this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
10 points (85.7% liked)

Anarchism

2276 readers
31 users here now

Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.

Other anarchist comms

Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
10
A thought experiment. (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 week ago by anaVal@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Imagine you are a person fighting in an anarchist revolt. You have captured a sizeable chunk of land but the front line has grown too large and you can't progress further. The state that you have been fighting approaches you with an offer: They recognise you as a sovereign (however that would look like) entity but you have to give away most of the land you've captured. They will leave you with the primary city and enough surrounding land to feed everyone.

What would be your position? Would you be willing to make a deal with the state?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (21 children)

Thry can't be trusted. No deal

[–] anaVal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (20 children)

I think they can be trusted to act in their best self-interest and this deal is that.

It allows them to:

  1. Stop the trickle of casualties.
  2. Gain back most of the lost territory.
  3. Regroup to potentially take the city back later. (Of course they would stand no chance but obviously they would think differently)
  4. Win public support.
  5. Have a sink for the more radical people in the populous. (Wanna live in anarchy? Go over there!)
[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

  1. Why would they care about casualties?

  2. Yeah but they want all of it, and will not be satisfied.

  3. Yeah. Of course they would. Theyre authoritarians.

  4. Would it? Do they care

  5. They don't want that, though. They want to punish, make examples, and have slaves.

[–] anaVal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I imagine the state as more a liberal representative democracy. Some place that has freedom of speech and relatively fair elections. The kind of country that actually needs public support to enact their rule. Not an authoritarian hell-scape, I wouldn't trust any deal they make anyway.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I (barely) remember the 90s, when most people would say i lived in one of those. Nah, still dont trust it as far as i can throw it.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)