• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Betteridge talks about something fundamentally different. Read the essay, it’s really short.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      I skimmed it. It’s bullshit. Reminds me of the “not technically a lie but essentially a lie” bullshit that the door-to-door “have you heard the Good News” religious bastards would try to sucker you in with when I was a kid in the South. A lot of “like us” type bullshit.

      If you’re stupid enough, you might think it makes sense. But it’s a fairytale.

      I’m not saying the author is stupid. I’m saying he’s maliciously pandering to stupid people.

      Let’s take a super quick example.

      If there’s a line to get on a crowded bus, do you wait your turn and refrain from elbowing your way past others even in the absence of police? If you answered “yes”

      I’ll try to get past my gag reflex at how condescending this is. But sure. Start with an eminently, universally reasonable position.

      The most basic anarchist principle is self-organization

      Still sounds fairly reasonable, but the intelligent among you might be thinking “hmm, sounds pretty reductive”

      Everyone believes they are capable of behaving reasonably themselves. If they think laws and police are necessary, it is only because they don’t believe that other people are. But if you think about it, don’t those people all feel exactly the same way about you?

      Now we’ve gone fully into “only really dumb people aren’t skeptical at this point” territory. I mean, first of all, in the interest of saving your mental health, it’s a decent idea to ignore any statement that starts with “but if you think about it”. However even going past that, you get to the premise: “I’m a good person, therefore everyone is a good person!” Which is…like…seven-year-old logic.

      Anarchists argue that almost all the anti-social behavior which makes us think it’s necessary to have armies, police, prisons, and governments to control our lives, is actually caused by the systematic inequalities and injustice

      This is the part where we go off the deep end. The author hopes you’re either not paying attention or are really stupid at this point.

      • 0xD@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah I was like “maybe I was wrong” but then I came to that part and just had to laugh.

        I would love to assume that everyone is benevolent - but they simply are not. It’s not like there aren’t sufficient examples of states without police or military power. They surely don’t correspond to this fantastical view.

        • bionicjoey
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          Look at how people responded to the COVID pandemic and you will see that human beings are terrible at looking out for their community.

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        I read your comment, then I read

        I’ll try to get past my gag reflex at how condescending this is.

        again and I thought to myself: “Hell, if that’s not the pot calling the kettle black!”

        With that much antagonistic priming, any political essay will be interpreted as gondescending bullshit.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          5 months ago

          If you’re that easily swayed into believing something is bullshit, I can see how you got into anarchism.

          You shouldn’t see it as bullshit because of “priming”. You should see it as bullshit because it’s bullshit.

          • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            If you’re that easily swayed into believing something is bullshit, I can see how you got into anarchism.

            Well, fuck you and your bad faith style of arguing, too.

            I’m not saying the essay is thorough or even a complete rundown of anarchist ideology. It’s more a easy-going rebuttal of societal contract theory, based on the presumed everyday life experience of the reader. Suggesting that this essay is a conclusive summary of anarchism and the reason why people “get into anarchism” is about as strawman as it gets.

            The essay simply explains one core tenant of anarchism: that humans rely on cooperation and trust on a core fundamental level in everyday situations, even in capitalism. Societal structures collapse once that base-level of cooperation doesn’t exist.

            How is that “bullshit”?

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              The essay simply explains one core tenant of anarchism: that humans rely on cooperation and trust on a core fundamental level in everyday situations, even in capitalism. Societal structures collapse once that base-level of cooperation doesn’t exist.

              Because people who will not cooperate may be rare, but they are not vanishingly rare. They are common enough that we need explicit rules backed by the violence of the State to enforce them. Everyone knows this at a base level too. That loud neighbor. That guy flipping you off in traffic. The woman at the store eyeing the jewelry case a little too hard. If we didn’t have laws, and cops to enforce them, these people would do what they wanted regardless of what anyone else wanted.

              Which leads to the follow-up bullshit of “if you just destroy the protective power of the State, all the bad people will actually be good people!” Yeah and rainbows shoot out my ass when I fart, too.

              • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Lol, and you complain about Graeber writing bullshit. xD

                In what way is your “bad person” example any better that the waiting for the bus example Graeber gave?

                If humanity was that sellfish, it would have died out about 100000 years ago. You’re spouting unscientific bullshit and act as if you’re the only reasonable person in the room. Classic lib moment.

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I dunno about 100,000 years ago, but around 50,000 years ago is when we finished exterminating the Neanderthals.

                  Humans are not inherently good.

                  But regardless of how good or bad we are, surely you realize how insane it is to suggest that there could ever exist a society that is 100% free from bad actors, both internal and external? Because in a society without cops the one willing and able to resort to the most violence is king.

                  • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    That’s not what anarchists are advocating, tough.

                    Anarchists aren’t against communities defending themselves. Cops are defendants of capital interests, though.

                    Edit: it’s also not about people being “good” or “bad”. It’s about limiting the potential of accumulation and monopolization of structural power.