Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

12

Freux wrote

There is restorative justice, banishment, shaming, death, and surely other means I'm forgetting. As ziq pointed out, it's all unique cases. Wasn't it Emma Goldman that said something like she won't tell how anarchists should go about something, they will decided themselves when they get there. Someone remember the quote?

8

ziq wrote (edited )

There's no such thing as an anarchist prison or an anarchist society. Anarchy is the constant struggle against authority. Prisons, rapists and so on are all forms of authority that we struggle against.

If you're asking how an anarchist would handle authority, that's up to the anarchist answering the question; informed by the specific conditions present with each unique case.

There will never be an 'ideal' society. That's why anarchy is needed.

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

So there is no law, no power structures to protect the weak, everyone is “free” to try and get justice if they’re strong or well liked enough to get a band of people together.

No archy at all.

That’s what anarchism is REALLY all about, complete and total freedom. No more pesky power structures oppressing anyone from doing everything their heart desires.

Let’s bring about our anarcho libertarian utopia ASAP.

...

There are also more humane visions Anarchy that allow for democracy, voting, societies, protection for the weak, etc. But here on Raddle we don’t acknowledge them.

1

ziq wrote

You're talking about socialism. Anarchy does not = socialism. They're different things.

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

2

ziq wrote (edited )

They didn't ask about syndicalism, they asked about anarchism. And I even linked them to a giant wiki I made with descriptions of a dozen different offshoots of anarchy, including syndicalism.

It's not my responsibility to push stale collectivist patriarchal workerist ideologies on noobs.

But you're welcome to give them your definition of 'anarchism' that is a utopia that somehow involves laws and 'humane' power hierarchies. I'd be fascinated to hear more about that.

1

martasultan wrote

If it depends on your anarchist, then allow /u/ziq to express their anarchism; you can answer the question separately with your own anarchism, you know.

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Well that’s exactly what I did.

In the mean time, I resent language that suggests there’s some kind of Platonic Anarchism.

I’m fine with ziq having their own brand of anarchism, maybe it’s even mainstream on the Internet. But, from my perspective it’s exactly the anarchism that would maximize human suffering, and transparently so.

Defining anarchism so narrowly means that progressives who don’t prefer communism, and who don’t want humans suffering at the hands of whoever is strongest in the absence of any counterbalancing power, will have no ideological home.

-1

ziq wrote (edited )

Anarchism means anarchism. Communism means communism, mutualism means mutualism, collectivism means collectivism, and syndicalism means syndicalism. No one is obliged to mention every tired economic theory that has attached itself to anarchism whenever someone asks about anarchism. Anarchism is about a lot more than economics.

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Ok, sounds good. Enjoy your dogmatic, pedantic anarchism. You’d make a great James Bond villain. 👍🏻

At that, I’m leaving Raddle. I suspect there are about 8 users here that post/vote under multiple accounts and the conversations here are boring as fuck.

0

ziq wrote

dogmatic, pedantic anarchism

lol do you even own a mirror, friend?

-3

crimpsonchin wrote

well this is one of the issues I have with the concept of complete anarchism. People cannot fuction without some form of control. Otherwise people WILL take advantage and pedofiles and rapists will roam free.

6

ziq wrote

I feel like you just ignored everything I said.

1

crimpsonchin wrote

actually, fair enough I read it again and it makes sence.

But you also are kinda saying that the whole existance of anarchy depends on a authority to struggle against, so what happens when the main authority is overthrown?

4

ziq wrote

A world with no authority would be what you termed 'full anarchy'; no authority means no state, no prisons, no cops, no rapists, no one that tries to dominate and exploit others.

In other words a fictional utopia that wouldn't even be realistic in a storybook.

2

crimpsonchin wrote

so what is it you actually strive for realisticly as somthing humanly possible then?

1

ziq wrote

Standing up to authority is plenty realistic and done everyday.

1

crimpsonchin wrote

thats not really a goal for a new society though

1

ziq wrote

Anarchy isn't a society...

