This video, which I first watched a month or so after it posted, is the first to expose me to what anarchy is in a way that gave meaning to the word, rather than the vague pejorative term that people around me had used it as. It has opened a door for me and helped me to develop a better understanding of the world and my values as I found so many resources to learn more when I knew what to look for. Thank You!
What an incredible comment ! Thank you so much!!! I couldn’t ask for more from the reaction to these videos. I’m both profoundly touched and proud. Thank YOU!
It's funny cuz the earliest firsthand experience I have of anarchy was my high school ceramics teacher saying that he was an anarchist. In my mind, this made him cool cuz it seemed very rebellious for a 60+ yr old Italian American in Connecticut, but there was a certain disconnect cuz I didn't yet know what anarchy truly meant. It did lead to open up more to the idea tho & not think of anarchy has mayhem, chaos & lawlessness
Laozi was probably one of the first anarchists. The Tao Te Ching leans heavily on that political theory thousands of years before the term anarchism was widespread.
@@smc9207 Anarchy without master(s) or ruler(s). Communism is abolish of private property, redistribution of goods etc. If the majority telling you what you can or cannot have when no harm has been conducted or that you don't receive ALL the benefits of your labor then, by definition, you are a slave.
I remember in school my teacher was trying to show the value of authority instead of anarchy, and just said to the class "you can do anything, you're free. The rules don't apply for the next few minutes." Students started talking, laughing, and then some people started throwing things. At the time, it felt like proof anarchy can't work. Since then, I've learned that it's hardly an accurate comparison to the actual working of democracy without hierarchy, which is more of how I think anarchy is. After all, kids in a room goofing off isn't the same as constructing a just world together
notice how they were bound to come back. if they were allowed to leave the class forever, they'd do something more useful than listening to 90% boring nonsense. authority creates strawman moments of freedom to prevent us from embracing it because it's always partial. you get productive worker for 8 hours and call it authority, and exhausted worker for 6 hours lying at his bed and call it anarchy.
Humans have grown past anarchy. A country with a goverment isn't an really a hierachy. All cases are but those are a result of human greed. Anarchy builds itself on the notion, that we do not need law enforcers nor govermental jobs etc etc. But things like healthcare or car insurgence etc etc. are positive things which are from the goverment. We humans have way to many flaws for none to enforce laws or write them. Of course humans write these laws but it is important that multiple people judge these laws. Anarchy is a thing of the past which is a theoritical ideology. We wouldn't have reached the moon with Anarchy and would be stuck on the same rock until humans go extinct.
@joaolfcamacho if anything it sounds absolutist, but I feel like tyranny requires hierarchical power being wielded over others. What I believe the person above is trying to say is that when you truly see the humanity in your fellow humans, the systems of power in place are plainly wrong/harmful. By their nature, they are easily exploitable by groups or individuals, whether small or large, to use their power for their own benefit & at the expense of others. Seeing these sorts of things it becomes evident that the better way of life would be for communities, societies & general groups of people to govern themselves & not have their lives in the hands of people who more often do not are inconsiderate of or unmoved by the plight of their people. And by "better way of life", I mean a way of life that is conducive & beneficial for all people within it to the maximum ability, regardless of class, sex, gender, sexuality, etc. & where people have the freedom of self-determination. One that does not do intentional to harm people or the environment simply by nature of its existence. Note: this may not be exactly what the original commenter meant in their comment, but at the very least this my opinion on the matter
Thank you so much for this video. It is so well laid out and explained that i feel like it can reach a lot of people. Anarchy needs to be properly understood if we are ever to have true freedom and solidarity of human needs. On a side note, i think a distinction should be made between private property and personal property. Anarchists want to abolish private property, not personal property. No one wants to share a community toothbrush or underwear. You can own your personal belongings. It is the ownership and enclosure or the means of production that we have an issue with, i.e. private property.
The Acehnese (an autonomous region in Indonesia) inheritance law somehow reflects this idea. Their community believes there are 2 types of properties: family-owned and personally-owned. Individuals have the right work the land in the manner the family agrees upon, in return for nominal rent to the family's trust fund (they call it as waqaf). The profits from such work is the exclusive right of that individual. This is a very interesting model from the unlikeliest place. Because the only thing you'll hear from mainstream media is the sharia legal system they implement there.. p/s: I heard the Taliban is considering such model to implement on the vast swathes of opium farms they had torched few months ago. After all, food supply is their primary security concern right now
@@afribeanner not sure who you're talking to, but if you reread the above comments you'll see that no one wants to take anyone else's property. My question to you is do governments and corporations use violence, force, or coercion when they want your property, water, or mineral rights?
@@WoodRabbitTaoist To answer your question I would say 100 percent Yes. Government is violence both democratic and dictatorship. Let me ask again will you use violence and force to confiscate private property from the individual? You say you don't "want" to but History shows something very different.
If we vote someone into power then we have someone who is only an authority on getting votes. If we coup someone into power then we have someone who is only an authority on insurrection. If we choose someone random for power we have someone who is only an authority on being in the right place at the right time. Give me sustenance and shelter and I will self govern and help others do the same. I have the most insight on the subject of helping myself and nobody can convince me otherwise. I recognize that I project a version of myself onto strangers and so I seek to witness kind and loving people by embodying those traits myself. A person who only sees evil strangers is the least deserving of power.
I'm at 9:55 I am a socialist/communist. The issue I see with anarchism is. If we take down the concept of government we would have a world ruled by corporations and very rich people, nothing would have changed. How can you anarchists claim to keep us free, from a anarchist with more power/resources for example? EDIT: I understand. Great video. You sway my opinion towards anarchism quite a bit.
Corporations are powerful because of government. They use the governments violence to squash competition. With that being said, you'll never have a justification for rulership over others.
