Are there police officers in an anarchistic utopia ?

[PassTheBeer]

Now..since there is no government.. how will the bad guys be punished ?

[Tablo]

There will be no police officers and anarchism is not a Utopian ideology. Police are meant for defending private property rights for the ruling elite. Since private property and ruling elites will not exist it is unnecessary to maintain police forces to brutalize the population. While private property will be gone personal property will still exist. Also, it is the goal of both Anarchists and Marxists to eventually do away with the state and police.

[Lord Testicles]

Who said anything about no government, we're talking about no state.

[Jazzratt]

Now..since there is no government.. how will the bad guys be punished ? Well, I don't have a crystal ball, but I imagine any kind of societal organ that exists to deal with threats to society - such as the ever popular (in these hypotheticals) killers - would probably look quite different from anything currently available. I think it would be emphasised much more that they are rooted within the community, as a democratically recallable arm of it made up of volunteers and/or a rotating membership.

Certainly there would be no "police officers" as it is understood today, just as there would be no owners of production as we understand it today.

[gorillafuck]

I am also curious how anarchist alternatives would eliminate the overall tough-guy attitude and dominating mindset that todays police forces have.

[Sosa]

one thing I've wondered is who would take up the role of the specialized job of detectives and forensic investigators who investigate murders, rapists, etc

[Tablo]

one thing I've wondered is who would take up the role of the specialized job of detectives and forensic investigators who investigate murders, rapists, etc
That's a good question. To be honest I think such occurences would be rare to the point that it would be a side hobby for some random people. Or maybe there will be a group that would do the investigations for all the communes in a particular region. I may be wrong with this being a rare occurrence, but I really can't see it happening on a scale comparable to now.

[syndicat]

Forensics and investigation work is, well, work. it's a service, a public good, that these workers provide. as such why wouldn't there be a self-managing worker organization that does this for the local governance system?

as I like to say "government" is ambiguous. it could be used to...and in everyday talk it often is used...to refer to the state, that is, the whole bureaucratic apparatus. libertarian socialists are interested in eliminating the state -- the hierarchical, bureaucratic structure not under actual control of the people -- and replacing it with a more directly democratic governance system based on neighborhood assemblies, councils of delegates and so on. the aim is direct self-government by the masses. this governance system would have the ability to make rules for the society and also to enforce them. this implies some kind of militia force that is directly controlled by the populace.

militia police should have a kind of "combined" job, that is, they only work in policing part of the time, and do some normal job the other time. otherwise the tendency is to get a really jaundiced attitude towards the people...the sort of attitude Zeekloid refers to.

there would need to be some system of popular tribunals to adjudicate accusations of criminal conduct or resolve disputes.

many petty crimes of the present, which are products of poverty and degradation, would diminish in number. it's best that people who do make mistakes be dealt with in their communities, if possible, because it is the moral pressure of family and friends that has the best chance of changing their attitude. completely isolating people...sending them off to some camp where they do the work of maintainging themselves, growing food...is the sort of thing that should be reserved for hardened cases who the population don't want in their midst.

the main change in governance is that it is the masses who control and run it, not a separate elite of bureaucrats and professional politicians, serving the interests of some dominating, exploiting class.

[blake 3:17]

Well, I don't have a crystal ball, but I imagine any kind of societal organ that exists to deal with threats to society - such as the ever popular (in these hypotheticals) killers - would probably look quite different from anything currently available. I think it would be emphasised much more that they are rooted within the community, as a democratically recallable arm of it made up of volunteers and/or a rotating membership.

Interesting. A few of us broke up a really nasty street fight yesterday -- some sto. opid drug deal gone wrong with the two dudes pounding each other. Several of us just srting yelling at them to stop it, quit it, it's over, etc. They eventually went their seperate ways. As part of building socialism we do need the majority of people to react responsibly in crisis situation. That involves particular skills, abilities, strengths and confidence.


I am also curious how anarchist alternatives would eliminate the overall tough-guy attitude and dominating mindset that todays police forces have. That's a huge question. There are reasons why a lot of macho idiots are drawn to policing, security, and military work.

