You must log in or register to comment.

anarchist_critic wrote

Some possibilities:

  1. CHIAPAS (Zapatista-contolled zones). Pros: nearly 25-year autonomous zone, foreign capital excluded, many areas outside control of Mexican state, self-sufficient. Cons: very specific kind of Maoist-inflected indigenous anarchism, too many lifestyle regulations, don't seem to accept visitors or migrants to the rural areas.

  2. SOMALIA. Pros: large areas are virtually stateless, subsistence economy, non-state traditional (xeer) law. Cons: civil war, US drone strikes, Islamists and other gangs active, very poor, shit gender politics. Possibly more ancap than anarchist.

  3. MADAGASCAR. Pros: according to David Graeber, rural areas are de facto autonomous zones, outside state control. Cons: poor, and not overtly anarchist.

  4. EL ALTO, BOLIVIA. Pros: 700,000 strong self-governing city, squatted but tolerated, run by ayllus (participatory neighbourhood councils), informal and subsistence economy. Cons: poor, social conservatism can be a problem, lynchings of criminals are also a problem.

  5. NAGALAND, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, etc. Pros: strongly autonomous society, strong social movements, constant protests and shutdowns, weak state presence, subsistence/informal/handicrafts economy. Cons: Indian state is an occupying power - weak but brutal; these areas are hard to visit or settle in due to Indian laws; constant intergroup conflict.

  6. WEST PAPUA. Pros: anarchic hunter-gatherer and horticulturalist ways of life still prevalent; tribal culture fiercely defended; hostility to the state; social movements and armed opposition. Cons: brutal Indonesian occupying army, many of the local cultures are patriarchal and violent, it's difficult to visit let alone move there due to Indonesian laws.

  7. BHUTAN. Pros: traditional society with little influence of capitalism, excludes major chains such as McDonald's, uses "gross domestic happiness" instead of GDP, high standard of living, beautiful terrain, great for off-grid. Cons: unelected monarchy, lots of restrictions on foreigners (including Nepalese minority), assimilationist ideology, police checkpoints etc.

  8. LADAKH. Pros: subsistence economy, nonviolent Buddhist culture, gender equality, de facto village-level self-government, ideal for backpacking etc. Cons: part of Kashmir and hence under Indian emergency rule.

  9. THE AMAZON. Pros: largely unregulated, local peoples are anarchic hunter-gatherers, wilderness area. Cons: requires high-end survival skills, locals unlikely to take well to visitors, the area is severely at risk from deforestation and climate change. Foot-long spiders, spiny fish which swim up your pee, aggressive giant guinea-pigs and other delightful flora and fauna.

  10. AMERICAN WILDERNESS. America is relatively sparsely populated and there are vast areas of wilderness where hardly anyone sets foot - forests, desert, mountains. Thousands live in off-grid communities in the US, some fugitives have vanished for a decade or more, and there were maroon and triracial isolate communities throughout US history. Pros: higher chances of finding somewhere with no existing human presence than most of the world, some untouched wilderness areas still left. Cons: only an option with a lot of survival skills, US wilderness constantly destroyed by capital, also American police etc.

  11. TRI-BORDER AREA (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay). Pros: largely lawless, ability to evade laws through multiple jurisdictions. Cons: more capitalist than anarchist, lots of gang activity.

  12. MONGOLIA. Pros: large subsistence sector, sparsely populated, low regulation, may not have extradition treaties. Cons: post-communist state, creeping neoliberalism.

  13. TIPI VALLEY, Wales. Pros: remote area, off-grid, effectively beyond state control. Very rare for police to go on-site. Lots of anarchists, weed growing wild, etc. Cons: requires some bushcraft skills; gets buzzed by planes from the local airbase. There are other intentional communities and countercultural zones in various states of health all over Europe, America and Australia - Wendland in Germany, Christiania in Denmark, a community in an old riverbed in Spain, Findhorn in Scotland, etc - there's even a counterculture district in Lithuania. Most of these were set up in the 60s, 70s or 80s.

  14. BARCELONA, Catalonia/Spain. Pros: large vibrant anarchist scene, regular riots, lots of squats. Catalan nationalism means relationship between population and state is strained. Spain is a good place for off-grid and suchlike, both legally and environmentally. Cons: brutal police and Spanish state with extremely repressive laws.

