• blindbunny@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Careful, you mention hating the state get everyone riled up. Conservatives, Liberals, Communists, all of them.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Really, just about anybody that looks to historical examples to inform their perspective.

          • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            Very disingenuous of you to not recognize white people wielding the state have persecuted indigenous people all over the world.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Yeah and white people have also done that while having teeth so clearly that means we need to knock out all our teeth.

              The state has been used to persecute and exploit people because it is an effective means of wielding power, so virtually everyone everywhere uses it, if they can. There’s just this silly martyr complex where people would rather lose and get themselves killed in practice, so that they can remain pure in their ideals. I suppose it’s useful for winning arguments. Not so much at actually achieving anything.

                • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  23 minutes ago

                  That’s an impossible standard, and doesn’t really have anything to do with anything. I’m not interested in impractical moral perfectionism.

      • buttnugget@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        There are examples of non states working, but it is unclear if it would be possible to maintain large societies.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 minutes ago

          Non-states or weak states very quickly run into collective action problems which are made significantly worse at large scales. Generally, they work when the material conditions allow for it, for example, the Zapatistas are in rural mountains that nobody really cares that much about. If they happened to be sitting on top of a bunch of oil, then the situation would be quite different.

          States are the most effective means of solving collective action problems that currently exist. Even the fundamental goal of keeping people safe from other states cannot be achieved in most cases without some degree of centralization. “I can’t go up and defend the pass, I have to stay here and protect my farm.” That’s what decentralization gets you, and the result is that the enemy, who is solving such collective action problems through the mechanism of a state, is (generally) able to subdue each individual with overwhelming force. But it extends beyond defense, “I can’t help build that bridge so we can all trade with our neighbors, I have to tend to my crops or I’ll starve.” While these problems can be solved on a very small scale, on a local level where people know and trust each other, it generally cannot be scaled up to similar situations beyond that.

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      Especially on an ml instance. I’m waiting for some bozo to post Engels’ “on authority” again.

  • sircac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I would strongly advise to not confuse the “state” with the “resulting de facto inferences of the richest and most powerful few” in a “coordinated effort of a collective society to protect us from those few” with the later, because those few also want to destroy it for their own benefit… a “state” made up of all the society is the only coordinated thing protecting us from those few human predators

  • buttnugget@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 hours ago

    This is why I hate it when people say stuff like “Do you support [state]’s right to exist?” No, no I don’t. I don’t think any state has a “right” to exist. People have a right to exist. A state is something different entirely.

  • nomorebillboards@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    In 100 years people are gonna look back on these 'phobes in the same way that we look back at slave owners… ignoring the fact that a lot of the 'phobes would probably be okay with modern slaves anyways.