Within the radical Left there are people drawn to confrontation for its own sake. particular militant actions did radicalize me -- getting a police baton in the back of the head pisses a person off -- but socialism/anarchism has a just peace as its goal.
I wish I knew the secret to getting rid of mach idiocy in the whole of society. When you find out, let me know!

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

I like to believe they will be ostracized for minor crimes and if the crime is major they are to be punished in ways benefiting the community. Case by case basis, but I could go into more detail if asked. To draw a line, you can be ostracized for an accident that breaks someones leg and allowed to return when they forgive you, but if you're gonna attack them and break their leg for a reason you can be ostracized for life if the reason is extreme.

[Jalapeno Enema]

one thing I've wondered is who would take up the role of the specialized job of detectives and forensic investigators who investigate murders, rapists, etcThe people who are qualified and interested in taking up these roles, as they are required.

I'm thinking professors and doctors (as well as other experts), who have knowledge and access to labs, would be a natural choice for such duties.

[PassTheBeer]

I wish I knew the secret to getting rid of mach idiocy in the whole of society. When you find out, let me know!


Chemical castration and forcible insertion of female hormones on a global scale? :D

[syndicat]

There are reasons why a lot of macho idiots are drawn to policing, security, and military work.



sure. but there are also people drawn to it because they have a naive idea of serving the community. i know someone who teaches in a college prep course for people going into the police. he tries to persuade them not to become police...because of the role the police play in the existing society.

in this society a role of the police is as bullies to intimidate the lower class. consider the role of the police and sheriffs in tenant/landlord conflicts, in arresting squatters, in policing strikes, in doing surveillance and internal damage to left political organizations, movements.

[NKVD]

An anarchist utopia is just that, a utopia. Anarchism in real life is simply impossible.

[Tablo]

An anarchist utopia is just that, a utopia. Anarchism in real life is simply impossible.
Based off of what? Communism is anarchistic in its lack of social hierarchy so I guess you don't want communism.

[WeAreReborn]

An anarchist utopia is just that, a utopia. Anarchism in real life is simply impossible.
This a joke? Anarchism is not a utopia because it is based off of reasons and facts not metaphysical nonsense like Anarcho-Capitalism, which is not Anarchist. Though I am not surprised a guy named NKVD would make such a trollish and not well thought sectarian post.

[NKVD]

Based off of what? Communism is anarchistic in its lack of social hierarchy so I guess you don't want communism.

I support putting in place institutions such as the NKVD and politburo to ensure that the social hierarchy is kept at a minimum. On the other hand, you have nothing in place to ensure anarchy works.


This a joke? Anarchism is not a utopia because it is based off of reasons and facts not metaphysical nonsense like Anarcho-Capitalism, which is not Anarchist. Though I am not surprised a guy named NKVD would make such a trollish and not well thought sectarian post.

Could you please point me to an example of a country that has successfully implemented anarchism? I can easily show you implementations of socialist countries such as the USSR and Cuba.

[Magón]

I support putting in place institutions such as the NKVD and politburo to ensure that the social hierarchy is kept at a minimum. On the other hand, you have nothing in place to ensure anarchy works.



Could you please point me to an example of a country that has successfully implemented anarchism? I can easily show you implementations of socialist countries such as the USSR and Cuba.

Anarchism, like Communism, has never been achieved because it's too much for people to handle right off the bat. That's why you had places like Anarchist Ukraine and '36 Spain... until you're USSR/NKVD came in and wanted a bigger piece of the pie than they deserved.

Call Anarchism "utopian" all you like, but Communism is no different.

[syndicat]

I support putting in place institutions such as the NKVD and politburo to ensure that the social hierarchy is kept at a minimum. On the other hand, you have nothing in place to ensure anarchy works.



LOL. so you expect "social hierarchy kept to minimum" by creating a secret police and one-party dictatorship. didn't work out that way in the "Communist" (aka bureaucratic mode of production) countries, did it? working class remained a dominated and exploited class.

