Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.


–6 votes

edited to add tags
by (70 points)
edited by
Try reading "about us" and it will explain the posting guidelines here.
how do you figure "if you want to post here,youre meant to follow our guidelines/rules, and if not, we can do whatever because it's our website" isnt a hierarchy? im not arguing that youre 'not anarchists.' im arguing that voluntary hierarchy is not inconsistent with anarchism, is rooted in organization, and inevitable.
You and Jay's Thoughts are the only an-caps here, and also the biggest trolls. No one wants to waste any more time responding to the continual bad faith antics of either of you. Please go somewhere else and stop bothering everyone.

"We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical." ~ Murray Rothbard
Criticism ought to be first listened to before defense or rejection.  To not examine criticism often is a willingness to blind oneself or group to flaws which lead down a path of self-deception.

To say that this website operates under the conditions of anarchy would be false.  Yes, we are all willing (for the most part to accept this, because we see the value of this website and we belief that the controllers use their power as well as they can to their own conscience.  It does no wrong to be reminded the apparent hypocrisy, but at the same time understand the those in charge are not hypocrites because I believe they understand the dilemma  and deal with it the best they can.

Someone does not need to be liked or to agree to be part of a group in which they wish to be a part of.  The must tragic event would be that a group such as this only wishes those who agree to take part.  I would ask RBF to stay so that the answers to the questions give a broader spectrum of thought and perception.
@afunctionalworld: RBBF has been around for a while. They are an "anarcho"-capitalist, which is fundamentally incompatible with anarchism. Since they have no connection to anarchism, why should they be invited to answer questions about it?
@riceboy:  I am not so sure that all here would not think that I also am not compatible with anarchy.  I see anarchy more as the next phase for humanity than the collapse of society or the revolution against oppression.  I see government more as a failure than an oppressive force; Not that it isn't.  

I myself do not see any value in capitalism and that it obstructs problem solving, distorts reality, and that the whole economic crisis is part of the very nature of capitalism.  Without it and there would be no crisis because it creates its own crisis.  Yet, Because RBBF believes in something I reject, does not mean I reject RBBF as a person, or believe his thoughts and input are worthless.  Instead at times they may offer additional insight.

Plus if you consider RBBF an outsider, the site still benefits by the observation that those inside would benefit to be sure we examine ourselves.  Most groups do not want this because denial is easier than close examination.  No one needs to like RBBF, but for the most part when others see that you listen and value what they say often it becomes easier for them to look past their own defenses and see what it is being said.  Not that an agreement is achieved or a truce but something better: the ability to reason together.
I agree with you afunctionalworld.  Your views aren't very compatible with anarchy.
I agree with your question and think it makes sense, also we vote on the side of the page :P
this is probably two years too late, but in general i agree with afunctionalworld's point. it is not just the troll who makes a troll, but also the audience. those on this site are perfectly capable of responding with creativity and insight to hostile, bad faith, and/or just confused questions and points, just as we are capable of being hostile, in bad faith, and/or confused about good faith efforts.
there is also a line that the mods will draw when (a) poster(s) seem to be detracting more than they are enabling us to work out some stuff... and that line will seem (and might be) arbitrary/subjective. but that does not disprove AFW's point in any way.
ancaps are not allowed to answer questions on this site, however, for the clarity of those who come here with little understanding of the history and contradictions (and because anarchy is confusing enough even when only actual anarchists are included).
i have probably said all this before. but maybe it was worth saying again here?

1 Answer

+3 votes
Being against hierarchy doesn't mean that just anyone can do anything they please in a space maintained by specific individuals without consequences. Sure this is a virtual space, but, as an extreme example, if a nazi walked in to the local infoshop (this sounds like the beginning of a bad joke...) and spouting off, I would hope that the folks from the infoshop would remove said individual from their space. Granted, in that extreme a case, probably everyone in the space would give a hand (or a boot).  

The point is that opposition to hierarchy doesn't mean that if I have an anarchist publishing and distribution project, or whatever sort of project, that you can come along and tell me what I should not be publishing, distributing, or whatever. The same holds true for this project, to my mind. If you want unmoderated, or universally-moderated, start your own site that does so.
by (22.1k points)
how do you figure that's not a hierarchy?
the point of this post is "dot," which apparently stands for "department of truth," constantly removes my posts from the 'answers' and turns them into comments. if that's the case, why the fuck do you even let anyone post? just let 'the department of truth' answer all the questions, theyre obviously the most knowledgable about all things "anarchy," right? and what's the point of the 'voting' system then? the department of truth doesnt even give 'the people' the chance to vote unless 'it' approves of the question, apparently.
and, ultimately, this is a form of hierarchy. my point is that hierarchy is not inherently inconsistent with anarchism, forcing people into involuntary hierarchies is... and if it ('hierarchy' itself) is, then this is not an anarchist website.
From your answers, it would seem you are a pro-capitalist anarchist, so your posts are subject to deletion.
i agree with you RBBF, about hierarchy, and i love my new acronym, thanks!