As far as I understand, Anarchist challenge all sort of unjustified

I think they hope something better will rise up out of the ashes of anarchy. It's temporary.

Anarchism has roots in late 19th century self sufficient agrarian societies where the concept of a central state truly was superfluous. Outside of that it's a completely meme ideology the next time you meet an anarchist living in a massive modern metropolis cashing trust fund bux turn 360 degrees and walk away.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq

>>3059847

they are revolutionaries for the sake of the revolution, they do not care much for the aftermath as in their opinion once they remove the modern system anything coming after will be by definition better in spite of historic precedents

>>3059866
Then how comes a person as smart asNolan Chomsky is anarchist?

>>3059886
He isn't. No gun grabber can be an anarchist.

>>3059847
It's not a replacement system for a shitty government. It's more like the revolution in education which is talked about that when it takes place people will begin to apply anarchist practices in their life and with more people doing it spreads to society. Just look at digital mediums like game mods, fan subbing, indie artists, and all sorts of piracy which could extend into the realm of the physical with the production of imitation goods which can be of equal or near equal quality but just lacking in official licensing.
It comes down to choosing between meeting the peoples needs or generating captital/profit.
>inb4 _____ built or made on a capitalist enterprise.
As if anarchy or any conceivable system of logic would be opposed to using whatever means are available to realize one's objectives. There's nothing stopping people from creating new innovations either and the presence of monopolies and government restriction impedes this.

>>3059936

disagree.

Some of the best developments in technology and thought were due to the state-sponsored universities of France and Prussia during the years preceding and after the era of Napoleon.

>>3059949
That still doesn't mean things can't be made or achieved and it still doesn't erase all the negative things brought on by state activity either. Also most revolutions that lead to the creation of modern republics were largely voluntary efforts as well.

File: 4xAeXUV.jpg (65KB, 345x500px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 345x500px

>>3059847

>>3059976
>Without the participation of local forces, without an organization from below of the peasants and workers themselves, it is impossible to build a new life.
>To move away from the current disorder, Russia must return to the creative genius of local forces which as I see it, can be a factor in the creation of a new life. And the sooner that the necessity of this way is understood, the better. People will then be all the more likely to accept [new] social forms of life. If the present situation continues, the very word “socialism” will turn into a curse. This is what happened to the conception of “equality” in France for forty years after the rule of the Jacobins.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/kropotkin/kropotlenindec203.html

>>3059959

I think the existence of state and the problems it causes ultimately provides sufficient impetus for technological advancement and a market for those advances.

Honestly, I like the idea of anarcocapitalism at the end of the day, I really do, but the issue is this: WIthout sufficient market forces, be it by large scale warfare carried out by modern states or the needs of corporations which are created often by government sanction, most technological advances we have today would have most likely not existed.

>>3059936
So anarchism is removing copyright law?

>>3060018
One thing that should be taken into account in any case is all the unnecessary consumerism brought about by commercialism. Anarchist action is naturally less inclined to produce such phenomena.

>>3060051

I suppose, but I think the anger around consumerism is just Ludditism with a new face. Needless to say, technological progress does cause a lot of fucking problems, as I agree with the Luddites, but I also like shitposting and working a job where I can argue with you about these things.

On that same note, I don't like consumerism either, but I do like having the ability to buy anime figurines from Japan and put them on my shelves. Really empty and trite trinkety shit but I like it.

I think that identity has been under attack since the industrial revolution, I am more worried about the end-game of finding wholesome and authentic meaning rather than questions about what is "necessary". Utilitarian framework thinking is garbage because from that, I would argue that this whole board is unnecessary or that a knife has a higher utilitarian value than a person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wetwETy4u0

excellent lecture series on the dissolution of the reservoirs of identity.

File: Bakunin_on_jews.png (406KB, 467x595px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 467x595px

>>3059976

>>3060041
Yeah? Haven't you watched this documentary.
https://youtu.be/pd28G7Lpec8

>>3060041
basically.

>>3059847
I think the idea is that once everyone how comfy real anarchy is no one will want a state

>>3059886
If he's an anarchist, he can't be that smart.

>>3059847
>nothin' personnel, kid: the ideology
It has no basis beyond looking edgy.

>>3059886
>>3062348
A double enterde statement

One of my friends is a genuine Anarcho-Communist and he claims that no one will form a state, because everything will be governed by community consensus (done via direct democracy). He believes that states inheritly act against the interests of the people, and people create better societies without a state since there is no ulterior motive other than survival for the community. Any individual who tries to seize power for themselves will be shunned as a result because the people will (supposedly) realise that the formation of an organised state will lead to corruption at some point in history.

I don't agree with him on everything, but his main reason for being an anarchist (that capitalism seeks to hamper scientific progress) makes some sense.

I'm a philosophicalanarchists, in that I believe we should strive to eliminate undeserved hierarchy in all social interactions, but as for practical "states" I'm not sure.

Rojava is doing some interesting things with this

https://cooperativeeconomy.info/the-basic-principle-of-the-economy-in-rojava-involve-everyone-in-production/

>>3059976
communism's ultimate goal is to establish an worldwide anarcho-communist society.

Because the concept of state was different in the 19th century, and in slow transition from the classical left wing "anything that dominates" to the more general Weberian "monopoly on violence" sort.
In this transitional period I recall one notable anarchist, I think Malatesta, confronted with the argument along the lines of "well you lot just want to set up a different kinda state, so how can you be anarchists?" and responded along the lines of "whatever, call it what you will, it's what we want."

What I am saying is that what you call a state is not the same as what has historically been called states. The system of anarchism is not one without institutions and rules governing the conduct of the public, by coercive means if necessary.

The idea is mutualism. Basically, if everyone cooperates, there's no need for government. If you want to start a governing body, you're told to GTFO.

>>3059847
>Anarchist challenge all sort of unjustified authority
>>3065737
>we should strive to eliminate undeserved hierarchy in all social interactions

Do you guys understand that this type of definition is moronic, right?