All the media. Hello, and welcome to it could happen here, because it could. My name is Andrew Sage and I'm also Andrewism on YouTube and at time of recording, the year is still technically new, so I wanted to start it off with some refreshers on anarchism. In the first episode, we'll look at the meanings of anarchism, authority, and anarchy, and the next time we'll look at free association, mutuality, mutual aid, and throllo solidarity. And don't worry, next month I'll be getting back into the Latin American Anarchism series, as I still haven't done Uruguay and Mexico yet. Oh. By the way, I'm not talking to myself. I'm here with the one and only be along.

All the media. Hello, and welcome to it could happen here, because it could. My name is Andrew Sage and I'm also Andrewism on YouTube and at time of recording, the year is still technically new, so I wanted to start it off with some refreshers on anarchism. In the first episode, we'll look at the meanings of anarchism, authority, and anarchy, and the next time we'll look at free association, mutuality, mutual aid, and throllo solidarity. And don't worry, next month I'll be getting back into the Latin American Anarchism series, as I still haven't done Uruguay and Mexico yet. Oh. By the way, I'm not talking to myself. I'm here with the one and only be along.

Oh, I keep, I keep forgetting that you do an actual throws actually saying the name.

Oh, I keep, I keep forgetting that you do an actual throws actually saying the name.

Yeah, not to worry.

Yeah, not to worry.

I've only been doing this for several hundred episodes. Now you'd think you'd think, but no, now you got it.

I've only been doing this for several hundred episodes. Now you'd think you'd think, but no, now you got it.

You got it.

You got it.

Hell, I'm excited to do this.

Hell, I'm excited to do this.

Also excited for the Mexico episodes, because Mexican anarchism is a trip Irguaan anarchism is also a whole lot of people digging tunnels out of prisons.

Also excited for the Mexico episodes, because Mexican anarchism is a trip Irguaan anarchism is also a whole lot of people digging tunnels out of prisons.

But we'll get we'll get We'll get to that later.

But we'll get we'll get We'll get to that later.

We will, we will. So I'm supposed to start off with I want to find out And I asked this question with tongue in cheek, of course, how familiar but you say you are with anarchism.

We will, we will. So I'm supposed to start off with I want to find out And I asked this question with tongue in cheek, of course, how familiar but you say you are with anarchism.

You know, I have a very silly like kind of like how did I like actually finally become an anarchist because I've been around anarchists for a long time, But like the thing that like actually convinced me to be an anarchist is I sat down and I got a bunch of like anarchist history books while library I started reading them, so like.

You know, I have a very silly like kind of like how did I like actually finally become an anarchist because I've been around anarchists for a long time, But like the thing that like actually convinced me to be an anarchist is I sat down and I got a bunch of like anarchist history books while library I started reading them, so like.

Marx Nott Lao and I'm sorts of people.

Marx Nott Lao and I'm sorts of people.

So specifically was a lot of like krups like how to Shooseo and Puranicism intoward Japan, which I've talked about on the show one hundred billion times. So I actually I think I've read Capaletes Anarchism Latin America around that time too.

So specifically was a lot of like krups like how to Shooseo and Puranicism intoward Japan, which I've talked about on the show one hundred billion times. So I actually I think I've read Capaletes Anarchism Latin America around that time too.

It's a very good resource.

It's a very good resource.

Yeah, yeah, so pretty pretty familiar with stuff.

Yeah, yeah, so pretty pretty familiar with stuff.

But yeah, we'll see, we'll see. I'm excited to talk about it.

But yeah, we'll see, we'll see. I'm excited to talk about it.