Nicely done young man, articulate and honest assessment of the subject matter, I do hope many many humans watch it and pass it on. Far to many 'tools' in this world don't even realise they are their own worst enemy. Viva la revolution!!!👊👊
My greatest concern with anarchisim is how to teach ethics, especially to children, because in the very likely case that people are divided about that, the ones that teach in a way that encourages domination, individualism or debate instead of cooperation, happiness and dialogue will, as they have almost always done, overpower the others. Although maybe in a world of relative abundance this wouldn't happen idk
@@Scriven42 no what worries me is that anti anarchist values would overpower any other ones in the long term I mean If you are an anarchist you probably don't want to force everyone to be an anarchist, (I don't,) but some people won't be anarchists. Of course in an anarchist society people would probably lean towards anarchist values but I think we can't be sure yet
@@juanitopantuflapantufla2605 people would teach anarchist values, as anarchist values would necessarily be embedded in the pedagogy. If we managed to get so far as to have an anarchist society, the most easy way for people to get what they want is by working within the structure of society. So sheerly out of self interest, it would be the norm to teach egalitarian
IT ALWAYS FREAKS ME OUT when one of my most respected UA-camrs turns out to be a [fellow] Anarchist / Marxist / Communist type when they do art videos or woodworking videos... Its like I secretly _know_ and thats why I follow them
sometimes i wonder why Jacque Fresco never really came across anarchism.... there are so many similarities between anarchist communism and the resource based economy... also i really appreciate errico malatestas eloquent formulations so much - he was so spot on with so many core issues. Also thank you for demystifiying anarchism in an understandalbe but clear manner - i think anarchism like truth needs to be fought for as long as humanity exists.
I’m alternative. Emo specifically.. since emo came from punk, I have a lot of morals that line up with punks. Since being alive, I’ve heard about anarchy, and I’ve seen the symbol. I’ve always been told it was anti government. But I never knew more than that. Especially after this election, I find myself having a lot more punk political views. Which isn’t surprising. I’m glad I got to watch this video and educate myself. I appreciate this breakdown dude thanks! Edit: want to mention I’m 18, and I’ve only been alive in a world where the world around me as been failing me. And people who I love.
7:40 that's why I consider myself an Anarchist bc I always believed in democracy like they told us to buy I believed in true democracy - the govt being an extension of the people's will. And as I got older I realized that then there is no point in a state, just live.
It's such a great way for people to eat the pill. They don't realize that 'their' representatives don't represent anything about them. That the people this government is for were the landed aristocracy, those that have enough power to 'deserve' an audience to the ruling body. Anarchy must live if the people are to be free. Fuck the st4te.
Great work on this. It articulates the Idea in a way i feel can get through to a lot of people. I hope it opens many doors and puts folks on the path to collective liberation. #stopcopcity
Excellent video, thank you for making and sharing this, I really enjoyed it and found it really helpful. I can recommend a book for anyone interested which touches on many of the topics here from an Australian Indigenous perspective: Sand Talk by Tyson Yunkaporta. He talks about general concepts of how traditional Aboriginal societies organised themselves (without government) in Australia, how justice was determined by the group and how closely human minds are tied to the natural world around them. As an Anglo Australian I found it hugely illuminating and I can also see many parallels to the anarchist ideas presented here. Again, great video!
You should perhaps look further into the etymology of Anarchy because the Greeks used "without ruler" to define a time in which 30 tyrants took over from a much more peaceful system before it.
i were super political for 2 years arguing with people over discord and had all the tendencies but I thought anarchists are a bunch of dumb kids lol I literally managed to develop kinda anarchistic understanding of power before discovering that it's so much more developed by actual anarchists
i'm considered by 10000% of people to be a "radical leftist," although i more accurately self-describe using a phrase in spanish translating to: "neither of the right nor the left but from those at the bottom coming for those at the top." a through-and-through abolitionist. i am a community organizer and co-founder of a (inter)national organization with a 3-letter acronym you've probably definitely heard of. as such, i've always respected anarchy but haven't strongly aligned myself with the philosophy based largely on my lack of knowledge on its history. this video is extremely helpful for that and i am grateful. a probable finite cause of my lack of knowledge on the subject comes from the scarcity of historical Black anarchist literature. as a Black and nobinary person, it is very, very difficult for a group of cishet white intellectual bros to sell me on something. and that's on generational trauma. i know race is touched upon in this video, but nowhere near enough. and not by the right people. we need to talk about the ways that certain leftist circles, no matter how well-intended in philosophy, have miserably failed to meet at the intersection of marginalized people when it comes down to praxis. i highly recommend you read "afropessimism" by frank b. wilderson.
You may enjoy The Nation on no Map: Black Anarchism and Liberation by William C. Anderson. I found it to be really good. It's understandable why many non-ciswhite people don't associate with the term "anarchism", as most people who identify with the term are white and don't put the theory into action and end up being as racist as the people they're supposed to hate. Labels aren't all that important like you're saying, but maybe you could use elements of the theory to help you in your organizing
as king of the anarchists, I approve. In all seriousness though, I have always been an anarchist I think... it feels that way anyway... but it took until I was almost 30 to discover the actual words to articulate my feelings, and it was through anarchy by Malatesta. Such a joyous thing it was to not feel as though I was alone in my feelings. recently I read "Seeing like a State" which I must recommend to all comrades, its a great book for someone who's looking for a great book.
That was very interesting to listen to. On an economic side, I agree at least on most points - but I can't really wrap my head around the arguments in Chapter 6. I feel like both sides here are utopians and neither will really work 100%. Which is fine, striving for utopia is always better than accepting stagnation.
So you still believe in slavery. Libertarian asks for less government abuse and communism is mob rule based on "needs". Oh, and you don' t believe in ownership of property or the produce of your labor. You support slavery.
I became more aware of anarchy because of the Sex Pistols. As a teen of the seventies Prog fan, they were a refreshing slap in the face. However, I understood the word to mean; "without rules", which conflicted with my sensibilities so I didn't look any further. How nice to learn I was wrong.
How can a society adopt an anarchist methodology amid imperialist antagonism? If country x wanted to be anarchist, how would they fight against the Western imperialist? Collective trial and error is not a sufficient answer when faced with (re)enslavement.
