• Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Well, because things in practice are often different than the extreme end of the definition, and I’m arguing because I enjoy it and it exposes me to other perspectives. Like how you see no benefit to anarchy tells me about your lived expieriences and/or how you would plan to act in an anarchal society.

      Also, social contracts are enforced in anarchy, just not by an entity emposed by a governing body. I’d say social contracts are more worthwhile when they flourish without the need for enforcement. E.g. people watching what they say in public around children. You won’t get arrested for swearing until it’s “disturbing the peace”.

            • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              If you mean the zapatistas… duhhh? They were an anarchist movement within a country, they were attacked by the country they were founded in, and their enforcers were held in rotation and decided on by a fully public discussion that anyone in the community could attend, this is fully anarchist.

                • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  They are absolutely on defence and i’m aware they are around, but the mexican government is actively trying to destroy them

                  you really didn’t realize that the fact that they’re still around undermines, not strengthens your argument huh?