Flippanarchy
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
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
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.
-
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.
view the rest of the comments
To my eyes, both you and @nutcase2690 are right about those unclear cases of hierarchies.
Anarchy rejects hard-structured hierarchies, that's for sure. But if we take a more general definition of hierarchies and authorities, then there is the possibility for more "fluid" hierarchy, both in a good and bad way.
About the good way, i believe Bakunin wrote a passage i like about it in God and the State, pointing out that anarchist recognize the authority of some people when it's meaningful (like trusting the orders/guiding of an architect when building a house). He also points out that what matters is the possibility to end this authority : it has to be temporary and/or linked to a task, to automatically enable the possibility of stopping recognizing this authority. You'd also have to be wise enough yourself to identify when to give your obedience/trust and to who, and this implies that this is not a precise science, we have to accept that sometimes people will make the wrong call and respect the authority of someone they shouldn't or vice-versa.
About the bad way, as you pointed out, all this really opens for the possibility of informal majority oppression or leader oppression. One imperfect solution to this is precisely the possibility for anyone to refuse authority at any time for any reason. Another safeguard is to speak about this and call out situations that tend to it and look like it : positive point here, the fact that anarchist and leftists organizations are known and mocked for bickering and splitting perpetually is a sign that they already do this (not great for movement unity though but heh, this is what we're working with).
There will be no definitive victory and perpetual state of anarchy, we'll always have to fight against temptations of power structures, especially when they'll come back in those informal forms once we get rid of the formal ones. But if you can get rid of a state, preventing weaker forms of it should be a walk in the park.