… until there isn’t

“Fun fact”: Mount Rushmore or Six Grandfathers was a sacred mountain for the Lakota to actively disrespect their beliefs

So you believe Julius Caesar is still alive? Let me convince you: he’s not.

Decisions are made on the lowest level possible so you don’t go through all the layers normally. But not getting anything done is a common cliche about anarchist organization, including from people who’ve been there.

Still, closed contemporary examples are Rojava and Zapatistas. In Rojava, for example, they have councils of ethnic minorities so when the main council makes racist policies, the minority council can intervene.

True, that’s also a form of anarchism

It’s not one big council but a confederation of councils. I like the idea of fractal democracy. Like a huge river branching into smaller ones and when you zoom in, these smaller ones branch again and again. You have councils on many levels, each making decisions, delegating to the next level and being recallable from below.

I have never heard the term minarchist. Many anarchists say, we need structures against the building of hierarchies, like avoiding knowledge hierarchies by doing skillshares.

Natural authorities are a different topic. I think Kropotkin was an example of a leader who was accepted because everyone agreed with him. Once he said something people didn’t like, they rejected him as a leader. You can call this a hierarchy if you like. I wouldn’t because he couldn’t coerce his followers but this is pure terminology.

The council isn’t elected. It’s open for everyone to join in all decisions. It might delegate some tasks, even smaller decisions, but it can always recall them.

So in your scenario, the council would delegate the power to sell the factory to a group of people which is very unlikely. Now this group of people who are trusted by everyone would decide to sell the factory which might happen. But the council would most certainly recall them from this decision making power the never should have given away in the first place.

Maybe I should have stressed more that a council is really open for everyone to join. It’s not an elected parliament or something

Let’s take the most “conservative” form of anarchism: anarchosyndicalism. Every factory is organized in councils, confederated both with the import or mining council and the consumer council. Now a capitalist comes and asks how much this factory costs. Do you think the council will tell them a price or to fuck off?

Anarchism is anti capitalist in nature since capitalism entails hierarchies

The irony is that the amount of coordination needed to protect anarchism would no longer be called anarchism

This is a common misunderstanding. While there are anti organisationist anarchists, others dream of a world while spanning confederation based on voluntary cooperation and mutual aid. Anarchism in general isn’t the absence of organization but the absence of hierarchy and domination (therefore isn’t anticapitalist in nature)

Yes, because anarchism is against all hierarchies and the class system is a form of hierarchy. Instead, decisions should me made collectively, for example in councils open for everyone

It’s very uncommon to post an image of a lost game because because you are proud of how good you played. Since the kid won, the parent might want to show off their offspring how great a vocabulary they already have. Or that they want billionaires to hang, it’s open for interpretation in my opinion.

Your a fucking nerd for not having a C. Adopt to your new culture!

In university we had some called something like “long night of the postponed term papers”. I never went there

Funny but not surprising that my comment got deleted and the one that says the same thing about .world not. They couldn’t prove my point better

Took us a while to finally see we actually agree

But do you agree that it’s a bad idea to merge all big meme communities to .ml? Which is what I was talking about all along. No matter if you misinterpret my point.

Also: I think it’s alot of people who would be upset, even tho it’s not most. Could you at least stick to your misinterpretation?

You put words into my mouth I never said and now you complain that it’s getting into the weeds a bit, but whatever

I didn’t say that, that’s an exaggeration. Also, I was coping a comment above mine as a joke. But I still stand to my comment. It doesn’t say “most people” but “all my homies”