Alright Sup Forums, please explain anarchism to me

Alright Sup Forums, please explain anarchism to me.
I am growing disgusted by many economic concepts that are considered basically immovable in todays society, and am trying to understand how a society that doesnt use governments, borders, property, maybe even currency, could ever be compatible with a world where pleading for "local only" market is not a possibility anymore in any way, and where information is shared on a planetary scale. How do you realistically de-institutionalize, de-monetize and level down society to have healthy and sharing-based economics ? Im not interested in replies from people who dont believe it possible, I'm looking for arguments from people who actually defend a realistic vision of liberal anarchism or something close to it.
TL;DR : how can the idea of anarchy possibly work ?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/WHBuU9yurzE
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

No

youtu.be/WHBuU9yurzE

nobody ?

>sharing-based economics
Are you talking about left-anarchism? Because right-anarchism is just full capitalism (private property rights, no public property)

no i mean left wing anarchism, or liberal communism, or something close where the idea of property doesnt apply anymore, and where state police is made obsolete.

Bump

last self bump i guess

If the idea of property is made obsolete and there is no state to protect it, then Might is Right and anyone can annex anything else through violence. What you're describing is the State of Nature that Hobbes reviled so much. Nasty brutish short, etc.

RARE
A
R
E

It's a meme. It assumes people can live in a leaderless society, despite humans living in some sort of "system" (tribal, religious, patriarchal etc) for 80,000 years.
Ignoring reality and human nature is also how communism and anarchism can exist and not be an oxymoron to anarcho-communists.

exactly, my question is how this is theoretically avoidable, what kind of organization is possible that would preserve human freedom and abolish property

but i dont mean the complete absence of system as such, but how we can build a system that isnt liberticide and based on the idea that people "own" things other than what they produce themselves

If you're "organizing" in any way, shape, or form, then you've drifted from anarchism. It's not theoretically avoidable, because it ignores the reality that humans can coerce eachother through violence.

well i dont necessarily mean the strictest definition of anarchism as in no organization, more like how can ppl build an organization that doesnt need to use concepts that will always be subverted to make capitalism happen, or hyper regulated state-driven lives as the only alternative

It doesn't. You're ignoring human nature and the impetus to gain for personal benefit at the expense of others. For example, if I like what you have, I can place a gun to your head and make you give it to me. Without a state to prevent that action, I will take what you have, whether I kill you or you just willingly give it to me. The only way to ensure safety is to grant the state a monopoly on violence, so that when I try to do that, I am shot by the police and that action is classified as an armed robbery, legally speaking. Capitalism is an inevitability. Even in the strictest communist regimes with the most authoritarian leanings, the state simply injected itself as a monopolistic capitalistic entity that distributed payment to its citizens in a terribly functioning business model. If you want to be free, you better be prepared to defend what you have. If you want everyone to be equal, it will be under a jackboot.

>If you're "organizing" in any way, shape, or form, then you've drifted from anarchism.
That's complete bullshit. If you're arguing against an ideology, shouldn't you be interested in not misrepresenting it?

(cant believe ive posted something like this on Sup Forums and no one has called me a cuck faggot beta cringelord yet)

>Capitalism is an inevitability.
Why do you need socialism to achieve it then?

Nobody here is willing or able to defend that (including me). You should definitely visit /lit/ which has some left-wing threads or even /leftypol/ on 8ch

Are you talking about left or right anarchism? Because the idea of property is not made obsolete in a right-anarchist society.

socialism is just sharing and re-allocating capital from capitalism

left, as i said above

It's not "organization" that anarchists are against, it's hierarchy of any form. That includes voluntary hierarchy. Heck, I've even had anarchists say that they wouldn't submit to God because that would be hierarchal.

So yeah, it's a pretty stupid ideology. Without hierarchy, they can't form a proper military to fight a revolution with. That's not even getting into all the trouble that society would go through after the revolution, trying to run all of society with zero hierarchy.

>stealing and re-allocating capital
Fixed.

Right-anarchists believe in voluntary hierarchy. Capitalism is dependent upon voluntary hierarchy.

OP was asking about left-anarchism, so that's what I was addressing.

Does this mean they don't have family units in left-anarchism, and that children are equal to adults? Because adults telling children what to do is hierarchy right?

They have families, but they are voluntary. The father is not the head of the house, and parents can't tell their children what to do.

The difference is that an anarchistic society is organized bottom-up, while currently our society is organized top-down. It's relatively simple to envision how such a society might work, compared to how to get to that point from the one we're currently at. It's not a simple-to-answer question. The communists envision socialism to lead to a very similar point, a lot of Anarchists see the answer in anti-authoritarian education and anarchistic communal projects. Others have proclaimed anarchism to be inseperable from transhumanism and believe that a societal revolution will follow a technological.

Its essentially
When kiddies turn 14 years old
They start to buy music from shitty bands Then the 14 year old teenie rebels memorize all the lyrics
This is mostly because their parents do not work to instill character or identity values

Then what happens is the kiddies start repeating the lyrics over and over again until they believe that it is a teenie edgy political option
Eventually it dissolves and the kiddies get into their 20's and become democrats or communist

>human nature
What a meme

It's ridiculous to ask about how to have a "system" of anarchy — that defeats the whole point, if there is one. Beyond dismantling existing systems (maybe) and setting the stage for the next system, anarchy can't function. It's inherently disfunctional.

So if I want to give my son the land that I cleared? Or the company I built? Is that no longer my property when I die?

there is no need for an institution of ownership or value via currency for u to transmit what u made to ur family

Anarchy did nothing wrong

ask someone who has it all figured out anything

So we still have property, currency and hierarchy, we just won't call it by those names
Sounds inefficient senpai