2024-11-24 07:38:35 +00:00
|
|
|
|
import{d as i}from"./chunks/git.data.DXRlJPI8.js";import{M as o,q as r,Q as e,K as n,u as a,ag as s,p as c}from"./chunks/framework.Sr2_9k8k.js";const h=e("h1",{class:"p-name"},"Anarchism",-1),l=["innerHTML"],d=s('<hr><details><summary>Referenced by:</summary><a href="/garden/digital-locality/index.md">Digital Locality</a><a href="/garden/individualism/index.md">Individualism</a><a href="/garden/leftism/index.md">Leftism</a><a href="/garden/local-communities/index.md">Local Communities</a><a href="/garden/my-political-beliefs/index.md">My Political Beliefs</a><a href="/garden/representative-democracy/index.md">Representative Democracy</a></details><p>Anarchism is a political philosophy centered around the idea that authoritative hierarchies are unjust, and aim for a society completely devoid of a state. They see a state as inherently self-preservationist and oppressive, thus that it has no place in society nor the transition to an egalitarian society.</p><p>Broadly speaking, flavors of anarchism can fall into 3 categories: collectivist anarchism, which is what this article will focus on; individualist anarchism, which are right-wing versions of anarchism based on <a href="/garden/individualism/">Individualism</a>; and modern anarchism, which are adaptations of collectivist communism to include additional hierarchies, such as anarcha-feminism which seeks to abolish the patriarchy in addition to class hierarchy. I'm personally biased against individualist anarchism but align with the values present in many collectivist and modern flavors of anarchism. I believe an ideal society is one with strong <a href="/garden/local-communities/">Local Communities</a> that operate as a collective; spreading power as thinly as possible to avoid the possibility of any individuals becoming corrupt and abusing their power.</p><h2 id="decision-making-in-anarchy" tabindex="-1">Decision Making in Anarchy <a class="header-anchor" href="#decision-making-in-anarchy" aria-label="Permalink to "Decision Making in Anarchy""></a></h2><p>Flavors of anarchy will differ on whether decision making should exist at all. Egoism, an individualist flavor of anarchism, argues against not only any kind of collective decision making, but against society itself. Collectivist flavors of anarchism typically allow for group decision making in some form.</p><p>Group decision making under anarchism is typically modeled after a flavor of democracy. Majoritarian democracy, or <a href="/garden/direct-democracy/">Direct Democracy</a> , is the idea that everyone gets a single vote and a measure passes if most people are in favor of it. A <a href="/garden/consensus-democracy/">Consensus Democracy</a> as described in <a href="https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-consensus" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Consensus</a> is the idea that measures should only pass if nobody is opposed to it. This typically means in lieu of voting, individuals can "block" a measure by saying they disagree with it in part of in whole, and the polity must then decide to drop the measure or tweak it until it can pass without any blocks. Some forms of consensus democracy will also allow for measures to pass despite a small number of blocks, for the sake of making it feasible without constant gridlock when scaling up.</p><p>There are criticism of group decision making as anti-anarchistic in any form. In both of these versions of democracy, the polity is collectively agreeing to have some form of rule or agreement in place, and once agreed to, an individual typically cannot rescind their consent to that rule or agreement. In majoritarian democracy, up to half the polity may have never even given consent for that rule in the first place. Even in consensus democracy, discussions will often break down into compromise and eventual resignation in order to get measures passed, which is not a "true" version of consent. Typically supporters of these decision making processes will justify them as necessary of a society to function.</p><p>I'm personall
|