  15. GREECE. Pros: large vibrant anarchist scene (though downturn lately), regular riots, squats, armed groups; left-leaning government; limited state penetration of everyday life compared to other rich countries; universities are off-limits to police (this was restored recently). Cons: brutal police, context becoming more repressive, austerity policies, fascism is on the rise.

  16. SIBERIA. Pros: the government is giving away free farmland; very sparsely populated; becoming more fertile due to global warming; very easy to disappear and live off-grid. Cons: Putin; post-Soviet pollution; it's very cold.

  17. LE ZAD, France. Pros: explicitly anarchist, occupied, part self-sufficient, just scored a major victory over the government. Cons: at risk of eviction; France has become much more repressive since the state of emergency.

  18. ICELAND. Pros: Green, pirate and independent activists do well in elections, are currently in government; small country, sparsely populated; Scandinavian-style welfare state; lots of wilderness; doesn't have most of the repressive crap which is common in Europe. Cons: conservatives periodically in power; no jobs; development projects eating into the environment; whaling.

  19. ZOMIA. James Scott's name for a large area of upland Southeast Asia in Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar, and southwest China. Pros: still largely lawless, anarchic culture, informal and subsistence economies, porous borders; great for backpacker trails. Cons: mostly ruled by repressive states which have increased their power recently; lots of gang activity.

  20. MICRONATIONS. People, often ancaps, periodically try to set up new nations, such as Sealand, which was an occupied oil rig. There's talk of a new floating nation being launched on old oil tankers, and another being created in space. Pros: possibly outside government jurisdiction. Cons: often remote and isolated; usually suppressed by states; usually organised on state-like model (but with extensive civil rights).


happysmash27 wrote

MICRONATIONS. People, often ancaps, periodically try to set up new nations, such as Sealand, which was an occupied oil rig. There's talk of a new floating nation being launched on old oil tankers, and another being created in space. Pros: possibly outside government jurisdiction. Cons: often remote and isolated; usually suppressed by states; usually organised on state-like model (but with extensive civil rights).

I started trying to make one myself at Anarkikomunismolando a while ago, but have been having trouble getting anything started due to lack of input from others, since I am trying to make it based on many people's ideas and not just my own. It aims to implement a gift economy, and be very international through the use of internet activism and Esperanto. Anyone have any input? It can be found at /f/anarkikomunismolando.


ziq wrote

Awesome. Hope you don't mind, but I'm going to go ahead and turn this into a wiki so more people see it.


TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

" hell is everywhere, the world is shit, were all fucked. Luckily if hell is on earth, there is a little bit of your own personal paradise too, and if you dont find it DIY it. "

The best place to be an anarchist is where you are right now!

If you're looking for anarchist "strongholds", rojava is quite anarchisty right now, at least until the turkish gouvernement invades them. In france we've got a few comunities, and a self-sufficient anarchist town. The internet and free software is still cool, you can hack corporations, steal and redistribute money and "be an anarchist" from your home computer!


Tequila_Wolf wrote

This question seems to me to only have a determinate answer insofar as anarchists are the same. I think that they aren't and that it depends on the anarchist.

I tend to be a "fight where you are" anarchist also, so the question doesn't really work for me.

For example, I think that the place I live is the best place for me as an anarchist because it's the place where I'm most informed about political concerns. It's also probably a place that I've exploited most by virtue of living there, and I have a sense of wanting to heal it. There are also people I care about here who I have an affinity network with. I also have a support system here.


snowflake wrote (edited )

i believe it would be nice to live right by the edge of a humungous forest , with a river and not too far from the ocean. i don't know what the definition of agriculture is but , i do want to personally leave behind some epic orchards and medicine gardens before i wander transcending to the ridges and plateaus like a sasquatch singing under endless starlight


Blackbeard wrote

Marinaleda, Spain, or maybe Christiana in Denmark? Both sound pretty radical.


RosaReborn wrote

Christiana is cool, only been there once, but I don't think its quite as radical as it originally was intended to be. It's just a lot of drug tourists, not so much of the self-sufficient anarchism spirit as it may have started with. Haven't heard of Marinaleda but is seems nice, would like to visit


Blackbeard wrote

It did kind of sound like Christiana was past its heyday. Marinaleda sounds like a cool place, they hook you up with plans and supplies to build your own house at least.