385
submitted 4 days ago by Deceptichum@quokk.au to c/mop@quokk.au
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 21 points 4 days ago

You mean what literally happens today where the US does whatever it wants? And the states with their guns makes the citizens follow its laws?

[-] Skipcast@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago

And how would anarchy fix that if nothing would change?

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 20 points 4 days ago

Who said nothing would change?

We currently live in a top-down system, where a handful of rich influential people decide everything. Anarchism is a bottom-up system where the people directly decide everything.

[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago

The same people who overwhelmingly voted this shitshow into power?

[-] Comrade_Spood@quokk.au 6 points 4 days ago

This shit show one, has the electoral college (an anti-democratic institution in the first place), and two is a system where a simple majority gets to decide who's the leader (also not a democratic system).

Lastly, then what the fuck are you suggesting? Sounds to me like youbare saying "people are what got us into this mess in the first place." So whats your alternative? Fascism? Monarchy? Cause if your issue is that the people are stupid and thus shouldn't be trusted, then you are either a pessimistic/cynical anarchist or an authoritarian. One of which I can sympathize with. The other I have a hard time not punching in the face

[-] Signtist@bookwyr.me 4 points 4 days ago

But unless we kill everyone who has access to those big guns, they'll still have access to them after the system changes. I agree that a change needs to happen, but I can't really wrap my head around how we're going to stop people with city-destroying bombs, who wouldn't hesitate to use them on American soil if their lives were at risk. We either let them live, and keep their weapons, or we try to kill them and get taken out in a firestorm of mutually assured destruction. Taking about what we're going to do after we've won that battle just feels like planning a wedding before asking someone out on a date.

[-] RamenJunkie@midwest.social 2 points 4 days ago

Its a bottom up system

You are thinking of Communism mate.

[-] Comrade_Spood@quokk.au 5 points 4 days ago

There is more than one way to crack an egg, and some you can do at the same time. Hence anarcho-communism

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 4 points 4 days ago

Communism the thing with a vanguard party dictating the show and a top down state?

No, that is very clearly much not it.

[-] paultimate14@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

The only way it would be better under anarchy is that you would no longer be shouldering the moral burden of participating.

In a democracy you need to come to terms with the fact that things are shitty. I held my nose and voted for Harris because YES she would have still allowed Israel to continue their campaign of terror against Gaza, but there's a laundry list of terrible things that have happened under Trump that absolutely would not have under Harris.

To be an anti-democracy anarchist is to hide your head in the sand. To stand at the trolley switch without touching it, trying to convince yourself that the blood is not on your hands. Trying to pretend like we can sequester off pieces of this one planet into containers that do not impact each other.

It's a great ideology for teenagers explore. To see things in extremes and think more abstractly without getting bigger down with the details of reality.

[-] Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago

The only way it would be better under anarchy is that you would no longer be shouldering the moral burden of participating.

And instead would have the moral obligation to act.

In a democracy you give all power to act to others, who never do act. Yet you tell yourself 'I did my part, I voted, it's the politicians fault'.

[-] paultimate14@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago
  1. That's a republic, not a democracy.

  2. There's plenty of room to participate even in democratic republics. It's not as if you just elect 1 supreme ruler and everyone else goes home. Thus even in democracy you are burdened with the moral dilemma of inaction.

[-] username_1@programming.dev 13 points 4 days ago

Yes, something like that. But in case of governments we have a few sources of threat, while without the governments we have millions sources of threat, half of which are completely crazy.

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 15 points 4 days ago

What extra sources of threats do you imagine with a people led system vs a ruling class led system?

The exact same threats exist.

this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
385 points (100.0% liked)

Memes of Production

1271 readers
1170 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS