externalities in anarchist society

[homo sapien]

So I'm reading the Anarchist FAQ as part of my search for the right label for my political ideology, and I thought of a question (I'm only on section A.2 right now, so I apologize if this is answered later in the FAQ): how are externalities handled in an Anarchist society if there is no central government? For example, imagine one worker managed plant is dumping things into a stream and hurting a community downstream? You can't really have meaningful environmental regulations without a strong central government... right?

[The Man]

So I'm reading the Anarchist FAQ as part of my search for the right label for my political ideology, and I thought of a question (I'm only on section A.2 right now, so I apologize if this is answered later in the FAQ): how are externalities handled in an Anarchist society if there is no central government? For example, imagine one worker managed plant is dumping things into a stream and hurting a community downstream? You can't really have meaningful environmental regulations without a strong central government... right?

I think ways these types of things could be regulated is through letting the Worker's Councils elect representatives (Instantly recallable), to make decisions on their society.

Remember this also applies to a Communist society, not just an Anarchist one... Actually, they are the exact same thing.

[syndicat]

Externalities happen because the people polluted on do not have power to prevent that. So, because workers don't control decisions about chemical exposures or safety in technical development, forms of technology or chemicals can be deployed that put workers at risk...capitalists thus externalize the social cost onto the workers. That part is solved by workers self-management.

In regard to pollution of larger areas, such as pollution from a refinery or power plant, there would be communal organizations, for local areas and united through larger regions, that would have power to control access to the environmental commons.

Libertarian socialism has no state...no bureaucratic, hierarchical apparatus apart from direct popular control...but it does have a governance system. Regulation is it actually occurs for example in the USA is a kind of fig leaf. It gives a semblance or appearance of protecting the population, while not restraining companies to the point it would adversely affect their profits.

State regulation, by the way, is a very poor solution. That's because any state is controlled by some elite class, and it will be in their interests to permit damage to the lower class or disfavored groups, if this allows greater economic advantage to themselves.

[homo sapien]

"In regard to pollution of larger areas, such as pollution from a refinery or power plant, there would be communal organizations, for local areas and united through larger regions, that would have power to control access to the environmental commons. "

Isn't this basically just a hierarchical representative government, just one that is a bit more responsive in theory to people's needs? I could see such an organization very easily turning into something like a modern day state...

This is one of the things I'm having a hard time understanding about Anarchism. It sounds good at the local level, but when I start thinking about the organization of a worldwide society it seems some level of representative leadership (apart from direct democracy) will be necessary or inevitable... which would lead back to statism and capitalism

Also, if association is truly free, what's to keep a polluting factory from simply saying "screw you" to the wishes of the other communes expressed in the larger assembly, withdrawing and doing as they please? Wouldn't coercion of some kind (either economic or military) be applied to the rebels? And wouldn't this violate the non-coercive principles of anarchistic freedom?