So in an anarchist society for someone to be incriminated that would mean that the other people in their environment believe so, that means communication would be a skill that undeniably reduces your chances of being harmed by your peers if in any situation that could make you seem suspect
"Order derived through submission and maintained by terror is not much of a safe guaranty; yet that is the only "order" that governments have ever maintained. True social harmony grows naturally out of solidarity of interests. In a society where those who always work never have anything, while those who never work enjoy everything, solidarity of interests is non-existent; hence social harmony is but a myth.... Thus the entire arsenal of governments - laws, police, soldiers, the courts, legislatures, prisons - is strenuously engaged in "harmonizing" the most antagonistic elements in society." ~ Emma Goldman
So what I don’t understand is the aspect of crime & punishment. It doesn’t seem well thought out. Correct me if I’m wrong but I could kill a man in cold blood but then what gives the right for “treatment specialists” to try to “cure” me. Especially if this means they can deprive me of my liberty to consent. And with that they seem to be at a higher class given they’re the only profession who can violate that right. However what differentiates them from police is that they can “treat” anyone who is acting anti-socially which is entirely speculative compared to modern policing which has specified codes. Then once they “treat” someone they can have their rights deprived without any ability to fight it. It just seems like there’s a LOT of room for abuse in this system.
Also I think the idea that “crime won’t happen” is pretty utopian. It cites Marxist ideas in conflict theory that class struggle causes crime/anti-social behavior but it ignores the possibility for crimes of passion or crimes stemming from people living in overcrowded or poor conditions.
Well if you've read the Dostoevsky novel and you have listened to chapter 7 of this video, this should tell you everything you need to know. I would also refer to the work of Jonathan Nitzan on crime in the US justice system to confirm the conclusions from Dostoevsky's novel in today's society.
I'm a little confused. You claimed it has been suggested that in anarchical society nobody would care about the freedoms of other, and then said "but nothing could be farther from the truth". But you didnt explain why. You just said "governents are always tools of domination", a statements which is fairly debatable since they facilitate things we would have to emulate in an anarchical society such as healthcare. You can't just say yeah humans would actually become communally focused because governments are actually not great, it doesnt make sense. I like a lot of the message of anarchism but that sounded really naive. I want to understand
It's important to recognize that government is only immoral violence and nothing more. It's an utterly unfounded assertion of one group having valid authority over another. Does it guarantee, or even increase the probability of intelligent and just solutions being enacted? Not in the slightest. In fact, it increases the probability that self-serving, power-mongering misanthropes will hijack society, purposefully creating dysfunction and chaos in order to opportunistically benefit from the manufactured volitility, which is precisely what we have now. Giving one small group an artificial, insurmountable advantage in physical force over everyone else doesn't make positive outcomes more likely. Asking what people will do instead is the wrong question.
I asked recently asked my hyper capitalist grandmother what the American dream is. Bro she literally said stateless, classless, moneyless society The American dream 😂 It just goes to show how little the average person knows about theory. Ty for this video, your making it easier to challenge people’s manufactured consent. Keep doing the good work Take bread
Listen as someone who's not a fan of governments in general if you can actually propose to me a system for a country to function without one I'm all for it. But I will watch critically and not just support everything you say. Still I really appreciate this video, no harm in learning something new.
non compete and andrewism are two anarchist UA-camrs who might help with this query. To be fair, this video is just an introduction to anarchism, but hopefully as they do more videos, more questions like these can be answered. you'll see that anarchism doesn't irradiate leadership. leadership is natural, it's just that anarchism is trying to remove the power dynamics and hierarchal nature of current 'leadership'. I also think Tao Te Ching has a great passage on how we can collectively do the work under great leadership. I hope this helps.
well i’m not sure about him, but my anarchism does not leave room for a “country”…..communes would be small and localised so as to maximise cohesion and minimise far-off rule and involvement in problems that will never affect you (amongst other reasons)
@@GasStationMan My bad I got busy with work, I guess that's one way to describe a country but to me countries and governments are one in the same. Usually because they are formed at the same time and so when you take away a government, whatever country existed there dissolves. What would be left if Anarchism took its place is a bunch of smaller scaled communities popping up everywhere. In terms of food , it will be on the community to run a farm or garden to feed their own and if they want to trade they can. Same for other functions
I know im late lol but im here lol Im not an anarchist im a ML but unlike a lot of others i think understanding anarchists is important anyway ur video is cool
Well, you Are basicaly right in most said. But if you want to prove something to be bad, Its not about bringing the evidence of all the bad stuff, but rather negate all the good thinks. Government Is bad in a lot of ways, but still a good deal when you consider you dont Have to care for So many things And instead live your life.
Successful Anarchy requires perfection of self-management. It actually requires "seeing and treating the other as one would wish to be seen and treated". There is no known evidence, in all history, of any human achieving perfect self-management. By perfect self-management, I mean consciously and mindfully establishing, knowing and respecting self-drawn boundaries that do not disadvantage the self or over-favour the self. All the available evidence suggests that shared authority...though evil...is the lesser of the two evils. Somehow, SHARED authority USUALLY...USUALLY tends to have a monitoring effect on individual self-management. Of course, that is, if all those who share authority DO NOT also share an agreed-upon selfishness. That being said, there is more evidence of shared authority being less diabolical and more success, than "every man for himself".
7min in, I write down my thoughts. I was put of by the term solidarity, because I associate it to union. Especially in conjunction with the red anachrie flag, which I assume to me anachro socialist.
What will the community do if it gets invaded and how will mobillization, arms, ammo and other basic supllies be handled and distributed to the resistance fighters? I just thougt that these are some important questions you didn't mention in the video.
Anarchists do not reject narrow, for-purpose hierarchy. We accept that things like military organizations often require hierarchy in order to function "quickly but more wrong" and cannot be spun up reactively to military threat. The difference is the anarchist army doesn't invade countries on the other side of the world on the whim of an elite few.
