• blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    17 days ago

    That would be pretty nice to see functioning anarchic societies. You are using the wrong term, you mean anomy.

    I think we will get a bit of a taste of that in the next years.

    • Don_Dickle@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      OK I read the article two things I have to say. WTF. And how absolutely we have a term for it. But after that it was a great read. But comparing it its still fucked up

      • blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        16 days ago

        Because most people use the word anarchy for a society without rules and without order. Right of the strongest, 365 days The Purge or something like that. But anarchism isn’t about that, but about a peaceful way of living without hierarchies and rulers. I was sure, that is not, what OP meant.

        • stinky@redlemmy.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          My question was about OP’s use of the term. Why do you think he misused it? “What do we do if X happens” —> “anomie is different from anarchy” seems like a non sequitur.

          • blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 days ago

            As I wrote before, I think OP meant to ask what happens if the US falls into a state of anomy. Nearly everybody who talks about that, uses the word anarchy instead, which is wrong.

            Should be clear enough now, I hope.

            • stinky@redlemmy.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 days ago

              Why do you think he was wrong? He didn’t say anything that suggested he didn’t know the definition of anarchy.