In the Spanish revolution there was a very large mass workers movement that did a lot of constructive work in the direction of creating a libertarian socialist society. The worker unions expropriated the capitalists and big landowners and created worker organizations to directly manage the industries and agriculture. These organizations were rooted in assemblies...in workplaces and villages. They elected coordinating councils and had industry conferences. They built a union militia with tens of thousands of members, and created a worker run war industry to provide ammo and such.

They didn't get to the point of replacing the Republican state but they had a program for how the working class could govern the society directly. through worker congresses, a unified people's militia, economics and defense councils elected by the mass organizations.

The worker management of the country's economy was quite successful during the course of the 2 and a half years of the civil war.

Manipulations of the Communists and massive aid of Germany & Italy to the fascists were the two main reasons the revolution was defeated. To the extent the anarchists contributed to this defeat, it was because they did not stick militantly enough to their program.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Police officers? Oh fuck no!

[NKVD]

Anarchism, like Communism, has never been achieved because it's too much for people to handle right off the bat. That's why you had places like Anarchist Ukraine and '36 Spain... until you're USSR/NKVD came in and wanted a bigger piece of the pie than they deserved.

Call Anarchism "utopian" all you like, but Communism is no different.

Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example :thumbup1:

[Kuppo Shakur]

how will the bad guys be punished ?
the good guys will get der guns and go PFEW PFEW PFEW and the bad guys will fall in da lava

[Magón]

Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example :thumbup1:

We're not talking about Socialism though, and as for the USSR being a prime example of Socialism working; it is completely a matter of personal opinion and who was in charge, etc. Some of us don't see Socialism being the Marxist-Leninist way, hence why it's a matter of personal opinion.

[gorillafuck]

I support putting in place institutions such as the NKVD and politburo to ensure that the social hierarchy is kept at a minimum.
...the politburo kept social hierarchy to a minimum?


Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example
I am going to Russia in April for school. I will ask my host families parents to find out what life was like in the Soviet Union.

[Tablo]

Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example :thumbup1:
I would challenge your describing of the Soviet Union as socialist even in the Marxist definition of the term.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

the good guys will get der guns and go PFEW PFEW PFEW and the bad guys will fall in da lava
Wow! So is that how it really works?

[Revolutionair]

I support putting in place institutions such as the NKVD and politburo to ensure that the social hierarchy is kept at a minimum.

Holy shit.
You think a secret invisible army will reduce social hierarchy?

[WeAreReborn]

Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example :thumbup1:
But the end goal of the USSR was true Communism and to promote it. It failed. And Catalonia Spain set up Anarchy but the Fascists backed by America defeated them.

[Blackscare]

But the end goal of the USSR was true Communism and to promote it. It failed. And Catalonia Spain set up Anarchy but the Fascists backed by America defeated them.


This is a minor example but I'm drunk so here goes;

Anyone ever notice that while Marxists seem to be endlessly self-critical and at least realistic in their assessment of their own failings, anarchists always seem to fall back on the victim mentality? It's always "WAAA THE BOLSHEVIKS KILLED US OFF" or "WE WERE ABOUT TO CREATE ANARKYISM BUT THEN FRANCO WAS A DICK ABOUT IT", or whatever, it's always blaming their enemies for acting in exactly the way everyone knows they will, as if you're not supposed to adapt your tactics to surmount such obstacles.

IDK, anarchists are whiners.

[Across The Street]

Some excellent points about the original question have been brought up. I like to think that aside from having the role of the police filled by militia/knowledgeable forensic scientists/willing volunteers having another occupation on the side, the people themselves through sheer power of suggestion will deter crimes. Mob mentality aint nuttin to fuck with. This point too, was already made. Friends and family of accused persons will be the strongest deterrent to crimes. I feel, in a liberated society, people won't commit crimes near as much if there is no foreseeable benefit in doing so. For instance, once the initial seduction of perpetuating monetary economic setups has faded, financial gain is no longer a motivation to fuck people over. As far as socialism and its largely failed experiments, possible exceptions being Cuba and Venezuela, I think most people shy away from the negative connotations involving Russia, China, and fascist nations all over the planet.