@@sean748 Ok but doesn't It generate a brend new class? If the army remains pretty much the same, they'll stil have some-kind of power unlike the other people. Am i wrong? The fear of being attacked is certain and with powers like the USA for example, how cannot be a Revolution in Extreme danger?
@@Aj-oj8tq with power must come chains upon those who wield it. I honestly don't know the best way to stop hierarchies like a military from becoming embedded, but hey, anarchism is a process not a destination. Always be tearing down what hierarchies you can get by without. Work for peace, but prepare for war. Military coups are kinda an issue in every society and ideology so it's not like anyone else has really solved it.
@@sean748 I can say I agree, but I don't hide the fact that I'm quite pessimistic about the revolution itself. Particularly in today's world where the possibilities are endless, but the yoke of some nations and people is even tighter, I find it nearly impossible for any kind of revolution to end in success, be it communist or anarchist. The only possibility of change that comes to my mind is, besides that of climate change, an increasingly recurring and inevitable topic, is the management by the whole world with regard to technological progress. When machines actually replace humans the situation will really be of vital importance, how will a capitalist state manage to plug this thing? I see no way that doesn't increase social inequality exponentially, not to mention everything else that would entail. That moment could perhaps be the most opportune of all, as well as a perfect occasion.
Anarchy is how I sleep at night it's my bedroom right? Government says it's ok to harm for good. It's like you have to like what they like and, you have to listen, and you can't let go. like having those things that keep your eyes open. Liberty and justice loose their meaning.
I cannot, unfortunately, join you for discussion later having obligations, but I do hope to listen tomorrow. My copy of Malatesta’s little book arrived this morning.
Would anarchy permit citizens assembly for so called government? If the government was truly representative of the people would that be permissible? What if they were delegative? Would it be less of a dystopia if the state was comprised of an assortment of randomly selected people? Is utopia truly necessary or just a guide to ideals? Which means citizens assembly states would be more practical/achievable than actual anarchy!
This video, which I first watched a month or so after it posted, is the first to expose me to what anarchy is in a way that gave meaning to the word, rather than the vague pejorative term that people around me had used it as. It has opened a door for me and helped me to develop a better understanding of the world and my values as I found so many resources to learn more when I knew what to look for.
Thank You!
What an incredible comment ! Thank you so much!!! I couldn’t ask for more from the reaction to these videos. I’m both profoundly touched and proud.
Thank YOU!
My teacher In highschool got me into anarchy, I wrote an essay and he suggested I look into anarchy because he thought I would agree with it. I did
It's funny cuz the earliest firsthand experience I have of anarchy was my high school ceramics teacher saying that he was an anarchist. In my mind, this made him cool cuz it seemed very rebellious for a 60+ yr old Italian American in Connecticut, but there was a certain disconnect cuz I didn't yet know what anarchy truly meant. It did lead to open up more to the idea tho & not think of anarchy has mayhem, chaos & lawlessness
W teacher
Yesterday I watched videos on Daoism and Shintoism now I’m here watching Anarchism and I love it. What a ride I’ve been on…
Laozi was probably one of the first anarchists. The Tao Te Ching leans heavily on that political theory thousands of years before the term anarchism was widespread.
Ursula K. LeGuinn grindset
One simple question opened up my mind to Anarchism: If the cops can police themselves, why can't we police ourselves?
You really opened a huge barrel of worms with this loaded question 😂
Who is going to judge the judge?
@@Dr.Tinkerpawdoctor the doctor?
@@thonytso The immune system
@@Dr.Tinkerpaw GOD
Never thought you are an anarchist but I am glad that you are with the platflorm that you have
i mean guy did make a analysis of that Paul Signac painting, as well as always highlighting the class struggle subtext of various other paintings
@@martinzachary6632 Because I am not a frequent visitor of this channel but I do remember his video on Dali
Ancom is a literal contradiction.
@@Somberdemure why
@@smc9207 Anarchy without master(s) or ruler(s).
Communism is abolish of private property, redistribution of goods etc. If the majority telling you what you can or cannot have when no harm has been conducted or that you don't receive ALL the benefits of your labor then, by definition, you are a slave.
I remember in school my teacher was trying to show the value of authority instead of anarchy, and just said to the class "you can do anything, you're free. The rules don't apply for the next few minutes." Students started talking, laughing, and then some people started throwing things. At the time, it felt like proof anarchy can't work. Since then, I've learned that it's hardly an accurate comparison to the actual working of democracy without hierarchy, which is more of how I think anarchy is. After all, kids in a room goofing off isn't the same as constructing a just world together
notice how they were bound to come back. if they were allowed to leave the class forever, they'd do something more useful than listening to 90% boring nonsense.
authority creates strawman moments of freedom to prevent us from embracing it because it's always partial. you get productive worker for 8 hours and call it authority, and exhausted worker for 6 hours lying at his bed and call it anarchy.
Sounds like nobody got hurt or traumatized due to social customs and everyone shared a pleasant moment together.
Humans have grown past anarchy. A country with a goverment isn't an really a hierachy. All cases are but those are a result of human greed. Anarchy builds itself on the notion, that we do not need law enforcers nor govermental jobs etc etc. But things like healthcare or car insurgence etc etc. are positive things which are from the goverment. We humans have way to many flaws for none to enforce laws or write them. Of course humans write these laws but it is important that multiple people judge these laws. Anarchy is a thing of the past which is a theoritical ideology. We wouldn't have reached the moon with Anarchy and would be stuck on the same rock until humans go extinct.
Children SHOULD be subjected to authority, that's the problem.
@@saladcat8305 ...you think people didn't have healthcare -likw stuff before government?
Your time and care is much appreciated. Thank you.
when you have love, anarchism is the only political philosophy that makes any sense
Well, that sounds tyrannical.
