I am pretty new to politics and I align more with social democracy, but I’ve always being curious about anarcho communism and it isn’t about losing scientific advancements or everyone for themselves. I think an anarchist would argue that these things are possible and in fact encouraged, but that they should be handled directly by the community, cutting out the middle man of the government.
Whether this could work or not is another dilemma, and one I cannot answer.
Most anarchists don’t reject scientific endeavors, especially those that have huge benefits on quality of life. I don’t think anyone really disagrees that the washing machine was a bad invention, nor any such invention that reduces the burden of domestic labor. Science and technology themselves are not the problem, rather the problem is with the incentives of the system around science and technology. A great example being the pharmaceutical industry. Medicine and the treatment of disease is obviously a good thing, but profiteering off of those medicines and treatments is the real problem. An anarchist would argue that these companies are not necessary to advance medical science and that many people would research medicine purely because they want to treat disease and not because they want to make all of the money in the world. In fact, the people actually doing the research are chronically underpaid, underfunded, and overworked.
As for “everyone for themselves,” this gets to a really interesting discussion amongst anarchists. Anarcho Communism leans into the idea that, without the hierarchical power structures of states, people will generally choose to self-organize amongst themselves to better their own lives. Forming non-hierarchical communities that share resources as needed, hence the communism part.
Generally anarchists assert that people do not have to participate in systems if they don’t want to, while also asserting the right of the individual to oppose hierarchical power structures that would try to erode the rights of an individual’s self-determination.
I just don’t believe that could work at the global scale for scientific advancement. Government or not we need regulated research and technology. You need a government to do that because otherwise what would be the punishment?
I think whatever the system we use we need to develop the technology to enable verification and proof based systems.
whatever the system people will lie, cheat, and manipulate so none of them will work properly until we have ways of confirming claims built into all our systems from scientific research, media and technology right to politics and maybe even ever day speech.
I am pretty new to politics and I align more with social democracy, but I’ve always being curious about anarcho communism and it isn’t about losing scientific advancements or everyone for themselves. I think an anarchist would argue that these things are possible and in fact encouraged, but that they should be handled directly by the community, cutting out the middle man of the government.
Whether this could work or not is another dilemma, and one I cannot answer.
Most anarchists don’t reject scientific endeavors, especially those that have huge benefits on quality of life. I don’t think anyone really disagrees that the washing machine was a bad invention, nor any such invention that reduces the burden of domestic labor. Science and technology themselves are not the problem, rather the problem is with the incentives of the system around science and technology. A great example being the pharmaceutical industry. Medicine and the treatment of disease is obviously a good thing, but profiteering off of those medicines and treatments is the real problem. An anarchist would argue that these companies are not necessary to advance medical science and that many people would research medicine purely because they want to treat disease and not because they want to make all of the money in the world. In fact, the people actually doing the research are chronically underpaid, underfunded, and overworked.
As for “everyone for themselves,” this gets to a really interesting discussion amongst anarchists. Anarcho Communism leans into the idea that, without the hierarchical power structures of states, people will generally choose to self-organize amongst themselves to better their own lives. Forming non-hierarchical communities that share resources as needed, hence the communism part.
Generally anarchists assert that people do not have to participate in systems if they don’t want to, while also asserting the right of the individual to oppose hierarchical power structures that would try to erode the rights of an individual’s self-determination.
Does that help?
Yeah that checks out from what I’ve read.
Do you have any resources I could read? My main doubts are regarding how would it work on a global scale
I just don’t believe that could work at the global scale for scientific advancement. Government or not we need regulated research and technology. You need a government to do that because otherwise what would be the punishment?
I just can’t see it working on the large scale.
I think whatever the system we use we need to develop the technology to enable verification and proof based systems.
whatever the system people will lie, cheat, and manipulate so none of them will work properly until we have ways of confirming claims built into all our systems from scientific research, media and technology right to politics and maybe even ever day speech.