this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2026
198 points (96.7% liked)

Flippanarchy

2348 readers
3570 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

  7. No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5wim@infosec.pub 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Anarchism means no rulers, not no rules.

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

~~No, it means, no rulers.~~

~~Anomie means no rules~~

~~Edit: at least that's the German word for a society without rules. Anarchy can perfectly integrate social rules, but without rulers. Made by the people in the society they live in.~~

~~Edit 2: auto correct fucked my over quite some times here~~

[–] 5wim@infosec.pub 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] 5wim@infosec.pub 1 points 2 hours ago
[–] Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Ok, and who gets to decide those rules?

And don't start with "everyone decides them", I mean practically. Who gets to have the idea of a rule, bring it forth to the group, organize the whole shtick of deciding on it, implement it, inform everyone else how the new rule works, enforce it, and everything else that needs to happen for a rule to exist?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

Do some reading. There are a lot of solutions. The most obvious, as you brought it up just to dismiss it, is direct democracy. Everyone votes. There are other options too, like a rotating panel of representatives, so no one has lasting g authority and everyone shares in it.

There are people smarter than both of us who think it's a good idea and have thought of potential solutions. Before you just dismiss things out of hand, you should actually look into what solutions have been thought of before. I promise you your thought isn't unique, and people have considered how it would work. Maybe you can learn from it, even if you don't agree with it.