What are peoples opinions here on having a decentralized governing body for the sole purpose of regulating capital/economic power.
My worry is that when left unchecked a person who does somehow acquire a monopoly on local resources can leverage the people relying on them into forming a budding corpo-state.
This is an anarchist community. The foundational belief is that any such body will become corrupt and serve the interests of capital instead of the interests of the people. You are essentially asking vegans if they approve of human slaughtering methods for “cruelty free” beef. Your question is fundamentally opposed to the central pillar of anarchism.
To me the foundation is the belief in personal freedom that cannot be overruled by authority of any kind. This does includes the modern concept of a state.
We come in many flavors with diverse ideas and opinions. I’ve been careful with my wording. “Governing body” can be interpreted in many creative ways including the people governing themselves.
While I tend to agree somewhat with both of your standpoints, I think maybe the governing in “governing body” is the problem here. While we would need to find some way to reach societal consensus on various levels, isn’t a government with an attached ability to exercise authority over people at odds with anarchist ideals? Even if people would form an autonomous government to govern themselves, the name itself suggests authority over people.
I havent gone super deep in this but what if we refine the concept of government as a way for people to organize the geo local organization.
Freedom is for individuals and individuals can organize but by organizing you are exercising local control. So the people must have a say in that control before it gets to powerful.
People respect your freedom to organize for better forest management. No one should stop you from building a home in the open forest but local communities should be connected in a way where people quickly catch on if you start cutting and exporting wood for personal gain.
With enough peer pressure people can non violently shut such system down and they have the right too. You mostly need enough people aware of whats what. Hence good education, organized trough modern infrastructure
The mentality ill person (now called a criminal) can only comely, if they resort to harming others directly they wave their right to not be stopped/overpowered by others temporarily.
The government in this case would be the digital network itself wich allows fair decentralzed shading of opinions and public oversight. Everyone together governing themselves.
What are peoples opinions here on having a decentralized governing body for the sole purpose of regulating capital/economic power.
My worry is that when left unchecked a person who does somehow acquire a monopoly on local resources can leverage the people relying on them into forming a budding corpo-state.
This is an anarchist community. The foundational belief is that any such body will become corrupt and serve the interests of capital instead of the interests of the people. You are essentially asking vegans if they approve of human slaughtering methods for “cruelty free” beef. Your question is fundamentally opposed to the central pillar of anarchism.
To me the foundation is the belief in personal freedom that cannot be overruled by authority of any kind. This does includes the modern concept of a state.
We come in many flavors with diverse ideas and opinions. I’ve been careful with my wording. “Governing body” can be interpreted in many creative ways including the people governing themselves.
While I tend to agree somewhat with both of your standpoints, I think maybe the governing in “governing body” is the problem here. While we would need to find some way to reach societal consensus on various levels, isn’t a government with an attached ability to exercise authority over people at odds with anarchist ideals? Even if people would form an autonomous government to govern themselves, the name itself suggests authority over people.
I havent gone super deep in this but what if we refine the concept of government as a way for people to organize the geo local organization.
Freedom is for individuals and individuals can organize but by organizing you are exercising local control. So the people must have a say in that control before it gets to powerful.
People respect your freedom to organize for better forest management. No one should stop you from building a home in the open forest but local communities should be connected in a way where people quickly catch on if you start cutting and exporting wood for personal gain.
With enough peer pressure people can non violently shut such system down and they have the right too. You mostly need enough people aware of whats what. Hence good education, organized trough modern infrastructure
The mentality ill person (now called a criminal) can only comely, if they resort to harming others directly they wave their right to not be stopped/overpowered by others temporarily.
The government in this case would be the digital network itself wich allows fair decentralzed shading of opinions and public oversight. Everyone together governing themselves.