@joaolfcamacho if anything it sounds absolutist, but I feel like tyranny requires hierarchical power being wielded over others. What I believe the person above is trying to say is that when you truly see the humanity in your fellow humans, the systems of power in place are plainly wrong/harmful. By their nature, they are easily exploitable by groups or individuals, whether small or large, to use their power for their own benefit & at the expense of others. Seeing these sorts of things it becomes evident that the better way of life would be for communities, societies & general groups of people to govern themselves & not have their lives in the hands of people who more often do not are inconsiderate of or unmoved by the plight of their people. And by "better way of life", I mean a way of life that is conducive & beneficial for all people within it to the maximum ability, regardless of class, sex, gender, sexuality, etc. & where people have the freedom of self-determination. One that does not do intentional to harm people or the environment simply by nature of its existence.
Note: this may not be exactly what the original commenter meant in their comment, but at the very least this my opinion on the matter
@@joaolfcamacho tyrannical is forcing your ideas on other people. It isn't believing that your ideas are correct.
You are correct. ua-cam.com/video/pcL0J_ndaUc/v-deo.htmlsi=qTHgu4mmI5P-4uq7
When you have no brain anarchy is what you love
Thank you so much for this video. It is so well laid out and explained that i feel like it can reach a lot of people. Anarchy needs to be properly understood if we are ever to have true freedom and solidarity of human needs.
On a side note, i think a distinction should be made between private property and personal property. Anarchists want to abolish private property, not personal property. No one wants to share a community toothbrush or underwear. You can own your personal belongings. It is the ownership and enclosure or the means of production that we have an issue with, i.e. private property.
The Acehnese (an autonomous region in Indonesia) inheritance law somehow reflects this idea. Their community believes there are 2 types of properties: family-owned and personally-owned. Individuals have the right work the land in the manner the family agrees upon, in return for nominal rent to the family's trust fund (they call it as waqaf). The profits from such work is the exclusive right of that individual.
This is a very interesting model from the unlikeliest place. Because the only thing you'll hear from mainstream media is the sharia legal system they implement there..
p/s: I heard the Taliban is considering such model to implement on the vast swathes of opium farms they had torched few months ago. After all, food supply is their primary security concern right now
Would you use violence and force when confiscating someones private property?
Thanks for this comment
@@afribeanner not sure who you're talking to, but if you reread the above comments you'll see that no one wants to take anyone else's property. My question to you is do governments and corporations use violence, force, or coercion when they want your property, water, or mineral rights?
@@WoodRabbitTaoist To answer your question I would say 100 percent Yes. Government is violence both democratic and dictatorship. Let me ask again will you use violence and force to confiscate private property from the individual? You say you don't "want" to but History shows something very different.
We are reaching levels of basedness previously thought impossible
If we vote someone into power then we have someone who is only an authority on getting votes. If we coup someone into power then we have someone who is only an authority on insurrection. If we choose someone random for power we have someone who is only an authority on being in the right place at the right time. Give me sustenance and shelter and I will self govern and help others do the same. I have the most insight on the subject of helping myself and nobody can convince me otherwise. I recognize that I project a version of myself onto strangers and so I seek to witness kind and loving people by embodying those traits myself. A person who only sees evil strangers is the least deserving of power.
Extremely hyped to see you cover anarchism and Malatesta! Keep em coming my guy
I'm only a portion through this vid but I wanted to thank you for making this, its really well put and has made this topic approachable
I would probably say I’m not an anarchist, but this video was pretty insightful
young anarchist here (13!!,) and im gonna learn more about anarchism today :D yay!!!
Hello fellow Anarchist! 🏴
@@joshuahjoseph6738 hello!!!
Good on you, young man 👍
(Check out Conflict, the band)
Watch and learn, young Padawan
Average age of an anarchist
I'm at 9:55 I am a socialist/communist.
The issue I see with anarchism is. If we take down the concept of government we would have a world ruled by corporations and very rich people, nothing would have changed. How can you anarchists claim to keep us free, from a anarchist with more power/resources for example?
EDIT: I understand. Great video. You sway my opinion towards anarchism quite a bit.
Massive W
Corporations are powerful because of government. They use the governments violence to squash competition. With that being said, you'll never have a justification for rulership over others.
The government maintains private property, without it the rich could not be so rich, the value of money itself will become obsolete.
Fuck man I'm evolving from a libertarian to an anarchist
Glad to have you on this side, brethren! ✨
Communism is not anarchy
From dumb to dumber
@Somberdemure but communism never worked
@@The_Consciousness I never said it did
Nicely done young man, articulate and honest assessment of the subject matter, I do hope many many humans watch it and pass it on. Far to many 'tools' in this world don't even realise they are their own worst enemy. Viva la revolution!!!👊👊
Back in my punk days I used to tag "My liberty depends on your freedom".
I had no idea The Canvas was so based
You don't know what based means
@@Lord_Humungusyou don't.
@@Lord_Humungusyou don’t know what anything means. How do you feel now huh??? I told you you don’t know what anything means so I can feel superior 😤.
@@Eeeemomo go cry to your wife's boyfriend about it
I finally found the channel I didnt know I needed. Merci mon ami!
My greatest concern with anarchisim is how to teach ethics, especially to children, because in the very likely case that people are divided about that, the ones that teach in a way that encourages domination, individualism or debate instead of cooperation, happiness and dialogue will, as they have almost always done, overpower the others.
Although maybe in a world of relative abundance this wouldn't happen idk
I get being against domination, but what's wrong with individualism?
Posted before watching, I hope...?
@@etinarcadiaego7424 I meant extreme egoism
English isn't my first language
@@Scriven42 no what worries me is that anti anarchist values would overpower any other ones in the long term
I mean
If you are an anarchist you probably don't want to force everyone to be an anarchist, (I don't,) but some people won't be anarchists.
Of course in an anarchist society people would probably lean towards anarchist values but I think we can't be sure yet
@@juanitopantuflapantufla2605 people would teach anarchist values, as anarchist values would necessarily be embedded in the pedagogy. If we managed to get so far as to have an anarchist society, the most easy way for people to get what they want is by working within the structure of society. So sheerly out of self interest, it would be the norm to teach egalitarian
what the person who does nuanced and informed deconstruction of art is an anarchist, who would have known
IT ALWAYS FREAKS ME OUT when one of my most respected UA-camrs turns out to be a [fellow] Anarchist / Marxist / Communist type when they do art videos or woodworking videos...
