Hybrid Anarchism:
§ Anarchy as a means:
For me, anarchy is now not a goal, but a means of human survival.
§ Hybrid Anarchism:
I am looking for a way out of the threat situation, and the ideas of Anarchism I only use for this.
And I am looking for solutions - here and now, but not in the future, since the development of IT is accelerating.
Therefore, I am a hybrid anarchist - I get solutions - intermediate between "capitalism" and Anarchism.
§ Examples of such solutions:
"Liberalization of property", moreover - partial, mainly - of "Intellectual" property - instead of "Socialization".
"Gift economy" instead of "free labor".
"Deliberative network" - free association and federalism - only in the scientific field - instead of full self-government.
"Arks of Freedom", "Free Political Zones" - separation of anarchists instead of transforming existing societies. Moreover, this offshoot can be virtual, not physical.
§ Anarchy is the highest level of democracy:
There is a continuum between traditional democracy and Anarchy, there are no barriers.
"Anarchists have tended to call this Self-management rather than democratic precisely because Democracy has, in practice, meant electing a government,… masters".
"The case for Anarchy = Self-management – is that no minority (even an elected one) can be trusted not".
Representatives cannot be trusted - today - because of the IT threat.
§ Anarchy is not lawlessness:
I repeat (www.svoboda.org/a/30472181.html):
"The anarchists tried to defend precisely the law."
Anarchism is not lawlessness, but powerless through absolute legality.
Anarchy is the absence of violence and coercion, the absence of executive power.
IT allows for an efficient and operational mechanism of legality - in the absence executive power, full self-government - today.
There is only one power - the executive.
Legislative, judicial, journalistic - not the authorities, but the institutions for developing rules and decisions.
"Power is the ability to impose your will on other people, even in spite of their resistance."
Anarchy is not an ultra-left exotic, but the optimal and only possibility of human survival.
There is an urgent need to create a confederation of anarch-Communities.
It is not the authorities who should protect from bandits, but the People's Self-Defense - with the help of an open decentralized Network of non-lethal micro-cruise-missiles and an infrastructure boycott (E, O2, H2O).
Society must non-violently isolate itself from attacking criminals. Let them not parasitize, do not restrict freedom, but use stone generators.
The goal is non-violent extrusion from the Communities - the Kremlin, monopolists, stash and hooligans.
But these methods are 3rd-stage.
Proudhon was distorted.
Proudhon was referring to specific laws and mechanisms of lawmaking.
But terms are only means. It is important to accelerate democratization for survival.
Anarchy is only the absence of hierarchy and the mechanisms of community.
The main human right is - the right to life - according to its own laws.
The main human freedom is - The freedom to choose the laws by which to live ..
Economic independence of residents from the rulers is needed, and for this - assistance in the development of transparent free trade and smuggling, especially medicines, and for this - the development of civil institutions to control the traffic of drugs and weapons.
Anarchism as a system of nonviolence eliminates the main monopoly - on violence, which is the main cause of corruption, inequality, all other negative phenomena, but, most importantly, is the source of the main threat today.
Ecclesiastical law, as an example, triumphed over coercive law - even in medieval investiture.
§ Religion and Anarchism:
Political democracy emerged as a result of the development of Christian democracy.
The democratic USA created the heretical dissidents of their Europe.
The non-recognition of the political hierarchy began with the non-recognition of the church hierarchy and the separation of church from state.
Not every religion is "opium for the people."
Among believers, the proportion of people who are unselfish and mentally inclined towards non-violence and anarchy is higher.
Evangelicals and Methodists who do not accept the mediation of priests can work together to save humanity.
Only for church hierarchs is the issue of faith critical, since their recognition as the only representative of God on Earth depends on it.
§ Anarchism is not a utopia today:
Anarchism has turned from a utopia into a way of survival - precisely because of the IT threat.
Humanity simply has no other choice.
On the 2nd hand, Anarchism, as a democracy without representation, ceased to be a utopia - with IT and D (distributed) AI, which made flat interaction more efficient than hierarchical.
Hybrid anarchism is a realizable variety of Anarchism. In the sense of the primacy of realizability.
The deliberative Network is a virtual yet full-value anarchic organization for Internet workers.
