Comment by Ranger@lemmy.blahaj.zone on Be hostile to hostile architecture

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/15059816

transcript [text overlaid on several pictures of benches and outside windowsills. the benches have bars, or gaps to prevent someone from sleeping on them.

text reads “Ban anti-homeless arctithecture”]

sauce: https://mastodon.social/@AnarchistArt/112901196516297447

Hostile architecture is among the symptoms of the hostile modern city, where neighbours never say hi, and people die on the streets as people walk passivly by.

So every single person in the world should be a vigilante?

No way that can end poorly.

Maybe if people had to be responsible for the violence they outsource to cops maybe they’d think about it twice.

You’re kidding me, right?

Suppose some jackass steals from you. If you don’t want to risk your life to get it back, you just shouldn’t get it back? What kind of libertarian bullshit is that? I thought anarchy was about collectivism, or at least pretended to be.

Obviously a society set up to force citizens to engage with power structures like police isn’t going to mesh will with anarchist ideas. A lot of anarchists just don’t do shit when they get victimized like that. The cops aren’t going to find your stuff and if they do they aren’t going to give it back. You suck it up, accept the loss, and ask your community for mutual aid.

But what if society wasn’t like that? What if we created other avenues for empowerment besides go to the cops or deal with it? What if there was a justice system based on restorative justice and rehabilitation instead of violence and oppression? It turns out that most people are only stealing things because they can’t meet their needs any other way, and most people actually don’t want to just randomly hurt others if they have adequate food, shelter, services, and community. Build a society based on helping people up instead of beating them down, and appealing to your community for help no longer necessitates violence.

ah yes, the secret third option: tell yourself that whoever stole your thing probably needed it more than you and beg your neighbor to give you another one.

we’re already doing that, it’s called gofundme, and it’s not working out great

it is true that, in a just world where people’s needs are provided for, there would be fewer bad actors. there will still be bad actors regardless. these bad actors would be the sort of greedy arseholes who currently run megacorporations, but they would operate on a much smaller scale since society would be less conducive to their will. even still, having no plan to deal with their actions besides “shrug and be thankful for what you do have” is not an attractive prospect

It sounds like you don’t actually want to discuss this and just want to have an argument tbh. You’re misrepresenting what I’ve said and it’s definitely not good faith.

I hope your capitalist community comes to help you when the cops don’t give your stolen things back.

There’s a divers range of anarchist schools of thought & some of the oldest are forms of individualist anarchism, Max Stirner was contemporary with Marx. You should read his work it not only deals with formal hierarchies but also not being ruled by arbitrary concepts, he’s famous/infamous for using hagelian dielectics to deconstruct hagelian dielectics(I’m some what of a hagelian myself /meme).

I was using outsourced figuratively, I was trying to express that the vast majority of people are completely divorced from the violence committed on their behalf. An example is when someone calls the cops over something minor & the cops show up & immediately escalate until they kill someone.

Edit: You can have formal & informal systems in place to minimize/help prevent unnecessary violence under anarchism, they just need to avoid hierarchy.

You can have formal and informal systems to help prevent unnecessary violencs under anarchism

Okay cool, so like a set of people whose role it is to go after people who act against the interests of the group, and who are authorized to do that?

they just need to avoid hierarchy.

sigh

Ranger, my guy, we’ve already discussed why a society without hierarchy is not possible. If one group has the unique authority to exert control over bad actors, a hierarchy exists. If everyone has equal authority, whoever threatens the most violence will see everyone else capitulate.

I don’t have time to go read the works of a philosopher I’ve never previously heard of before continuing a conversation with you. Since you already seem to understand it and like it, you perhaps give me a summary of his ideas? By the way, I think you meant “dialectics” – a dielectric is something you put between two pieces of wire to keep them from shorting out.

An example is when someone calls the cops over something minor and the cops immediately escalate until they kill someone.

Sounds like we need police reform and officers trained in de-escalation, not a complete abolition of the police. You’ll hear no argument from me that the current state of policing in the States is our biggest point of national shame and bordering on fascism, but I am truly tired of leftists seeing this fact and jumping to the conclusion that these problems extend to policing as a concept, and proceeding to work to abolish that.

My brain subconsciously corrects as I read so I often don’t see errors.

I am way too tried to summarize Stirner, I’d think I’d rather try to explain quantum physics to a five year old(exaggeration).

Yeah real police reforms would be nice. Anarchism I would say isn’t necessarily a simple policy change, yes anarchist have short term goals, but it’s really more of a ongoing process, for me less about a finite end of history but trying to build a space of respect for autonomy no mater how ephemeral.

A book on that subject for when you have time: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Autonomous_Zone

Not just that. But what if two anarchists disagree with each other? Who wins? The one who is willing to escalate the highest? My neighbor doesn’t like my native wildflowers, so we yell at each other until someone pulls a gun?

If you’re both batshit insane, sure.

Of course normal people just have polite conversations.

Fortunately for us, everyone on earth has totally rational responses to all situations. And we all agree: we want things to be good, and not bad. And it’s very obvious what things are which!

The thing about the flowers is obviously trivial. There are other matters where a violent ‘direct action’ is obviously warranted.

There are a million things in the middle that are nuanced and difficult and entirely susceptible to ‘person who threatens the most escalation wins’ outcomes.

And hierarchies are made up of people who totally have rational responses to all situations.

Especially the people who naturally gravitate to the top.

Hence why maintaining a society without any form of explicit or implicit hierarchy is very very possible.

A community for anarchist. Anarchism is a set of philosophies that promotes a world free of hierarchical systems.

No electioneering, no telling people to or not to vote or who to vote for. Interpretating this rule as forbidding critisism of candidates is certainty an interpretation but in the context of an ANARCHIST space it’s a bad interpretation.

No bootlicking & that will include being hyper pedantic about people calling politicians, prosecutors, bureaucrats, etc, cops.

Yes, if you’re an obnoxious neo-lib you’re going to get banned. If you’re not obnoxious & have good faith questions you can stay.

All Capybara Are Bros IDTSCJSTDNBDLFTSATICLPE

Be hostile to hostile architecture(files.mastodon.social)

Anarchism

!anarchism@lemmy.blahaj.zone

Community stats

Community moderators