Its like I secretly _know_ and thats why I follow them
@@piccalillipit9211 well, I had a hunch, but yeah, you are right, i was quite happy to find it out too
@@piccalillipit9211do not debase the name of anarchists putting them alongside communists and marxists. We are not the same.
@@sbef NO way more tetchy and sensitive LOL
what does art has to do with anarchy ?
I was wondering why I liked all your other videos so much. Now I have my answer.
sometimes i wonder why Jacque Fresco never really came across anarchism.... there are so many similarities between anarchist communism and the resource based economy... also i really appreciate errico malatestas eloquent formulations so much - he was so spot on with so many core issues. Also thank you for demystifiying anarchism in an understandalbe but clear manner - i think anarchism like truth needs to be fought for as long as humanity exists.
Anarchism is for me the only way of possible the best philosophy of human life.
I’m alternative. Emo specifically.. since emo came from punk, I have a lot of morals that line up with punks. Since being alive, I’ve heard about anarchy, and I’ve seen the symbol. I’ve always been told it was anti government. But I never knew more than that. Especially after this election, I find myself having a lot more punk political views. Which isn’t surprising. I’m glad I got to watch this video and educate myself. I appreciate this breakdown dude thanks!
Edit: want to mention I’m 18, and I’ve only been alive in a world where the world around me as been failing me. And people who I love.
TIL: Power is like the ring from LOTR, it corrupts even anarchists/wizards
At the intersection of art and anarchism I found your channel, and I'm looking forward to checking it out.
Ps after watching ❤
7:40 that's why I consider myself an Anarchist bc I always believed in democracy like they told us to buy I believed in true democracy - the govt being an extension of the people's will. And as I got older I realized that then there is no point in a state, just live.
It's such a great way for people to eat the pill. They don't realize that 'their' representatives don't represent anything about them. That the people this government is for were the landed aristocracy, those that have enough power to 'deserve' an audience to the ruling body. Anarchy must live if the people are to be free. Fuck the st4te.
The removal of violence from human relations is the main plank of Anarchism.
~ Errico Malatesta
Just discovered Anark's channel, so this came as a pleasant surprise.
Great work on this. It articulates the Idea in a way i feel can get through to a lot of people. I hope it opens many doors and puts folks on the path to collective liberation. #stopcopcity
Excellent video, thank you for making and sharing this, I really enjoyed it and found it really helpful. I can recommend a book for anyone interested which touches on many of the topics here from an Australian Indigenous perspective: Sand Talk by Tyson Yunkaporta. He talks about general concepts of how traditional Aboriginal societies organised themselves (without government) in Australia, how justice was determined by the group and how closely human minds are tied to the natural world around them. As an Anglo Australian I found it hugely illuminating and I can also see many parallels to the anarchist ideas presented here. Again, great video!
You and Andrewism are cool as hell!
But I also want to say some positive stuff.
I love your voice. Really.
I love that you switch screens when quoting. Makes it easier to distinct.
I absolutely loved the video, and I'm happy to be an anarchist.
53:34 is the best part, adam smith's invisible hand will manage everything
from one anarchist to another, brilliant video
Every consistent libertarian should be an anarchist.
You should perhaps look further into the etymology of Anarchy because the Greeks used "without ruler" to define a time in which 30 tyrants took over from a much more peaceful system before it.
Was not expecting this at all, but it's a very welcome surprise
i've seen a couple of your art-related videos but i didn't realize you did hard-political content. this will be a stimulating watch.
I hope it was as stimulating as you expected it to be!
I believe I was always an anarchist but didn’t know it had a name until 2011.
i were super political for 2 years arguing with people over discord and had all the tendencies but I thought anarchists are a bunch of dumb kids lol
I literally managed to develop kinda anarchistic understanding of power before discovering that it's so much more developed by actual anarchists
30:08 OMG yes! This quote is exactly how I feel.
i'm considered by 10000% of people to be a "radical leftist," although i more accurately self-describe using a phrase in spanish translating to: "neither of the right nor the left but from those at the bottom coming for those at the top." a through-and-through abolitionist. i am a community organizer and co-founder of a (inter)national organization with a 3-letter acronym you've probably definitely heard of. as such, i've always respected anarchy but haven't strongly aligned myself with the philosophy based largely on my lack of knowledge on its history. this video is extremely helpful for that and i am grateful.
a probable finite cause of my lack of knowledge on the subject comes from the scarcity of historical Black anarchist literature. as a Black and nobinary person, it is very, very difficult for a group of cishet white intellectual bros to sell me on something. and that's on generational trauma. i know race is touched upon in this video, but nowhere near enough. and not by the right people. we need to talk about the ways that certain leftist circles, no matter how well-intended in philosophy, have miserably failed to meet at the intersection of marginalized people when it comes down to praxis.
i highly recommend you read "afropessimism" by frank b. wilderson.
complete aside: i discovered your channel maybe two days ago and it's all i've watched since. exactly what my soul needs right now.
You may enjoy The Nation on no Map: Black Anarchism and Liberation by William C. Anderson. I found it to be really good. It's understandable why many non-ciswhite people don't associate with the term "anarchism", as most people who identify with the term are white and don't put the theory into action and end up being as racist as the people they're supposed to hate. Labels aren't all that important like you're saying, but maybe you could use elements of the theory to help you in your organizing
as king of the anarchists, I approve.
In all seriousness though, I have always been an anarchist I think... it feels that way anyway... but it took until I was almost 30 to discover the actual words to articulate my feelings, and it was through anarchy by Malatesta. Such a joyous thing it was to not feel as though I was alone in my feelings.
recently I read "Seeing like a State" which I must recommend to all comrades, its a great book for someone who's looking for a great book.