To NKVD; Anarchism is very far from being impossible, the world is on the brink of witnessing it become very real, and I would dare to say, as much as is possible, it already exists in large pockets of every country. Of course, at present, it has to operate under the confines of capitalistic materialism, but nobody can currently say how long this will last. I don't doubt the power of collective action, or mob rule, DOP, etc, but the U.S. is largely made up of people who are increasingly isolated, and fragmented from not only their peers, but themselves. Ungovernability is the rule of the day, and the implications of large masses of autonomous individuals go largely ignored by nearly everybody. I'll let u draw your own conclusions as to the situation in the rest of the world, but I think u might get where I'm going with this. It might be frightening to think past the initial reactions, but do yourself a favor and imagine a free world.

The guy above me has apparently never met any real anarchists.

[NGNM85]

I support putting in place institutions such as the NKVD and politburo to ensure that the social hierarchy is kept at a minimum. On the other hand, you have nothing in place to ensure anarchy works.

Exactly, how else could you be sure everyone is equally oppressed?


Could you please point me to an example of a country that has successfully implemented anarchism? I can easily show you implementations of socialist countries such as the USSR and Cuba.

Is the USSR is a and example of the success of Socialism, what does a failure of Socialism look like?

[WeAreReborn]

This is a minor example but I'm drunk so here goes;

Anyone ever notice that while Marxists seem to be endlessly self-critical and at least realistic in their assessment of their own failings, anarchists always seem to fall back on the victim mentality? It's always "WAAA THE BOLSHEVIKS KILLED US OFF" or "WE WERE ABOUT TO CREATE ANARKYISM BUT THEN FRANCO WAS A DICK ABOUT IT", or whatever, it's always blaming their enemies for acting in exactly the way everyone knows they will, as if you're not supposed to adapt your tactics to surmount such obstacles.

IDK, anarchists are whiners.
Nice idiotic, sectarian ramble. Also great over generalizations. Both seem to make you sound intelligent and bring a lot to this conversation. A lot of Marxists think that the USSR was great and there was few flaws. But a lot also see reason and see the multiple flaws. Just like a lot of Anarchists realize that you shouldn't focus on the past, myself being one of them, and just try to focus ahead. Though this forum talks a lot about the past to inform and to analyze, which is great. But to stereotype a group is pretty ridiculous. But whatever I'm not mad or anything just amused by your drunken bullshit.

[NKVD]

LOL. so you expect "social hierarchy kept to minimum" by creating a secret police and one-party dictatorship. didn't work out that way in the "Communist" (aka bureaucratic mode of production) countries, did it? working class remained a dominated and exploited class.

No it didn't.


We're not talking about Socialism though, and as for the USSR being a prime example of Socialism working; it is completely a matter of personal opinion and who was in charge, etc. Some of us don't see Socialism being the Marxist-Leninist way, hence why it's a matter of personal opinion.

It shows that Marxist-Leninist socialism is workable, unlike anarchism.


...the politburo kept social hierarchy to a minimum?

Kruschev changed things slightly, but social hierarchy was nothing compared to say America.


I would challenge your describing of the Soviet Union as socialist even in the Marxist definition of the term.

You would. But you'd be wrong.


Holy shit.
You think a secret invisible army will reduce social hierarchy?

Are you talking about ghosts?


But the end goal of the USSR was true Communism and to promote it. It failed.

It succeeded for 70 years. That's probably 69 years longer than any anarchist country has succeeded.


To NKVD; Anarchism is very far from being impossible, the world is on the brink of witnessing it become very real, and I would dare to say, as much as is possible, it already exists in large pockets of every country. Of course, at present, it has to operate under the confines of capitalistic materialism, but nobody can currently say how long this will last. I don't doubt the power of collective action, or mob rule, DOP, etc, but the U.S. is largely made up of people who are increasingly isolated, and fragmented from not only their peers, but themselves. Ungovernability is the rule of the day, and the implications of large masses of autonomous individuals go largely ignored by nearly everybody. I'll let u draw your own conclusions as to the situation in the rest of the world, but I think u might get where I'm going with this. It might be frightening to think past the initial reactions, but do yourself a favor and imagine a free world.