Do anarchists want to prove that anarchism is not utopian?
Anarchy is powerlessness, not defenselessness:
For Russians, anarchy is "permissiveness" in the sense that any bandit can rape you, and no one will protect you.
But violence is power. In this case, the power of the bandit.
Russians have been taught that only 2 alternatives are possible:
- either the power of officials,
- or the power of racketeers.
The Russians learned this lesson in the 1990s.
However, there was no planned conspiracy to deliberately compromise democracy in the 1990s, although, for sure, someone understood the consequences of the ongoing compromise of democracy and played along with it. -
However, today there is definitely a "conspiracy" to discredit liberalism and democracy, and to instill in Russians a paternalistic belief that security can only be associated with authoritarian power. The word "conspiracy" is taken here in quotation marks, since - a government institution ("Factory of Lies") is traditionally not considered a conspiracy.
It was not liberalism that was to blame for the "anarchy" of the 1990s, but the monopoly inherited from the super-monopoly of "communism."
Yeltsin and his company gave people - personal freedom, while retaining "control" in the system.
Freedom of entrepreneurship, economic freedom was not given - it was "natural" for people that someone should issue permits for all.
The authorities gave only personal freedom, which was only visible to people, which was on the surface.
People were pushed against each other. People did not have the opportunity to do anything more serious than resell something to each other, or rob each other.
The "thieves" - those close to the "roof" were engaged in more serious matters.
Permissive economy instead of punitive economy:
The permissive system was simply beneficial to officials - what was prohibited in the USSR - in general, was now allowed, but - by permission.
Whereas in the West, mainly - there is a liberal notification law - an entrepreneur does not ask for permission, but bears responsibility.
Are the Russians wrong? Is security possible with anarchy?
Yes, they are wrong, Yes, it is possible.
Security is possible precisely in the absence of officials.
Today IT allows people to get by, finally, without the "services" of the authorities, a corrupt "roof" over themselves.
People can make laws and regulations themselves, choose their own legal experts, legal scholars, not in the sense of knowing the prescribed laws, but in the sense of knowing the consequences of specific changes in laws and the consequences of adopting new laws.
Today, with the help of IT, people are able to themselves - horizontally develop Civil legislation on the settlement of disputes among themselves.
People can pass laws, in particular, allowing someone to make money by ensuring the safety of the people themselves - with accountability only to the people themselves.
Today people are able to protect themselves. They do not need to call for help from the "Varangians" so that they drive away other rapist bandits.
Today, humans are able to defend themselves - even without intermediaries - "bounty hunters" - by building a flat, open network of non-lethal micro-cruise-missiles.
The guarantee of human survival will appear only when the cloud of micro-cruise-missiles closes the sun from the terrorists who seized power.
Anarchy = nonviolence. On the lawlessness of Anarchy:
Under Anarchy, a million super-complex interconnected laws with a billion words are replaced by one law with one word - " nonviolence ."
More precisely, under Anarchy , even this law is not needed, since the Law is a means of regulating violence, coercion.
The law was invented by robbers to maximize the robbery.
Even today, the US government sends terrorists = bailiffs and policemen terrorizing acce local workers, to those working within the laws imposed on them, supposedly taken by their representatives.
It's just that transactions between people will be carried out on the basis of contracts - satisfying both parties , and not just one, as it has been so far .
With 100% transparency, boycott of treaty breakers is more effective than violence today.
More precisely, the laws will remain under Anarchy, but - moral, recommendatory.
Factors of this:
1. Welfare,
2. The complexity of production.
Already today, > 50% of transactions are not carried out on the basis of legal laws, but - on the basis of "customary law" - by the people themselves.
That governments are agents of lawlessness, not formalize I moral law, because it is a competitor of violent law and governments themselves.
The above circuit is actually the ideal target .
It is described for clarity.
In reality, of course, there will be - a compromise.
Until the 18th century, the source of the Law was the king.
Then the King of France was executed, and the Civil Legislation was adopted, the basis of which is just a voluntary agreement.
Moral legislation is just the next stage of law in the spirit of the same European Christianity - "do not swear", for an oath is a source of violence.
|