lol, the old long dis-proven monkey hierarchy story written by colonial explorers in the 19th century based on very superficial observations of chimpanzee only. Most apes do not live in hierarchical structures and even for chimpanzees it is less clear cut. The entire story is about as accurate as 19th century colonial explorers describing other societies as backwards and primitive.
If you believe that false monkey story, maybe it is time to question some of the other evidently false historical believes you seem to have?
This is the height of comedy. You at least acknowledge that apes and chimps organize hierarchically, and these are our closest ancestors last I checked. Humans throughout history have also organized hierarchically. This is even the case for small tribes.
If you can’t even acknowledge this simple fact what else is there to tell you really. The fact that you glibly jumped on the whole false monkey story instead of addressing this fact shows just how intellectually dishonest you are.
Humans (and apes) throughout history have usually not organized hierarchically. It can happen for short amounts of times during specific events and there it also makes sense to do so.
The constant hierarchical structure of nation-states is historically speaking an extremely new invention and largely an illusion at that.
That’s just a false statement. Pretty much all human societies have organized themselves in tribes with leaders and hierarchies. The only thing that changed over time is that humans started living in increasingly larger groups necessitating increasingly complex organization. Claiming that hierarchical structure starts with nation-states is utterly ahistorical.
You failed to get my point. All current and historical anthropologic research suggests that what you describe as “tribes” are very fluent structures with hierarchies often only of symbolic nature, i.e. having one or several well respected figure-head leaders to take over command in times of emergency only.
The idea of a hierarchical structure that is constantly in effect and which has an effect on the majority of the population (a opposed to only effecting a tiny cast of nobles or other such groups) is a rather new development coinciding with the emergence of modern nation states after the French revolution.
I got your point, and I fundamentally disagree with it. The difference is one of scale. We have nearly 8 billion humans on the planet right now, and hierarchies that every large society developed are a result of managing this complexity.
Furthermore, as the French revolution clearly shows, organization is needed in order to effectively resist capitalist hierarchies. Anarchists continue to fail learning the lessons of why the commune failed.
Again, you’re preaching utopia without providing any tangible path towards achieving it. Meanwhile, MLs have liberated countless people from the hell that is capitalism. Much like religious preachers, anarchists preach utopian ideals to keep the masses from rising up and taking effective action.
The more scale you have the less do centrally organized hierarchical systems work… as in the case of those tribes, what you perceive as leadership is mostly figure-heads only.
China is actually a good case in point, as when the nation-state tried to expand its reach to more and more formerly peasant farmers, it had to do so by adopting non-hierarchical market based principles that ultimately turned China into the state-capitalist system we see today.
Anarchists do have plenty of practical approaches, but they did in fact learn their lessons from MLs that have claimed to have liberated countless people from feudal oppression, just to in turn to make them suffer from authoritarian state hell, or as the most recent development turned their inefficient authoritarian state systems into state-capitalist “wonderlands” as China did (history still to be written how that will turn out…).
If anything MLs act like religious preachers claiming that if people just suffer through this current bad situation they will surely reach communist heaven soon. Anarchists follow no such false prophets :p
Once again, you’re letting your dogmatism get ahead of you. Central organization has consistently outcompeted federalized systems. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that pretty much all large companies are centrally organized. There is even a great example of Sears trying to compete with Walmart using a federalist approach which eventually drove it out of business.
Meanwhile, China shows how central planning allows dealing with pandemics effectively, how it results in great infrastructure such as cross country high speed rail, and how central planning allows actually tacking emissions instead of just talking about it. Market based principles you talk about in China are very much subordinate to the central plan.
Anarchists do not have practical approaches, if they did we would’ve seen them in action by now. It’s been over a 100 years and all anarchists have done was to continue propping up the existing capitalist hellscape that whole time.
Anarchists share a lot with libertarians ideologically. It’s largely a privileged class of people who largely don’t care about actual suffering that’s happening to people in their countries, and are more focused on high level concepts like freedom of speech because their own needs are already met. The “authoritarian state hell” you talk about lifted over a billion people out of abject poverty, but you can’t be bothered with such things because you don’t care about alleviating real suffering. Anarchism is fundamentally rooted in western individualism and selfishness. Anarchists can’t imagine themselves as part of a collective whole and working towards common benefit. That’s what anarchists refer to as authoritarian state hell.
The “authoritarian state hell” you talk about lifted over a billion people out of abject poverty
It did not! Only after turning to market-based approaches did that happen (and thus mostly abolishing the authoritarian state hell), before that it made the suffering much worse by starting a civil war and afterwards doing their “great leap” causing millions to starve to death. You can not glance over facts like that, and doing so is highly dishonest.