Agree on seeing like a state
Good to know anarchism is being shared to the world
That was very interesting to listen to. On an economic side, I agree at least on most points - but I can't really wrap my head around the arguments in Chapter 6. I feel like both sides here are utopians and neither will really work 100%. Which is fine, striving for utopia is always better than accepting stagnation.
For you're interested in more economics, try looking into Ostrom's work on the Commons. As well as Stafford Beer's Cybernetics.
😅that is the word my friend the 🔥COMMONS🔥with Individual Freedom ; there is no reason for basics like housing and food to be scarce or expensive🤩
Forget that. Take it from a moral standpoint.
P.S. communism isn't moral.
I'm no anarchist through I do have alot of overlap(I'm a libertarian communist), but I've wanted to learn more about anarchism. Loved the video
So you still believe in slavery. Libertarian asks for less government abuse and communism is mob rule based on "needs". Oh, and you don' t believe in ownership of property or the produce of your labor. You support slavery.
It's dreadful how communists wildly overlook anarchist theory
I’m not sure you understand the words that you’re speaking, because libertarian communism/socialism is def anarchist, keyword being libertarian
@@funkerdoo he's probably a libertarian marxist.
Two of my favourite creators!
Thank you I found this video useful.
I became more aware of anarchy because of the Sex Pistols. As a teen of the seventies Prog fan, they were a refreshing slap in the face. However, I understood the word to mean; "without rules", which conflicted with my sensibilities so I didn't look any further. How nice to learn I was wrong.
This is a great discussion of Malatesta’s ideas, his work is a really good introduction to anarchism. Fantastic video!
How can a society adopt an anarchist methodology amid imperialist antagonism? If country x wanted to be anarchist, how would they fight against the Western imperialist? Collective trial and error is not a sufficient answer when faced with (re)enslavement.
So in an anarchist society for someone to be incriminated that would mean that the other people in their environment believe so, that means communication would be a skill that undeniably reduces your chances of being harmed by your peers if in any situation that could make you seem suspect
"Order derived through submission and maintained by terror is not much of a safe guaranty; yet that is the only "order" that governments have ever maintained. True social harmony grows naturally out of solidarity of interests. In a society where those who always work never have anything, while those who never work enjoy everything, solidarity of interests is non-existent; hence social harmony is but a myth.... Thus the entire arsenal of governments - laws, police, soldiers, the courts, legislatures, prisons - is strenuously engaged in "harmonizing" the most antagonistic elements in society." ~ Emma Goldman
Amazing, thak you!
World Peace day June 22nd 🌎, unite in solidarity for each other, Overcoming nonsense with Common sense ❤
I got sidetracked and read the first 3 chapters of anarchy for a few days
so so happy you’re an anarchist. much love ♥️♥️
Hey this is cool comrade. Dunno anything about art but I watch this channel to learn. Didn’t know you’re anarchist bro. 🏴
So what I don’t understand is the aspect of crime & punishment. It doesn’t seem well thought out. Correct me if I’m wrong but I could kill a man in cold blood but then what gives the right for “treatment specialists” to try to “cure” me. Especially if this means they can deprive me of my liberty to consent. And with that they seem to be at a higher class given they’re the only profession who can violate that right. However what differentiates them from police is that they can “treat” anyone who is acting anti-socially which is entirely speculative compared to modern policing which has specified codes. Then once they “treat” someone they can have their rights deprived without any ability to fight it. It just seems like there’s a LOT of room for abuse in this system.
Also I think the idea that “crime won’t happen” is pretty utopian. It cites Marxist ideas in conflict theory that class struggle causes crime/anti-social behavior but it ignores the possibility for crimes of passion or crimes stemming from people living in overcrowded or poor conditions.
Well if you've read the Dostoevsky novel and you have listened to chapter 7 of this video, this should tell you everything you need to know. I would also refer to the work of Jonathan Nitzan on crime in the US justice system to confirm the conclusions from Dostoevsky's novel in today's society.
I'm a little confused. You claimed it has been suggested that in anarchical society nobody would care about the freedoms of other, and then said "but nothing could be farther from the truth".
But you didnt explain why. You just said "governents are always tools of domination", a statements which is fairly debatable since they facilitate things we would have to emulate in an anarchical society such as healthcare.
You can't just say yeah humans would actually become communally focused because governments are actually not great, it doesnt make sense.
I like a lot of the message of anarchism but that sounded really naive. I want to understand
It's important to recognize that government is only immoral violence and nothing more. It's an utterly unfounded assertion of one group having valid authority over another.
Does it guarantee, or even increase the probability of intelligent and just solutions being enacted? Not in the slightest. In fact, it increases the probability that self-serving, power-mongering misanthropes will hijack society, purposefully creating dysfunction and chaos in order to opportunistically benefit from the manufactured volitility, which is precisely what we have now.
Giving one small group an artificial, insurmountable advantage in physical force over everyone else doesn't make positive outcomes more likely. Asking what people will do instead is the wrong question.
Once people get past that stage they realize they will have to be productive together also.
I like that sweater. Good topic. Thx.
YUHHHHH YOURE BASED LETS GO
Anark/Canvas is certainly a surprising crossover, but definitely a welcome one
You would knew, if you watch the livestreams :)
@@federicosavorani6320 Ya got me there 😆
@@Cubehead27 PS, I am so sorry for the butchered English there, I am ashamed of myself lol
@@federicosavorani6320 Not at all! It's your second language, is it? I can only speak one so you're ahead of me anyway lol
I asked recently asked my hyper capitalist grandmother what the American dream is. Bro she literally said stateless, classless, moneyless society
The American dream 😂
It just goes to show how little the average person knows about theory. Ty for this video, your making it easier to challenge people’s manufactured consent. Keep doing the good work
Take bread
I’m an ML but awesome video. Keep up the good work comrade! Love your vids btw
Listen as someone who's not a fan of governments in general if you can actually propose to me a system for a country to function without one I'm all for it.
