Ya, I know. I’ve just never been able to join you in the presumption that law can exist without a state. That’s where property rights come from. That’s where the mediums of exchange come from. At the end of the day someone’s in charge of making rules and enforcing them. At the family level up to a national level; and perhaps even a global level. I admire programs like USaid and see the value of governments. If there ever was a time to gain support for those ideas it would be now. I just want the government I had 4 months ago to come back.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

And at this point I should chime in and note that the meaning of "state" in anarchist theory is not the dictionary one -- taking wikipedia:

A state is a political entity that regulates society and the population within a definite territory

Other societies have states, anarchist societies are states, by that definition. (Just for the record fascism is the unity of capital and state, not society and state).

Rather, the Anarchist definition formed under the influence of monarchical and bourgeois authoritarianism. Redoing the terminology and using "hierarchy" or something is way overdue IMNSHO: Continuing to use an unexpected definition of "state" causes lots of confusion, provides no clarity, thus hinders praxis, and as the theoretical and practical purpose of theory is to bolster praxis it has to go.

Also makes explaining why Ancaps aren't Anarchist way easier.

"In your stateless society, who will collect the garbage?" -- "The municipalities, just as they do now, I guess" -- "Didn't you just say you want to abolish the state?" -- "Yes the municipality will not be a state any more" -- "You're stupid and should feel stupid I'm voting for the fascists at least the garbage gets collected on time".

[–] TronBronson@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

All very fair points. Thank you for adding some color and context.