Edit: funny that you use ultra capitalist examples like Walmart to make your point about “communist” China…
lol, the old long dis-proven monkey hierarchy story written by colonial explorers in the 19th century based on very superficial observations of chimpanzee only. Most apes do not live in hierarchical structures and even for chimpanzees it is less clear cut. The entire story is about as accurate as 19th century colonial explorers describing other societies as backwards and primitive.
If you believe that false monkey story, maybe it is time to question some of the other evidently false historical believes you seem to have?
This is the height of comedy. You at least acknowledge that apes and chimps organize hierarchically, and these are our closest ancestors last I checked. Humans throughout history have also organized hierarchically. This is even the case for small tribes.
If you can’t even acknowledge this simple fact what else is there to tell you really. The fact that you glibly jumped on the whole false monkey story instead of addressing this fact shows just how intellectually dishonest you are.
Humans (and apes) throughout history have usually not organized hierarchically. It can happen for short amounts of times during specific events and there it also makes sense to do so.
The constant hierarchical structure of nation-states is historically speaking an extremely new invention and largely an illusion at that.
That’s just a false statement. Pretty much all human societies have organized themselves in tribes with leaders and hierarchies. The only thing that changed over time is that humans started living in increasingly larger groups necessitating increasingly complex organization. Claiming that hierarchical structure starts with nation-states is utterly ahistorical.
You failed to get my point. All current and historical anthropologic research suggests that what you describe as “tribes” are very fluent structures with hierarchies often only of symbolic nature, i.e. having one or several well respected figure-head leaders to take over command in times of emergency only.
The idea of a hierarchical structure that is constantly in effect and which has an effect on the majority of the population (a opposed to only effecting a tiny cast of nobles or other such groups) is a rather new development coinciding with the emergence of modern nation states after the French revolution.
I got your point, and I fundamentally disagree with it. The difference is one of scale. We have nearly 8 billion humans on the planet right now, and hierarchies that every large society developed are a result of managing this complexity.
Furthermore, as the French revolution clearly shows, organization is needed in order to effectively resist capitalist hierarchies. Anarchists continue to fail learning the lessons of why the commune failed.
Again, you’re preaching utopia without providing any tangible path towards achieving it. Meanwhile, MLs have liberated countless people from the hell that is capitalism. Much like religious preachers, anarchists preach utopian ideals to keep the masses from rising up and taking effective action.
The more scale you have the less do centrally organized hierarchical systems work… as in the case of those tribes, what you perceive as leadership is mostly figure-heads only.
China is actually a good case in point, as when the nation-state tried to expand its reach to more and more formerly peasant farmers, it had to do so by adopting non-hierarchical market based principles that ultimately turned China into the state-capitalist system we see today.
Anarchists do have plenty of practical approaches, but they did in fact learn their lessons from MLs that have claimed to have liberated countless people from feudal oppression, just to in turn to make them suffer from authoritarian state hell, or as the most recent development turned their inefficient authoritarian state systems into state-capitalist “wonderlands” as China did (history still to be written how that will turn out…).
If anything MLs act like religious preachers claiming that if people just suffer through this current bad situation they will surely reach communist heaven soon. Anarchists follow no such false prophets :p
Once again, you’re letting your dogmatism get ahead of you. Central organization has consistently outcompeted federalized systems. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that pretty much all large companies are centrally organized. There is even a great example of Sears trying to compete with Walmart using a federalist approach which eventually drove it out of business.
Meanwhile, China shows how central planning allows dealing with pandemics effectively, how it results in great infrastructure such as cross country high speed rail, and how central planning allows actually tacking emissions instead of just talking about it. Market based principles you talk about in China are very much subordinate to the central plan.
Anarchists do not have practical approaches, if they did we would’ve seen them in action by now. It’s been over a 100 years and all anarchists have done was to continue propping up the existing capitalist hellscape that whole time.
Anarchists share a lot with libertarians ideologically. It’s largely a privileged class of people who largely don’t care about actual suffering that’s happening to people in their countries, and are more focused on high level concepts like freedom of speech because their own needs are already met. The “authoritarian state hell” you talk about lifted over a billion people out of abject poverty, but you can’t be bothered with such things because you don’t care about alleviating real suffering. Anarchism is fundamentally rooted in western individualism and selfishness. Anarchists can’t imagine themselves as part of a collective whole and working towards common benefit. That’s what anarchists refer to as authoritarian state hell.
It did not! Only after turning to market-based approaches did that happen (and thus mostly abolishing the authoritarian state hell), before that it made the suffering much worse by starting a civil war and afterwards doing their “great leap” causing millions to starve to death. You can not glance over facts like that, and doing so is highly dishonest.
Edit: funny that you use ultra capitalist examples like Walmart to make your point about “communist” China…