💾 Archived View for idiomdrottning.org › farewell-anarchy captured on 2023-11-14 at 08:33:06. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Farewell, anarchy

Against labor exploitation, I felt that traditional ancom was a good idea. Worker co-ops, unions… all good solutions. Creating a haven for the downtrodden, so we could leave the owner class’ plants and highrises hollow and abandoned. “The workers are going home.”

Against climate change & other environmental effects of externalities abuse, the ancom set of solutions aren’t so hot, especially given automation tech. Plenty of cruel machines that’ll poison the Earth with or without us.

The core value of ancom style anarchy is that every human has the same worth. There can be no coercion or hierarchy or force. The ultimate democracy, not only politically but also economically.

Anarchy is the opposite of:

Wilhoit’s definition of conservatism:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The problem is that I do want to bind fossil-burning corporations. I want humans to change their way of life to be sustainable. Climate change showed the flaw in the anarchic ideal.

Wilhoit went on to say:

The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone; and it cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.

Right. But that leaves us with questions that anarchists have struggled with since ancient Greece: how do we decide the law and how do we enforce the law?

It’s theoretically not impossible for the grassroots “educate, build friendships, start groups and circles” bottom up anarchy to lead to a world where there’s no climate change, but then eight billion people all need to change, all need to start behaving perfectly. It’s probably even harder for everyone to change than to just change politics, media, and industry. Especially given that these polluters are a subset of “everybody”.

It’s also definitively not a given that we’ll be able to reform traditional parliamentary politics in time (election reform, money-out-of-politics bills, educating the electorate, better media). All signs point to “no” on that, even, but it’s my present belief that it’s likely to be the fastest solution. A 5% chance of success is still better than all the other ideas I’ve come up with.

I’m not standing in the way of those who believe in the grassroots-first route but now you know why I spend so much time commenting on parliamentary and intergovernmental politics.

My solution to climate change depends on working government.

Anything else is too slow.

People who are with me in that and don’t want to subject themselves to doomy imagery can stop reading this page now. Grim stuff ahead.

I sometimes see collapsologists romanticize the post-apocalypse and how it’ll be all back to nature and kumbaya after “the fall”. Leftists adding conditions such as labor rights, baking that work inalienably with climate fight. “Climate justice.” I don’t think they know what they’re messing with so let me paint a li’l picture of what it’s like in that timeline. Sky blood red. Air full of soot and poison. No clean water. Mass extinction of species, including most mammals and most likely also of humans. Sober up and let’s prevent that outcome.

The owner class

Follow-ups

degrowther writes:

The state is a tool for imposing minority rule on a majority. Full stop.

Yes, that’s why statism is such a flop for labor rights where ancom has had success after success. Laborers are a majority.

But for climate change, a state (as you describe it) seems like exactly what we need since the majority wanna burn the Earth and a minority don’t.

I oppose cutting off the anarchist routes to victory. If you guys can fix it, great! Please!♥♥

I just think the fastest way to solve it is state-imposed energy rationing & fossil bans. The state right now SUCKS. Especially USA with the drill-happy Biden administration. That’s painfully true. So if y’all have a better way to solve it I’ll join you and go for it. But then I mean actually solve it! All I see is complaining about how god-awful statism is, the one tool we actually have. Yes it sucks but it’s the only thing we’ve got and I’m eager for alternatives but until then it’s a ginormous lever that I wanna keep trying to push in a less harmful, actually productive direction.

Sandra

PS If it’s about figuring out degrowth processes and new economies and new ways to relieve or adapt to scarcity, I’m already there. I spend ten times more time doing that than I do on statist solutions.