Comments

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).

9

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.

2

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.

2

An_Old_Big_Tree 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.

2

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

2

Blackbeard wrote

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

2

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

2

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.

3