Just because the goal is difficult doesn’t mean it isn’t necessary.
The American culture of hyper-individualism is a problem that needs to be solved. We do it through agitation and grassroots community building. Direct Action and Mutual Aid. Educating each other in the principals of a new culture and then practicing it through action.
Collectives are communities of individuals. What makes a collective powerful is the fact we are all individuals with our own strengths and through combining our strength can we have power to shape our lives. When each individual is respected and they are ensured autonomy over their life, they are more than willing to work together with others to protect their mutually shared prosperity. Educating people that being a part of collective action does not necessitate abandoning your individuality or autonomy is priority number 1 in the US towards the goal of building a community capable of resistance.
I think that sounds great. I mean, who doesn’t want to have their cake and eat it too, right? Except, it’s not possible. You can’t both have the full piece of cake remaining on your plate and have eaten it too. If you eat the cake, you don’t have it on your plate anymore, and if you have your cake on your plate, you haven’t eaten it yet. The two things are mutually exclusive.
But, maybe individual autonomy and community aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. I’m willing to entertain that, even though I’ve been conditioned my whole life to believe that they are. But just because propaganda is effective, that doesn’t mean it’s true. Still, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t at least a little skeptical.
In these communities of individuals, would there be any limits placed on individual autonomy? It seems like there would have to be. The community would have to have some rules and laws that everyone was expected to follow, I would assume. How would those rules be enforced? How would the rules be enacted? Through direct democracy? Would it require a unanimous vote or would a simple majority do? If the latter, what about the dissenters? Would the people who didn’t vote for the rule be expected to adhere to it?
Read up on anarchist theory cause it says the exact opposite. It is entirely possible through decentralized, horizontally structured systems of authority.
I’m not going to sit and spell out an entire government structure to you but Anark on YouTube has good, very informative videos if you want further information, and then there are always the works of anarchist authors like Kropotkin, Malatesta, Ursula K Le Guin, etc …
Just because the goal is difficult doesn’t mean it isn’t necessary.
The American culture of hyper-individualism is a problem that needs to be solved. We do it through agitation and grassroots community building. Direct Action and Mutual Aid. Educating each other in the principals of a new culture and then practicing it through action.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ronald-a-young-anarchist-agitation-community-building
Collectives are communities of individuals. What makes a collective powerful is the fact we are all individuals with our own strengths and through combining our strength can we have power to shape our lives. When each individual is respected and they are ensured autonomy over their life, they are more than willing to work together with others to protect their mutually shared prosperity. Educating people that being a part of collective action does not necessitate abandoning your individuality or autonomy is priority number 1 in the US towards the goal of building a community capable of resistance.
I think that sounds great. I mean, who doesn’t want to have their cake and eat it too, right? Except, it’s not possible. You can’t both have the full piece of cake remaining on your plate and have eaten it too. If you eat the cake, you don’t have it on your plate anymore, and if you have your cake on your plate, you haven’t eaten it yet. The two things are mutually exclusive.
But, maybe individual autonomy and community aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. I’m willing to entertain that, even though I’ve been conditioned my whole life to believe that they are. But just because propaganda is effective, that doesn’t mean it’s true. Still, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t at least a little skeptical.
In these communities of individuals, would there be any limits placed on individual autonomy? It seems like there would have to be. The community would have to have some rules and laws that everyone was expected to follow, I would assume. How would those rules be enforced? How would the rules be enacted? Through direct democracy? Would it require a unanimous vote or would a simple majority do? If the latter, what about the dissenters? Would the people who didn’t vote for the rule be expected to adhere to it?
Read up on anarchist theory cause it says the exact opposite. It is entirely possible through decentralized, horizontally structured systems of authority.
I’m not going to sit and spell out an entire government structure to you but Anark on YouTube has good, very informative videos if you want further information, and then there are always the works of anarchist authors like Kropotkin, Malatesta, Ursula K Le Guin, etc …
You can also read the zine linked.