• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    45 months ago

    Oh wait I just reinvented violence of the state hehe

    Except if the state is a community voting on how they should be policed, it isn’t really violence, is it?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      45 months ago

      It is, that community will still have its marginalized groups that don’t get representation, and if anything, on a smaller scale it’s harder to form a group that would argue for necessary support for these people

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        on a smaller scale it’s harder to form a group that would argue for necessary support for these people

        Idk, I kinda gotta disagree with that. Sure, mob violence against “undesirables” is always gonna be a problem, but communities know each other and are less likely to see different constituent groups as “outsiders”

        But in this specific example, where we are talking about “how do we decide who gets to use violence to keep the peace,” I think community-based democratic approaches are the best option.

        I also gotta disagree with

        that community will still have its marginalized groups that don’t get representation

        because by definition, if there is a marginalized group, they are not part of that community, and instead would form their own peacekeepers, like Guardian Angels.

        Obviously there is a benefit to federalization, I’m not arguing for nor do I support statelessness, but I think if democracy is emphasized from the ground up, those issues naturally tend to erode. Like I think the core problem which necessitates the federal government stepping in to ensure rights comes from a lack of democracy.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          45 months ago

          but communities know each other and are less likely to see different constituent groups as “outsiders”

          Tell that to every gay kid who grew up in a small rural Christian town…

          form their own peacekeepers

          So you expect every marginalized group to have their own personal cops? What about cross-sectional minorities. I don’t know how this works in your head but whatever you’re trying to say here is not translating well.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            35 months ago

            So you expect every marginalized group to have their own personal cops?

            That is so clearly not what I’m saying, have a good day.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              35 months ago

              So not the person you’re replying to but maybe instead of disengaging you reevaluate and rephrase because following along that’s sure as shit how I read it too and if that’s not your idea, what is?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      No it’s still definitely violence. Like, day to day, you try to use violence as little as possible but it is necessary for the laws of society to be backed by violence or people would ignore them. “Violence” doesn’t have to refer to killing people, it means the use of force against somebody without their consent (killing them, arresting them, or evicting/exiling them).

      The state we have right now in America and most of Europe is a community that decides how it wants to be policed (i.e. a democracy). Different jurisdictions make different policing decisions and have different outcomes, but they all follow that structure.

      The point I was making was that any attempt by anarchists to “overthrow the state” is silly because the “state” will return in a new form as power reconsolidates. If you consider a recognized federal or state government to be a “state” but an armed “anarchist” militia that runs a city to not be a state, that’s just a silly semantic argument.