Keep dreaming for you little liberal utopia where all the hippies run free.


Exactly, how else could you be sure everyone is equally oppressed?

Works brilliantly doesn't it? No more bourgeoise getting away without being oppressed. :laugh:


Is the USSR is a and example of the success of Socialism, what does a failure of Socialism look like?

:confused: Every country that hasn't been socialist? Like the United States of America or Qatar to pick two examples.

[Across The Street]

I'll leave the utopianism where it belongs, in the afterlife.

[Revolutionair]

Are you talking about ghosts?

0k-xfEjAm6c

"Helden an der unsichtbaren Front"


How does the average worker have any control over things like the Cheka?
I hope you will be the first to die in a revolution, this will ensure that we will not live in a totalitarian monarchy.

[PassTheBeer]

Police officers? Oh fuck no!

What if you get raped ? Who will you report that to ? Bad guys will always exist

[revolution inaction]

This is a minor example but I'm drunk so here goes;

Anyone ever notice that while Marxists seem to be endlessly self-critical and at least realistic in their assessment of their own failings,

no i haven't noticed that

[gorillafuck]

But the end goal of the USSR was true Communism and to promote it. It failed. And Catalonia Spain set up Anarchy but the Fascists backed by America defeated them.
Catalonia certainly didn't set up a place without people performing police duties. The "police" there might have been different, I dunno much about them, but there were certainly people who were "policing".


Kruschev changed things slightly, but social hierarchy was nothing compared to say America.
Yeah, must've been Kruschevs fault. Always is.

[Rafiq]

But the end goal of the USSR was true Communism and to promote it. It failed. And Catalonia Spain set up Anarchy but the Fascists backed by America defeated them.

That was the goal of the USSR... Until the 1930's, after that it became a Nationalist state wit no concern over communism.

And plus, the USSR was CONSTANTLY under siege by foreign powers, I say they did a good job... The USSR never failed, Gorbachev failed.

[Rafiq]

Both Anarchism and Communism can work when put in place.

The problem is achieving it, achieving revolution.

[Magón]

It shows that Marxist-Leninist socialism is workable, unlike anarchism.

Uh, no, did you not pay attention at all to what I said? The matter of the USSR being Socialist, is completely a matter of opinion. There are some Marxists (non-ML's) who think the USSR failed in it's attempt at Socialism, Anarchists clearly don't like hierarchies like the USSR had, and there are plenty of others who think the USSR under either Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, etc. failed to do what Marx & Engels were talking about.

If Marxist-Leninist's version of Socialism is what's workable, and that's all that can be achieved, then please allow me to rebel against that, because there's no way I'm going to live under such a system if it is ever achieved again.

What you fail to see is that Anarchists don't need this middle man theory, and '36 Spain is a good example of that. There was no dictatorship of the proletariate, there was only the Prol's fighting their Bourgeois leaders (Franco, Catholic Church, etc.) In Russia you still had class divides in the society. In Spain, a Prol was a Prol, no more, no less. He/She wasn't a middle class, lower class, upper class, he/she was a Prol living like everyone else did.

[WeAreReborn]

What if you get raped ? Who will you report that to ? Bad guys will always exist
First off, the education system will be changed. But lets look for a second as crimes as a whole. It would be fair to say the vast majority of them relate to property, theft or some other kind of economical "injustice", so in an Anarchist society they would be eliminated. The few remaining crimes would be murder, rape and assault or violence in general. Possibly vandalism as well. Now a lot of murder today is from three main causes: mental instability, economic hardship or to get paid in some cases, and out of passion, so often a mistake. We can cross economic murder off our list. Passion can be reduced by the educational system teaching people how to deal with their anger. Though it would still exist, it would be greatly reduced. Mentally instability would be dealt by a sort of rehabilitation center, not a prison, in which it would provide a healthy and safe environment for the detainee. They would be observed to possibly help us understand more about mentally diseases and conditions so in the future there could possibly be a cure.

