Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

subrosa wrote

What do you consider a justified hierarchy?

5

Fuzz OP wrote

I dont think theres any hierarchy thats justifieable, evrebody should be able to take part in decision making.

3

subrosa wrote

You mean like... direct democracy?

3

Fuzz OP wrote

Direct democracy in every single aspect of a society

3

subrosa wrote

To me it seems like you're an anarchist. Nice.

4

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

Fuzz OP wrote

Well nobody would force you to do anything, so i guess its not ruling at all

3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

−2

Fuzz OP wrote

Im not talking about a large industrialized society, but a small community that wouldnt need to be strictly organized.

3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

1

Fuzz OP wrote

It doesn't seem naive to me. Almost everybody is able to appreciate a well run community, and people actually tend to respect order, so as long as there is no force involved everebody should be more or less content.

2

Majrelende wrote

If you think 'force,' is not part of the equation then you have to admit democracy is either always going to replicate the function of a state or it's just a useless charade done merely for ritual. If the latter is true why even do it?

Some types of meetings that could roughly be considered “democracy” might be helpful for the spread of ideas and for gaining different perspectives on issues. Too formal a system would likely be a “useless charade” that wastes time and suppresses creativity, but an informal gathering could be helpful for sharing ideas and connecting with less familiar people.

2

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote

According to this you posted this 7 hours ago.

If you're still drunk, you're an anarchist. If you're hungover, you're an anarcho-communist. If you're asleep, you're anti-work post left.

Yes, you can be all three.

2