1

crimpsonchin wrote

okay but it can replace what was a society. And if its not what is an ideal society then?

2

martasultan wrote

People cannot fuction without some form of control.

but why

Otherwise people WILL take advantage and pedofiles and rapists will roam free.

then whats so wrong with shooting them

2

ziq wrote

Because they see humans as violent marauders that go from town to town killing babies for fun I guess. And somehow immediately stop their baby killing rampage when a state asks them to cease and desist.

And people call me a misanthrope.

3

lookin4 wrote

Let them out of prison, have a sympathetic ear, protect their victims and themselves, encourage to talk about it in a safe way, try to find the real reason for the action and close that gap within the offender and/or the society. Uphold the good in human beings, without ignoring the evil we all have in us. Establish and maintain a collective base where feelings and desires can be expressed without having to fear judgement or punishment. At best, the roots of a action can grow into something positive.

Because no state will exist, the small society I would want to live in decides consensually what action is a real crime (wrong action for a happy life inside the small society). Everyone with a veto will no longer be part of it.

(Yeah, it's not just that and everything will be fine. It's just a abstract and quick answer.)

2

PerfectSociety wrote (edited )

How might an Anarchist community address rapists and murderers? One approach that might be applied might be simply killing the rapists and murderers.

1

Splinglebot wrote

because the world is black and white, every rapist/murderer is an irredeemable evil person, rehabilitation doesn't exist and punitive "justice" solves everything

1

PerfectSociety wrote

If people (perhaps the victim and/or her loved ones) are pissed off at a rapist, they might kill that rapist. Or they might torture the rapist. Or they might forcibly castrate the rapist. Or, they might forgive the rapist and rehabilitate. Or they might do something I haven’t listed.

The point is that there are no laws that codify what is to be done with rapists. Neither is there any law that protects them from so-called “mob justice”. Laws don’t exist in Anarchy.

1

ziq wrote

They said 'one approach', not 'the only possible approach'.

1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

Is 'if they fiddle kids shoot them in the head' a wrong answer?

4

crimpsonchin wrote

I would say so yes. That is a reactionary answer, which ignores the possiblity of future rehablitation through therapy and chemical castration.

0

martasultan wrote

Some people are fucked up, period, and won't ever be rehabilitated; no Beria will ever be a proper, safe person. Sometimes a round is the best cure.

3

crimpsonchin wrote

okay but is that always a fair punishment for the crime? sure rape is bad, but an automatic death sentance seems harsh, also what about false accusations of crime?

1

PerfectSociety wrote

Your question doesn’t really make sense. Your asking as if we are proposing some kind of policy for how to deal with rapists. We aren’t. If people (perhaps the victim and/or her loved ones) are pissed off at a rapist, they might kill that rapist. Or they might torture the rapist. Or they might forcibly castrate the rapist. Or, they might forgive the rapist. Or they might do something I haven’t listed.

The point is that there are no laws that codify what is to be done with rapists. Neither is there any law that protects them from so-called “mob justice”. Laws don’t exist in Anarchy.

-1

martasultan wrote

sure rape is bad

This is something of an... understatement.

automatic death sentance seems harsh

Perhaps, then, don't rape a kid. That's a major fuckin' no-no.

also what about false accusations of crime?

I had assumed any proposed punishment was for those confirmed to have committed such. Generally I oppose punishment before that.

1

crimpsonchin wrote

evidence can be faked well keep in mind. Just look at how messed up the justice system now is.

Also you ignore that chemical castration CAN cure rapists.

2

ziq wrote

That's not true. Most rapists get off on power; chemical castration doesn't stop them from wanting to hurt people. It just stops them from getting erections.

1

martasultan wrote

Chemical castration only works if they stick to the drugs- they'll go right back to however they were before after, with maybe some side effects to fuck them up. That's not a solution feasible without an officer forcing them to keep the regime on.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

Sounds like a solution.