Vast majority of problems in the world are caused by people with positions of authority. We treat authority the same way a scientist would, who just discovered that the radium in toothpaste is harmful.
I’m asking genuinely, since I don’t understand anarchism as well as marxist leninism. But what is the anarchist theory for removing power, which gives them authority, from capital, and ensuring that power stays in the hands of the masses?
The egalitarian Indus valley civilisation was just as technologically advanced, and lasted longer than the roman empire despite being much smaller.
The mapuche a (relatively) egalitarian tribe located in south america, was able to defend itself against the Spanish colonizers for almost three decades.
The early neolithic southern levenant was peaceful for over 10,000 years. we know this because they only started to build fortifications when the Egyptians arrived
Because the larger the population, the more coordination of resources is required. A tiered government structure is the most efficient way to do this. Logistics for a city are very different than logistics for a continent.
And this was before globalization/industrialization too. What worked for societies thousands of years ago isn’t a good indicator of what would work now.
But ultimately humans are the problem. The larger the population, the easier it is for bad actors to create positions of power.
Am not familiar with with logistics but arent they already ran decentralized?
But ultimately humans are the problem. The larger the population, the easier it is for bad actors to create positions of power.
I agree. History has shown us repeatedly that bad actors will always eventually find a way to get into positions of power. We reject political authority because we want to break out of the endless cycle of wars, man-made famines and genocides.
The roman empire stretched much further geographically as well. It was imperialism which needed new land to conquer and feed its stratified society. It was not an egalitarian project.
I’m sorry that math is difficult for you. But 75 million people is significantly more 5 million people.
Many things don’t scale well, and self governance is one of those. All you have to do is look at shopping cart returns to see that people aren’t capable of it.
Sure stateless societies might have worked well thousands of years ago, but the reason none of them lasted is because people suck.
I’m not against, anarchy or communism, by the way. I just don’t think humans are capable of sustaining it. People who lust for power at all costs, and those who enable them, are our Great Filter
Vast majority of problems in the world are caused by people with positions of authority. We treat authority the same way a scientist would, who just discovered that the radium in toothpaste is harmful.
I’m asking genuinely, since I don’t understand anarchism as well as marxist leninism. But what is the anarchist theory for removing power, which gives them authority, from capital, and ensuring that power stays in the hands of the masses?
There aren’t many examples of authorityless communities to compare to.
The egalitarian Indus valley civilisation was just as technologically advanced, and lasted longer than the roman empire despite being much smaller.
The mapuche a (relatively) egalitarian tribe located in south america, was able to defend itself against the Spanish colonizers for almost three decades.
The early neolithic southern levenant was peaceful for over 10,000 years. we know this because they only started to build fortifications when the Egyptians arrived
It’s because they were much smaller. Anarchy doesn’t scale.
smaller as in having a peak population of 5 million compared to the roman empire which had a peak population of 75 million people.
Yes, being 15x less populated is smaller.
I dont see why it couldn’t scale up beyond just 5 million
Because the larger the population, the more coordination of resources is required. A tiered government structure is the most efficient way to do this. Logistics for a city are very different than logistics for a continent.
And this was before globalization/industrialization too. What worked for societies thousands of years ago isn’t a good indicator of what would work now.
But ultimately humans are the problem. The larger the population, the easier it is for bad actors to create positions of power.
Am not familiar with with logistics but arent they already ran decentralized?
I agree. History has shown us repeatedly that bad actors will always eventually find a way to get into positions of power. We reject political authority because we want to break out of the endless cycle of wars, man-made famines and genocides.
The roman empire stretched much further geographically as well. It was imperialism which needed new land to conquer and feed its stratified society. It was not an egalitarian project.
It’s kind of incredible that you were dumb enough to type this in all seriousness, like you thought it was some incredible dunk.
I’m sorry that math is difficult for you. But 75 million people is significantly more 5 million people.
Many things don’t scale well, and self governance is one of those. All you have to do is look at shopping cart returns to see that people aren’t capable of it.
Sure stateless societies might have worked well thousands of years ago, but the reason none of them lasted is because people suck.
I’m not against, anarchy or communism, by the way. I just don’t think humans are capable of sustaining it. People who lust for power at all costs, and those who enable them, are our Great Filter
It’s incredible that you think this makes you look better and more cogent
The current system is obviously handling all of the worlds problems so well, without any starving families or climate change driven injustice.
A criticism of one system is not support for another.
Obviously. However, accepting an obviously broken system over the option for literally anything else is the definition of insanity
There are 8 billion people. It would have to scale.
Interesting, I’ll look into it