But I will watch critically and not just support everything you say.
Still I really appreciate this video, no harm in learning something new.
non compete and andrewism are two anarchist UA-camrs who might help with this query. To be fair, this video is just an introduction to anarchism, but hopefully as they do more videos, more questions like these can be answered. you'll see that anarchism doesn't irradiate leadership. leadership is natural, it's just that anarchism is trying to remove the power dynamics and hierarchal nature of current 'leadership'. I also think Tao Te Ching has a great passage on how we can collectively do the work under great leadership. I hope this helps.
May I ask you, what is a country to you?
@@Turiorian hmm, I guess a bordered territory where it's people cooperate and (generally) follow one ideology under one flag. But I'm not sure.
well i’m not sure about him, but my anarchism does not leave room for a “country”…..communes would be small and localised so as to maximise cohesion and minimise far-off rule and involvement in problems that will never affect you (amongst other reasons)
@@GasStationMan My bad I got busy with work, I guess that's one way to describe a country but to me countries and governments are one in the same. Usually because they are formed at the same time and so when you take away a government, whatever country existed there dissolves.
What would be left if Anarchism took its place is a bunch of smaller scaled communities popping up everywhere. In terms of food , it will be on the community to run a farm or garden to feed their own and if they want to trade they can. Same for other functions
Great video!
I know im late lol but im here lol
Im not an anarchist im a ML but unlike a lot of others i think understanding anarchists is important anyway ur video is cool
Well, you Are basicaly right in most said. But if you want to prove something to be bad, Its not about bringing the evidence of all the bad stuff, but rather negate all the good thinks. Government Is bad in a lot of ways, but still a good deal when you consider you dont Have to care for So many things And instead live your life.
30:00 what a quote
Thanks for making this video 🙏🖤
I love your videos so much man
Successful Anarchy requires perfection of self-management. It actually requires "seeing and treating the other as one would wish to be seen and treated". There is no known evidence, in all history, of any human achieving perfect self-management. By perfect self-management, I mean consciously and mindfully establishing, knowing and respecting self-drawn boundaries that do not disadvantage the self or over-favour the self. All the available evidence suggests that shared authority...though evil...is the lesser of the two evils. Somehow, SHARED authority USUALLY...USUALLY tends to have a monitoring effect on individual self-management. Of course, that is, if all those who share authority DO NOT also share an agreed-upon selfishness. That being said, there is more evidence of shared authority being less diabolical and more success, than "every man for himself".
7min in, I write down my thoughts. I was put of by the term solidarity, because I associate it to union.
Especially in conjunction with the red anachrie flag, which I assume to me anachro socialist.
Thankyou!
I want this as a podcast 😢
very well made, great job!
What do classic Anarchists think of the theory of people like Rasmus Hastbacka and Swedish Anarcho-Syndicalism?
Thanks
Havik from Mortal Kombat 1 is all about Anarchy.
Do one on Conquest of bread ❤️🖤
What will the community do if it gets invaded and how will mobillization, arms, ammo and other basic supllies be handled and distributed to the resistance fighters? I just thougt that these are some important questions you didn't mention in the video.
Anarchists do not reject narrow, for-purpose hierarchy. We accept that things like military organizations often require hierarchy in order to function "quickly but more wrong" and cannot be spun up reactively to military threat. The difference is the anarchist army doesn't invade countries on the other side of the world on the whim of an elite few.
@@sean748 Ok but doesn't It generate a brend new class? If the army remains pretty much the same, they'll stil have some-kind of power unlike the other people. Am i wrong? The fear of being attacked is certain and with powers like the USA for example, how cannot be a Revolution in Extreme danger?
@@Aj-oj8tq with power must come chains upon those who wield it. I honestly don't know the best way to stop hierarchies like a military from becoming embedded, but hey, anarchism is a process not a destination. Always be tearing down what hierarchies you can get by without. Work for peace, but prepare for war. Military coups are kinda an issue in every society and ideology so it's not like anyone else has really solved it.
@@sean748 Well said.
@@sean748 I can say I agree, but I don't hide the fact that I'm quite pessimistic about the revolution itself. Particularly in today's world where the possibilities are endless, but the yoke of some nations and people is even tighter, I find it nearly impossible for any kind of revolution to end in success, be it communist or anarchist. The only possibility of change that comes to my mind is, besides that of climate change, an increasingly recurring and inevitable topic, is the management by the whole world with regard to technological progress. When machines actually replace humans the situation will really be of vital importance, how will a capitalist state manage to plug this thing? I see no way that doesn't increase social inequality exponentially, not to mention everything else that would entail. That moment could perhaps be the most opportune of all, as well as a perfect occasion.
Anarchy is how I sleep at night it's my bedroom right? Government says it's ok to harm for good. It's like you have to like what they like and, you have to listen, and you can't let go. like having those things that keep your eyes open. Liberty and justice loose their meaning.
Big thanks for this video! ❤🏴
I cannot, unfortunately, join you for discussion later having obligations, but I do hope to listen tomorrow. My copy of Malatesta’s little book arrived this morning.
Around 28:45 - Did all passengers on the Herald of Free Enterprise act cooperatively that fateful night? (6 March 1987)
Whoops! My anarchy symbol.
Great material
You made a GREAT video! 🎉
Anarchy is just a fancy term for “let me do shit my way”
Based🏴
Would anarchy permit citizens assembly for so called government? If the government was truly representative of the people would that be permissible? What if they were delegative? Would it be less of a dystopia if the state was comprised of an assortment of randomly selected people? Is utopia truly necessary or just a guide to ideals? Which means citizens assembly states would be more practical/achievable than actual anarchy!
Anarchy is inevitable
Based
theres a lot of these types of texts that i wanna read or listen to but dyslexia and suspected add makes it extremly tiering and hard
bro ik u commented this like 5 months ago but I can relate sm. this text was only like 70 pages and I took like a month to understand the whole text
@@laskdjf3880 haha would take alot more then a mounth for me to get through it