• Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, I agree, which would disagree with the other comment’s point that socialism inherently opposes individualism.

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Interesting. Where/when are they not opposed?

          Edit: Noting that I didn’t mean that they are mutually exclusive outside of social structure… You can take individual actions in a socialist society. The question is just around which is the core principle of the organisation of society.

          Edit 2: to me anarchy isn’t inherently individualistic, it is just opposed to power-over social structures. You can have a voluntary socialism. Look at Chiapas, for instance.

        • Axolotl@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          As much as i know, anarchy is not indivualist since the entire point of anarchism should be that the community works togheter to do stuff

          • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            While respecting the rights and autonomy of the individual. It is entirely about respecting individual freedom while also encouraging work together as a community.

              • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                Tell me you know nothing about Anarchist philosophy or history with explicitly saying so.

                ![“The ultimate goal of our oppressors is to limit our imagination about what is possible without them, so that we might never imagine more for ourselves and the world we live in. We can only imagine what is in front of us because the power structure decrees that there are no alternatives other than what currently exists. We humans have lived the alternative for tens of thousands of years. We are capable of building a free society, a brighter future, because we already have ideas about what that might look like. We know what societies without bureaucracies are capable of.”

                — David Graeber, cultural anthropologist](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/84d97534-b030-4f03-9732-7e73c587306b.png)

                • Cosmoscos ☭@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  you still didnt explain

                  • How would you organize people and overthrow the bourgeosie state?
                  • How would you maintain siginificant resistance against foreign imperialist attacks without some kind of heirarchy?
                  • How would you incentivize people to actually work in jobs which dont have good reputation?
                  • How would you counter reactionary tendencies and stop reactionary mobilization?

                  This whole quote seem like motivation speech

                  • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    Try reading a book and you’ll get those answers explained in full. I’m not gonna sit here and paraphrase volumes of anarchist theory just so you can play judge nitpicking the specifics. I have explained my position well enough. If you want specifics, go read the source materials.

                    Kropotkin, Graeber, Bakunin, Proudhon, Luxembourg, Parsons, etc … All have explained the mechanisms of decentralized resistance and horizontally structured systems of authority as well as the incentive structures of how people decide what to labor on and organize with their communities to ensure desired services are rendered alongside how this change of incentives and authoritative structure would counteract reactionary efforts.

                    FYI, that quote is from renowned anthropologist, David Graeber, who wrote multiple books on these very subjects. You should try reading them. You’ll learn something.

          • kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Anarchism is about resolving the apparent contradictions between individual rights/responsibilities and collective rights/responsibilities.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s about a community of individuals. The individual is celebrated, but in a way that’s far more akin to Mr. Rodgers (you’re special and unique just like everyone else) rather than of say a heroic society (where the ability to command attention and stand uniquely above others is valued).

            An anarchist would say that you need to figure out how you can best contribute to your community in a way that fits with your unique self rather than taking away from it. It’s akin to a family, where various things need to be done and it’s up to the members of the household to figure out how to get it done in a way most associated with everyone’s wants and needs, but also in the discussion are the nice to haves like someone may grow an herb garden, while another household may decide nobody wants it enough to do it or push for it.