Moving onto rape. There is only two reasons that I can think of. One being mental instability and the other being not understanding the end effect and wanting to have sex. The first can be solved by the same means of murder. The other needs to be dealt with through education and having people understand the mental effects that rape has on the victim. Mix that with a healthy society and it will be practically non existent.

So with the majority of crimes eliminated how will the criminals be put into the rehabilitation centers? There will be a voluntary, rotational neighborhood watch who would patrol the community. It would be what the Capitalists claim the police today are for, protection not keeping social control. So with a mixture of prevention and a voluntary, rotational "police force", to keep corruption to a minimum, Anarchism could function with little crime.

[syndicat]

What if you get raped ? Who will you report that to ? Bad guys will always exist

you would report it to the local militia. you seem to think that anarchism means there won't be any system of social governance or self-government. that is a common fallacy. there is still a governance system or government in a libertarian socialist society. it's just that it is based on direct democracy of assemblies, and delegate democracy, and self-managed work in all industries...not the bureaucratic state structures that now exist.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

IDK, anarchists are whiners.
No, we're brick throwers.

[NGNM85]

Works brilliantly doesn't it? No more bourgeoise getting away without being oppressed. :laugh:

No more anybody getting away without being oppressed. The society you envision is a pentientiary for every man, woman, and child. I, for one, don't find that particularly attractive.


:confused: Every country that hasn't been socialist? Like the United States of America or Qatar to pick two examples.

They are no less Socialist than the USSR.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

No more anybody getting away without being oppressed. The society you envision is a pentientiary for every man, woman, and child. I, for one, don't find that particularly attractive.
Well some people like to fetishize authoritarian control based culture.:rolleyes: It gives them the delusions of control that fulfill their fantasies of power.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Alternatives To Police (http://rosecitycopwatch.wordpress.com/alternatives-to-police/) 'zine.

Many Cop Watch groups facilitate workshops on the theme of alternatives to police. As regards the specific issue of sexual assault, I highly recommend the models of Philly's Pissed (http://www.phillyspissed.net/) and Philly Stands Up (http://phillystandsup.wordpress.com/) - the support/accountability/transformative justice has informed a lot of shit around sexual assault (and other issues) in my community, and has been hella valuable.

The premise of this thread is clearly stoopid, but if anyone wants to have a serious conversation about this shit, they should feel free to message me.

Also: "The Militia"?
Appointing a different group (even a more participatory/democratic/inclusive one) to act as police really doesn't address the inherent fuckedupness of retributive justice.

[syndicat]

Also: "The Militia"?
Appointing a different group (even a more participatory/democratic/inclusive one) to act as police really doesn't address the inherent fuckedupness of retributive justice.

restorative justice can't get off the ground unless the perp is identified. vigilante "justice" is likely to mean people just finger or pick out people they don't like. it's necessary to have people who have some training, some skills, in things like forensics, and investigation. that's part of the police function.

restorative justice is preferable but it's not going to work in all cases. but the alternative concept isn't "retribution". it's called social self-defense. the community is the best place to deal with infractions...assuming this person has real connections to this community...family, friends. their pressure can be brought to bear on the individual. not all persons have these connections. some individuals have a hardened amoral mentality....often the product of being brought up in a situation where nobody cared about them.

[not your usual suspect]

I note that some people have said that anarchism is not utopianism. However, the question asked specifically about "anarchist utopia". A utopia (a perfect place, for our purposes) would have no need of police, or militia, or other means of making sure that people obey the standards of society. Being a utopia, people just will. An anarchist utopia is no different in that respect to a fascist utopia (there are various other differences obviously). Anarchism, though, is not utopianism, and anarchists accept that they may never reach utopia (though they should always strive). In an anarchist society which is not a utopia then, what options exist? A number of options have been outlined already in the thread. The key points about a specifically anarchist solution to "criminal deviance" is that anarchists values will need to be adhered to. A few different thoughts on that topic would include having any forensics teams separate to the "prosecuting" group, which is again quite separate to the ";enforcement" group. I'm sure that an anarchist "justice" (for want of a better word) system would focus on rehabilitation to the exclusion of punishment and retribution (though I understand deterrence is a debated topic in anarchist theoretical circles).

