Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I'm really not sure, I'm not the biggest theory person tbh. Depending on what you're thinking of, that could just be anarchy.
I don't want to assume what you mean, but if you're perhaps talking about something along the lines of following and listening to experts, then that's understood to be a positive thing to us anarchists. To use a painfully fresh example, following scientists/medical professionals on public health decisions, rather than conspiracy theorists
Like... to start off, I've heard of what is referred to as Minarchy, which etymologically means a minimal government (or one run by "voluntarism"), but that doesn't sound like what I convey. "Relationship anarchy" (one would say a principle of mine, and I look to that here) for one has often been placed under the umbrella of libertarian thought but it's closer to a conditional thing. If there are things I'd refer to as a creator (my parents, the sun if it were sentient, maybe God, etc.), I would obey them and not be "anarchist" towards them, as I also may towards peers and contemporaries on a basis of agreement, or towards people who create a club/service so as long as it's within the bounds of what they made (think back to relationship anarchy), even bypassing my own sense of voluntarism/liberty in the process, but a ruler (whether or not elected) that says "[from the moment you're born] I am automatically your authority because that's just how it works", that's not (unless agreed to in hindsight by an individual) valid if you ask me. Note good and bad derivatives/foundations, which also explains my comments surrounding subsidiarism and localism; at least in a town context, there is some increased level of regard to what I'm saying.