You realize that heirarchy is exactly how you enforce rules, correct? You can't enforce rules without heirarchy. Seems to me it's you who has no idea what anarchy is. "no slaves, no masters" doesn't mean people who can arbitrarily enforce "rules."
> You realize that heirarchy is exactly how you enforce rules, correct? You can't enforce rules without heirarchy.
That's not necessarily true, is it? All participants of an instance or group could practice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy to form and enforce a set of rules without hierarchies. Not saying that's what happened here though...
Sure, but I don't think just only having direct democracy is sufficient, especially in an anarchist society.
The only nation state currently that somewhat has a form of direct democracy (Major emphasis on somewhat)- Switzerland- still has absurd hierarchies, some even more so than other countries, where entire cantons can decide who can or cannot move somewhere.
no you don't understand their hierarchy is totally temporary and they can just change it at any time unlike 'unjustified' hierarchies, also everything will just operate on a gift economy and somehow no one will exploit this
I hear the analogy of nations having an anarchist relationship with each other. There is no hierarchy of soverign nations but there certainly are power dynamics. If one nation breaks a treaty, for example, the other nation delivers some form of punishment as a deterrence.
What does it matter what I realize? I was explaining what anarchists believe, and why "you have rules!!!" is not some sort of clever gotcha. As an adult human, I'm fully capable of understanding beliefs without sharing them.
