• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I didn’t say anything about capitalism being natural. I said the final stage, anarcho-syndicalism, is probably unachievable. And no, human nature is not whatever we do with it. You will not just make things like jealousy, violent tendencies, the need to be controlled, and people fearing those different from them magically disappear. There will be people like that regardless of how you wish to remake the world unless you find a way to genetically engineer it all out of us. Because all of those things go back to our primate roots.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      i didn’t mean to imply you said capitalism is natural. i meant there’s nothing natural about it yet the entire world revolves around it and has been for quite a while. if you put a system in place human nature is irrelevant. murder is “natural”. we have laws against it. anarchism shouldn’t be just total chaos, it just removes unnecessary hierarchies.

      things like jealousy and violence are usually linked to economic and social hardship, and in a fair economic and free social system it should either go away or be the result of psychological problems which should have remedies in an anarchist system as well.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Psychological problems only have humane remedies in such a system if the person with the problem agrees to the remedy. What if they don’t?

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          i don’t agree. if you’re an aggressor, it’s not inhumane to require you to stop. a free society doesn’t mean you’re free to hurt people.

            • pyre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              i don’t know man, some sort of social worker takes them away. you’re asking me specifics like I’m going to build my own society right now.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                I’m trying to point out the flaw here. If you give the social worker the power to do that, suddenly you’re creating power hierarchies, which goes against the whole idea.

                • pyre@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  no it doesn’t. not necessarily, anyway. authorities don’t need to automatically vanish in an anarchy. instead they may need to prove the purpose of their existence. there is literature on non-state justice systems. communism and anarchism comes from thinkers, economists and philosophers. it’s not like they didn’t just think of crime at all.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    If you have power hierarchies and authorities, it is no longer anarcho-syndicalism. So I think you’re proving my point. Also, when would these social workers with this authority ever vanish? After some sort of eugenics program to eliminate all dangerous mental illnesses from humanity?

        • NoMadMan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          To quote you: “You will not just make things like jealousy, violent tendencies, the need to be controlled, and people fearing those different from them magically disappear.”

          Please point to the words ‘violent mental illness’ in your original post. Now take your yellow highlighter pen and color it on your screen. Actually, use a Sharpie - what the hell. Maybe next time you’ll see it and remember not to speak out of turn.

          If you mean to say that ‘violent tendencies’ is necessarily equivalent to ‘violent mental illness’, I would counter that they are two different things. I would say that people in the armed forces have violent tendencies. Police officers have violent tendencies. But violent mental illness is a completely different thing. Violent mental illness implies that the violence is not a rational response to the situation at hand.

          So, sorry I took away your little 'Gotcha!" moment.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Okay, well you can counter it but that is still what I meant to say.

            And I didn’t do any sort of gotcha comment. That’s not something I do. I resent the suggestion. If you’re going to just make uncivil accusations, we can stop this right now.