Flippanarchy

I think you are lacking some context in what is meant by "build non-hierarchal systems." Anarchists have a robust theoretical understanding of, but to people less acquainted with that understanding, it seems kind of empty and convenient. This jargon problem needs to be better addressed in political education, which is relevant to this discussion.

We conceive of these problems differently. When you (most people in my experience, including myself at one time) conceive of the criminal justice problem, and you locate a logical contradiction, you stop.

However, the primary contradiction in society is created when one majority group, dominates and therefore oppresses the majority. All other contradictions are effects and consequences.

We can't develop a society free from social contradictions (such as poverty, carcerial justice, oppression, exploitation, racism, queer phobia, etc.,)" until class rule is abolished.

Now, that is very big and abstract. We are back to your FTL dilemma.

So we start with reflecting on the true nature of our material conditions and acting on them. But this is no small undertaking either. We've been taught to perceive of certain truths, in a certain way. So our role as individuals is to seek out education and organization, so that we can collectively struggle to reform and attack the basis of negative social contradictions.

In your carcerial justice example, where you describe a dilemma, I see a "site of struggle." I want to get involved, learn, educate, affect change. Doing this develops us to become the people who will be able to solve these problems, institute reforms, not for the masses but as part of the masses (non-hierarchal). Until so much change has occurred within politics, culture, and material well being of the vast majority for the benefit of all, that revolutionary conditions become apparent. One anarchist formulation of this is called "Dual Power."

When the people are educated, the power is with us, and the objective reality of class antagonisms is clear to the people, then a just revolution is possible.

But you're right, it's success is not guaranteed. I'm a partyist, so I believe in the creation of a political party by the masses to fight on the basis of our own interests against the ruling classes. Through the most democratic means, not common in our workplaces and government, we can collectively reflect and take action on the basis of our collective interests. These interests are ideologically dispersed, but there is a material basis that cuts across all of our experiences, as more or less exploited members of society.

The party is able to accomplish 3 very important functions. 1. It can synthesize and develop a political platform to inform our activity 2. Develop a long term strategy for our activity 3. Actualize immediate tactics that advance our agenda.

I could go on. I will if you want me to. It may seem unsatisfying but I will die defending this, is that our job is not to imagine a more just world and then work our way backward, but to engage here and now in collective political, cultural, material struggle to create the conditions for such a world to exist. Since we can't know what that is, considering so many contradictions in society are productive (albeit evil) parts of society rather than something that threatens the stability, then we can't try to prefigure it. That puts the cart before the horse. The answers to your questions are all things you can do right now: join an org that puts you in touch with people who are worse off, become educated on the theory, history and science of liberation, reflect on and criticize every part of everything.

You are already doing this. You are asking burning questions and aren't quite satisfied with any answers. That, in itself, is an objective revolutionary condition. In my experience, this is what it feels like to begin to uncover actual truth. Don't stop.