this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
187 points (99.5% liked)
Memes of Production
1442 readers
392 users here now
Seize the Memes of Production
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.
Other Great Communities:
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sorry but for me it just becomes easier for some charming strongman to grab power in a system you describe.
How can he grab power that doesn't exist? Without the hierarchy for him to command that others be subordinate to the strongman's will, that strongman has no power to grab.
When the collective is able to freely disassociate with the strongman trying to make power grabs, the strongman is unable to consolidate power to himself to command others against their will.
If he tries to get violent, then he has to fight a collective of people there to defend each other from these kinds of strongmen when they get violent.
It would be leagues harder for strong men to grab power, because the very systems that dictate our society would be fundamentally structured to not allow individuals to consolidate power over others. The way it is now fundamentally allows individuals to be out into power and the people just have to shut up and accept it or else face the end of a police baton.
He'll generate that power by rallying people?
Who said it will be against anyone's will? Example: Maga (but there are loads through history)
If he gets violent too early, that's easy (see hitler for example) but that didn't solve the problem at all.
And then you say the system should dictate our society? And that in some manner would not allow individuals to consolidate power. Like should you have an anti power police? It's all super hazy.
So say that it's 2060, you fish down at the lake in a utopian paradise. 5 dudes show up and just take your fish, what happens?
Seems like you just do not understand Anarchism and are trying to compare it to current society, which it is fundamentally different from and unable to make direct comparison to.
They can try to rally people but the rest of society will rally against them in kind to maintain their autonomy.
MAGA exists because of our current institutions reinforcing those beliefs. Dismantle those and those beliefs disappear with them.
The system already dictates our society. It isn't about "should" but "will". We currently live under a society where authority comes from the top down and the populace must listen or be forced to capitulate by threat of violence from the police. People gain that authority through manipulation of social biases to be granted position labor power to command over the above mentioned society. This is directly due to our institutions being structured with respect to hierarchical power of authority.
In Anarchism, you wouldn't have any police, you would have a completely and fundamentally restructured society that doesn't allow for individuals to garner hierarchical power and exert authority over others without direct and mutual consent from the parties involved.
Your hypothetical isn't a "utopian paradise" if 5 people feel incentivised to take your fish instead of just fish themselves. Why would they? They would understand that if they do so and gain a reputation for being thieves who take things by force then no one will want to associate with them, and thus they will lock themselves out of the collective benefits of society.
Go read more if things are not clear. Read Kropotkin if you want dense theoretical explanation, read Graeber for a historical understanding of how these powers came to be and the alternatives that are possible. Many other names exist as well such as Malatesta, Bakunin, Lucy Parson, Emma Goldman, etc...
You're having a hard time convincing me, someone who is already interested. How will you convince Maga (that is just an example), and dismantling society won't help, another will grow in its place, like history has shown again and again and again.
As for the 5 fish thiefs, well some people have no empathy, they'll prefer stealing than working, what is your society (if you can call it that) going to do about it? This is a fundamental question, if you don't solve it then your system, IMO, wont work.
Sorry this seems to be too complicated for you to grasp then.
Downvoting and berating, is that your "anarchist way of life"? Bet you think anarchy is vandalism.
And I bet you're a simpleton who thinks vandalism is inherently a bad thing.
Like I explained in plenty of details. If you're still not convinced, your lack of understanding is greater than my ability to simplify these complex concepts down to a way you can actually understand.