The community themselves decide. If it’s enough of a problem, the community will organize to address it how they see fit. That’s the whole point of anarchism. We don’t have all the answers and we don’t claim to, the people that run into these issues will find the solutions that best suites their needs.
So does the community vote on everything then? If there are too many decisions, could they appoint someone to make some of the decisions on their behalf? Or does every little decision need to be voted on by everyone? If not, I don’t see how it’s different than democracy
frankly, I think it’s very sad that this is being downvoted like it is.
It’s a legitimate question - the previous comment was just a hand-wave “oh, they’ll just figure it out”, but if you’re going to advocate for a system, you should be able to explain how that system works in practice.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m very much anti-capatilist - but a huge amount of this comment section advocating anarcho-communism is little more than hand-waves of “it’ll just work out”, and downvoting anyone who wants to think through the practicalities of it
And about capitalism, rich people (and by “rich”, I mean people that don’t need to work to stay rich and stay getting richer) have more access and influence on decision making them anybody else.
Decision power should be spread more evenly, your society can have people delegated to take decisions, but that decisions should reflect the interest of the society as a whole, not only who gets economic power.
Agree, but are democracy and anarchy synonymous? The original post was taking about anarchical communism witch I thought was different than democratic socialism.
The community themselves decide. If it’s enough of a problem, the community will organize to address it how they see fit. That’s the whole point of anarchism. We don’t have all the answers and we don’t claim to, the people that run into these issues will find the solutions that best suites their needs.
So does the community vote on everything then? If there are too many decisions, could they appoint someone to make some of the decisions on their behalf? Or does every little decision need to be voted on by everyone? If not, I don’t see how it’s different than democracy
frankly, I think it’s very sad that this is being downvoted like it is.
It’s a legitimate question - the previous comment was just a hand-wave “oh, they’ll just figure it out”, but if you’re going to advocate for a system, you should be able to explain how that system works in practice.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m very much anti-capatilist - but a huge amount of this comment section advocating anarcho-communism is little more than hand-waves of “it’ll just work out”, and downvoting anyone who wants to think through the practicalities of it
Democracy and capitalism are not synonymous.
And about capitalism, rich people (and by “rich”, I mean people that don’t need to work to stay rich and stay getting richer) have more access and influence on decision making them anybody else. Decision power should be spread more evenly, your society can have people delegated to take decisions, but that decisions should reflect the interest of the society as a whole, not only who gets economic power.
Agree, but are democracy and anarchy synonymous? The original post was taking about anarchical communism witch I thought was different than democratic socialism.