Memes of Production

394 readers

918 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 1 week ago

MODERATORS

Deceptichum@quokk.au

what do you mean most people naturally want to just get along (quokk.au)

submitted 1 day ago by Deceptichum@quokk.au to c/mop@quokk.au

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 day ago

You make implicit assumptions that are hard to grasp and thus criticise. But I'll try.

With those definitions, a "state" existing is an inevitability

You didn't really address the definitions.

Getting any group of humans to all agree on a single set of rules at all times is impossible

I don't know what people you hang out with, but any game of football manages to get people to agree to a single set of rules.

especially as the community size increases.

If the group gets too large, it can naturally split up into two neighbouring groups. I don't really see why this shouldn't work, as long as there's freedom of association (i.e.: I can/should leave if I don't agree with the terms of a group).

So there has to be some form of enforcement of the rules

I never said that the rules shouldn't be enforced. Just that the mandate to enforce the rules shouldn't rely on a set group with a monopoly of violence.

And as community size increases, it's also an increasingly bad idea to leave enforcement of the rules up to individuals/the community at large.

So, neither individuals, nor the community. Do you want an elite unit of secret police? O.o

Humans are emotional creatures and will at times respond inappropriately to others who break the rules.

So, there will be agreed upon rules and protocols on how to deal with rule violations. Still no requirement for this not-individual-not-communal police force you want.

And since humans are made of matter, there's going to be a defined geographical area where a given community has control.

... so?

For the no ruler part, while the internet has made direct democracy possible, there's still going to need to be a manager of some sort to go about actually implementing the decisions made.

A coordinator is different than a ruler. A ruling subject (i.e. a monarch, or any other state apparatus) has sovereign power over it's subjects (i.e. it's "people). A coordinator coordinates tasks.

Does that "manager" (which is a weird coice of words, since managers don't implement - they manage people implementing) necessarily have the power of command and control over other people?

Your worldview is very hierarchy-focused.