[Misanthrope]

An anarchist utopia is just that, a utopia. Anarchism in real life is simply impossible.

If anarchism is impossible so is communism. Both theories have the same ending, they just differ in getting there.

[Ovi]

I am also curious how anarchist alternatives would eliminate the overall tough-guy attitude and dominating mindset that todays police forces have.
The problem is not in people whose role is defending the others or investigating crimes, but in those who are given by default a high authority. As long as the militia people have just as much authority as the rest of the people, the fact that they're paid for being on stand by for emergencies doesn't give them any privilege to abuse. Anyone can grab a gun in case of emergency and it doesn't make it any difference by having armed people reachable by phone or whatever.

[Summerspeaker]

The notion of a society without police and other such brutal oppressions as utopian in the sense of perfect confuses the hell out of me. The traditional anarchist vision of not having to fear violence, forced labor, deprivation, and so on would only make life approach the passably pleasant. It's a start rather than a end. My dreams stretch out to the stars and beyond.

[Gallup Rising]

I think its interesting actually that its a communist aka Angela Y Davis who is at the forefront of abolishing prisons and the prison industrial complex. I definitely do not think that we would ever "replace the police" at least not in any way put into practice by larger society today. Also i think its beneficial to recognize that the violence of the state is the same violence in the family, and we need to develop consciousness around this. Also I think that most communes, collectives, syndicates, etc... would "police themselves" but obviously that would have to be something far more liberating than what we have now.

[Revolution starts with U]

there is no such thing as an anarchist utopia, so the question CANNOT be answered.
Anarchism is far more a means, then an end.

... or u could just look up "polycentric law" the Rule of law" or just law in general d have a thought about it

[Amphictyonis]

Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example :thumbup1:
What do you think separates advanced communism from anarchism?

[Impulse97]

I like to believe they will be ostracized for minor crimes and if the crime is major they are to be punished in ways benefiting the community. Case by case basis, but I could go into more detail if asked. To draw a line, you can be ostracized for an accident that breaks someones leg and allowed to return when they forgive you, but if you're gonna attack them and break their leg for a reason you can be ostracized for life if the reason is extreme.


What if this group of outcasts form their own group, stockpile weapons and start attacking the defenseless utopia that shunned them? If someone is crazy enough to kill with out remorse whats stopping them from doing it on a mass scale with a bunch of others like them if they feel wronged?:hammersickle::trotski::hammersickle:

[Amphictyonis]

What if this group of outcasts form their own group, stockpile weapons and start attacking the defenseless utopia that shunned them? If someone is crazy enough to kill with out remorse whats stopping them from doing it on a mass scale with a bunch of others like them if they feel wronged?:hammersickle::trotski::hammersickle:

with full employment and material needs taken care of just about the only crimes being committed will be crimes of passion and crimes committed by the criminally insane.

Do the police stop crime now? America has the most police of any nation, it also holds the highest incarceration numbers. There are material causes at the foundation of most crimes. Take the material causes away and we'll be left with a small amount of crime which can be dealt with in a democratic manner. Some centralized monopoly on force isn't the end goal of anarchism or Marxism.

[Impulse97]

with full employment and material needs taken care of just about the only crimes being committed will be crimes of passion and crimes committed by the criminally insane.

Do the police stop crime now? America has the most police of any nation, it also holds the highest incarceration numbers. There are material causes at the foundation of most crimes. Take the material causes away and we'll be left with a small amount of crime which can be dealt with in a democratic manner. Some centralized monopoly on force isn't the end goal of anarchism or Marxism.


