Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

ziq wrote

Direct action taken by an anarchist against a violent authority does not somehow make the anarchist take the authority's place on the hierarchy. The anarchist doesn't start receiving the authority's paychecks or privilege or license or badge or social status. The anarchist's station in life is unchanged at best, or at worst the anarchist is imprisoned or killed for their action.

1

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

So is the motivation here to create an authoritative definition of Anarchy that excludes Chomsky’s views?

I personally appreciate his thoughtful approach to maximizing human freedom, while balancing the need for protection against human exploitation and tragedy of the commons. Perhaps in implementation he’s not always correct, but I like his underlying model. I personally think he’s an anarchist, because at the root of his model is challenging power structures and tearing them down when they don’t serve the greater good. No hierarchy is sacred.

On another note, while I know this conversation is important to you, don’t let my views upset you. I think Anarchy is strongest with a range of approaches, sometimes conflicting, hopefully always respectful and inclusive where possible.

2

ziq wrote

The definition already existed. "No authority." He decided that wasn't good enough and tacked the word 'unjustified' onto it for no good reason.

I'm not upset, just passionate.

1

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

So would you have laws? If so, how would those laws be interpreted and enforced? If not, how do you fairly and without bias prevent exploitation of the weak?

2

ziq wrote

You're falling into that trap again of thinking of anarchy as a social system instead of a perpetual struggle against authority.

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Isn’t that what Chomsky suggests?

I’m just trying to figure out what you’re suggesting.

2

PerfectSociety wrote

No, Chomsky suggests that certain forms of authority/hierarchy can be "justified". This is an stark contrast the the core principles of Anarchism.

-1

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Anarchism as defined by The Anarchism Authority?

2

PerfectSociety wrote

No, Anarchism as defined in the most rational sense in the context of Political Philosophy. You've brought up this point of an "Anarchist Authority" as an attempted reveal of hypocrisy among Anarchists on this topic, multiple times on this thread. Our response has been the same - expertise and authority aren't the same thing. A lack of authority does not indicate a lack of objective criteria for what makes for the most rational definition of a term within some context (in this case, the context of Political Philosophy).

1

ziq wrote

Isn’t that what Chomsky suggests?

No.

I’m just trying to figure out what you’re suggesting.

I've given you hundreds of words describing in simple terms exactly what I'm suggesting and you keep responding with confusion. It's kinda no longer worth my time.