• db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 months ago

    How do you you “gobble up power” in a group dedicated to preventing anyone having power over others?

    • sus@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      That group won’t exist in a vacuum. It needs to be resilient to outside interference. Even inside that group there are going to be people that only identify with it out of convenience rather than true belief. It is still possible for individuals to accrue social capital, form “inner circles” and individually stockpile resources - and stopping them would logically infringe on their freedoms to associate, freedom to dig holes, etc.

      • Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        So you’re saying that in whatever system is created for libertarianism there will be a potential for people to use their freedom to subvert libertarianism, right? That makes sense to a point, but it’s the same issue that exists in every other system. Socialist need to have checks and balances to ensure the government doesn’t subvert the needs of the people, capitalists need to bust monopolies to ensure someone doesn’t takeover the market, etc. I know I’m mixing economics and politics, but I hope you see my point.

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Stockpiling resources isn’t possibly without exploitation. Why would anyone let you stockpile resources they create? These assumptions don’t make sense

        • sus@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Why would anyone let you stockpile resources they create?

          the same reason people let it happen now: people aren’t actually a hivemind where every individual steadfastly holds to your chosen ideology and ceaselessly watches each other and keeps precise track of what everyone is doing. Surveillance states can’t root out crime and black markets, so I very much doubt a loose association of stateless communes can do it either.

    • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      By promoting a culture of disarming using children safety as an excuse and allowing the government or police to have a violence monopoly to do whatever they want without consequence of retaliation by the people they oppress.

        • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          That kind of hypothetical system does not and will never exist.

          Afghanistan was once an anarchist dream where remote mountain villages grew crops to sustain their local communities and were protected by tribal families who elected a local warlord, it was a shit life compared to the West

          Now is currently getting wrangled under control by an oppressive Islamo-fascist theocracy who occupied the power vacuum that the Soviet invasion back in the 1980s created by destroying the Afghan monarchy and government.

            • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              I agree with you, but that is what true anarchy looks like in modern times. Some parts of remote Afghanistan currently have villages that all run like that.

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                6 months ago

                That’s not what Anarchism means. You can’t just redefine eastabilished political movements willy-nilly