I know this but, you still fail to answer my question. Rather, you just repeated the gist of what I said. I understand that most crime should disappear but, what of those criminally insane? If they are shunned what's stopping them from carrying out the situation I proposed in my first post?:hammersickle::trotski::hammersickle:

[Amphictyonis]

I know this but, you still fail to answer my question. Rather, you just repeated the gist of what I said. I understand that most crime should disappear but, what of those criminally insane? If they are shunned what's stopping them from carrying out the situation I proposed in my first post?:hammersickle::trotski::hammersickle:

Shunning sounds rather neolithic doesn't it? What are we in biblical times :) Why do I think of Quakers for some reason? I would think modern mental health facilities (for violent verifiable mentally ill people) would be best. Places where people can actually get help rather than be stored away in 4 x 8 cells rotting away intellectually and spiritually.

As far as violence in the heat of passion or whatnot, jealousy, envy or some social motive behind violence I would think a centralized monopoly on force wouldn't be necessary to separate that small population from society. I think shorter jail terms with 100% focus on personal growth would do. It would be nothing like the current prison system in America. Institutions will still exist under communism/anarchism they will simply be sincerely of the people rather than tools of maintaining class society.

[Lord Testicles]

Ahh but socialism on the other hand can work. The USSR being the prime example :thumbup1:

Were is the USSR now?

[blake 3:17]

What you fail to see is that Anarchists don't need this middle man theory, and '36 Spain is a good example of that. There was no dictatorship of the proletariate, there was only the Prol's fighting their Bourgeois leaders (Franco, Catholic Church, etc.) In Russia you still had class divides in the society. In Spain, a Prol was a Prol, no more, no less. He/She wasn't a middle class, lower class, upper class, he/she was a Prol living like everyone else did.
__________________


And the Spanish revolution failed and 40 years of fascism followed.

[Revolutionair]

And the Spanish revolution failed and 40 years of fascism followed.

And Stalin was happy the Spanish revolution failed, because he would rather have fascism than a real left wing movement.

It is not surprising if a group of farmers fights all of the world's superpowers and loses.

[Andropov]

And Stalin was happy the Spanish revolution failed, because he would rather have fascism than a real left wing movement.

It is not surprising if a group of farmers fights all of the world's superpowers and loses.
Well that is blatantly wrong, if he indeed would have rathered a Facist Regime in Spain over "a real left wing movement" he would have supported Franco instead of sending valuable resources to the Republicans he would have sent it to the Nationalists.
So in summary that conculsion is factually incorrect.

[Cane Nero]

Well that is blatantly wrong, if he indeed would have rathered a Facist Regime in Spain over "a real left wing movement" he would have supported Franco instead of sending valuable resources to the Republicans he would have sent it to the Nationalists.
So in summary that conculsion is factually incorrect.

He supported the Republicans, not the anarchists who depended on the "goodwill" of Republicans to receive weapons and other resources.

[syndicat]

And the Spanish revolution failed and 40 years of fascism followed.

and a lot of the responsibility for that lies with the Communist Party and Comintern, their sectarianism, fixation on power for their party to the exlusion of all else, thus demoralizing the working class opposition, which was mostly not Communist but either anarchosyndicalist or left socialist.

[bcbm]

god stop talking about spain please

[Decolonize The Left]

and stalin.

[Andropov]

He supported the Republicans, not the anarchists who depended on the "goodwill" of Republicans to receive weapons and other resources.
Indeed, but I fail to see your point?

[The Man]

Could you please point me to an example of a country that has successfully implemented anarchism? I can easily show you implementations of socialist countries such as the USSR and Cuba.

In my opinion, there has never been a true ideology implemented into society. There has never been a TRUE Capitalist society, there has never been a TRUE Communist society, There has never been a TRUE Anarchist society, there has never been a TRUE Free society. The only society that was ever truly implemented, is unfortunately, the authoritative statist society.

[NGNM85]

And the Spanish revolution failed and 40 years of fascism followed.

Right, and the Russian revolution was such a roaring success.