this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2020
0 points (NaN% liked)

askchapo

22764 readers
10 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net
quartz242@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net
SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net
ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net
InsidiousTrackers@hexbear.net
0
Question for anarchists on this board: What is your solution to fascists/qultists/reactionaries in general? (hexbear.net)
submitted 3 years ago by CthulhusIntern@hexbear.net to c/askchapo@hexbear.net
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This is mostly a serious question. Also, not for the tankies/MLs. I already know what your answer to that question is. I may not always agree with you on everything, but you do have an answer that if the conditions became right, could actually work.

No, this is for the type of anarchist completely against the wall, gulags, seemingly any amount of getting hands dirty. What is the solution to those types of people? There are so many of them in the US, a lot of which are heavily armed, that they could easily topple a socialist system, and even if they didn't do that, their existence would be incompatible with any marginalized group living their lives, since they love to harass them at best, outright murder them at worse. So what's the solution? Anarchists often seem to avoid this, seemingly believing that if there was a socialist or communist society, they would just say "aw shucks, guess I was wrong about that. Guess I'll no longer be racist or xenophobic!"

So am I missing something, what's the answer?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] No_Values@hexbear.net 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

I think you're reading a few things into my comment that aren't there

'Glad you agree that the gulaging of kulaks or the extermination of landlords is not authoritarian' is quite a jump from what I said(make some pedantic argument about what constitutes self defence if you wish but I was clearly referring to immediate physical danger)

I didn't say 'my' violence was 'good', I explained why people don't consider the anti clerical violence authoritarian, as you asked

Who makes said rules? Who carries out the trial? Are they members of a hierarchical state with more power than the individual on trial? If so imo that is authoritarian

[โ€“] weshallovercum@hexbear.net 1 points 3 years ago

The kulaks posed immediate physical danger of starving the Soviet people from their lack of cooperation. The landlords were actively suppressing the peasants.

Who makes said rules?

The rules come from the constitution voted upon by the people.

Who carries out the trial? Are they members of a hierarchical state with more power than the individual on trial? If so imo that is authoritarian

Tell me how would an anarchist society enforce laws then? And how would an anarchist society ensure every individual would have equal power?