Yeah, I mean, we'll see, is right, because let's say ippened an anarchists. But I was first introduced to anarchism, I would say somewhere around twenty seventeen twenty eighteen through Christian anarchism. Actually that was during my deconstruction. I stumbled upon Christian anarchism and briefly flated with it, but didn't really get seriously into the studying of anarchists m until like Lee twenty nineteen, Rearly twenty twenty around the time and leads in towards twenties when I started my channel. Let's say I've been studying anarchism for about five years. Seriously, I feel like I'm now getting started, you know, like I'm now sett into that grasp what it is. And I think is there's so many interpretations of anarchism, you know, so many different schools of thought. I mean, that's not to say that it can't be find or that any attempts to define anarchism is like exclusionary or on anarchist. And I see that out of that argument floating around it like, well, no, you can't define anarchism because that's actually authoritaria. But you know, there are such a thing as as definitions, but there is room, of course for a negotiation of meaning.

Yeah, I mean, we'll see, is right, because let's say ippened an anarchists. But I was first introduced to anarchism, I would say somewhere around twenty seventeen twenty eighteen through Christian anarchism. Actually that was during my deconstruction. I stumbled upon Christian anarchism and briefly flated with it, but didn't really get seriously into the studying of anarchists m until like Lee twenty nineteen, Rearly twenty twenty around the time and leads in towards twenties when I started my channel. Let's say I've been studying anarchism for about five years. Seriously, I feel like I'm now getting started, you know, like I'm now sett into that grasp what it is. And I think is there's so many interpretations of anarchism, you know, so many different schools of thought. I mean, that's not to say that it can't be find or that any attempts to define anarchism is like exclusionary or on anarchist. And I see that out of that argument floating around it like, well, no, you can't define anarchism because that's actually authoritaria. But you know, there are such a thing as as definitions, but there is room, of course for a negotiation of meaning.

Yeah, it's it's a very it's a very well usually it's a very syncratic ideology. It pulls from a lot of different places, and it pulls mosts a different of its own strands.

Yeah, it's it's a very it's a very well usually it's a very syncratic ideology. It pulls from a lot of different places, and it pulls mosts a different of its own strands.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. But let's say if you had to like define anarchism like right now, like, what would you say is a not un negotiable basic fundamental definition for you?

Yeah, yeah, exactly. But let's say if you had to like define anarchism like right now, like, what would you say is a not un negotiable basic fundamental definition for you?

I mean, the opposition to hierarchy on a basic level, the opposition to the state, to capitalism, to patriarchy, to systems of hierarchical power is I guess, like the the baseline definition. And then also in terms of what it's, you know, the replacement for that can be a lot of things. But yeah, it's it's the building of a society where we don't have power over one another. I think it's like a very baseline kind of thing.

I mean, the opposition to hierarchy on a basic level, the opposition to the state, to capitalism, to patriarchy, to systems of hierarchical power is I guess, like the the baseline definition. And then also in terms of what it's, you know, the replacement for that can be a lot of things. But yeah, it's it's the building of a society where we don't have power over one another. I think it's like a very baseline kind of thing.

Yeah, I think that's that's pretty solid for me. I find it fairly similarly, I would say that I think the opposition to authority is the most simplant part, you know, I would say the definition I've been sort of workshopping sculpting over time and as a right. So I really like to play with words a bit and find the best ways to put things. So for me, what I've come up with is that anarchism is the political philosophy and practice that opposes all authority along with its justifying dogmas, and proposes the unending pursuit of anarchy, a world without rule, where self determination, mutuality, and free association form the basis of our society. And so basically the rest of this episode is going to be me breaking down how I came to this definition, what I'm expounded upon with this definition, So for one, just taking a look at the structure of it, we are looking at an oppositional stance and a propositional stance, opposing and proposing. You know, we're not just for the negation of all things, although there are schools of anarchisms that do lead in that direction. But also, of course, we want to be constructive. We're not as some people seem to presume, you know, obliterating the states and then leaving warlords in their weak you know.

Yeah, I think that's that's pretty solid for me. I find it fairly similarly, I would say that I think the opposition to authority is the most simplant part, you know, I would say the definition I've been sort of workshopping sculpting over time and as a right. So I really like to play with words a bit and find the best ways to put things. So for me, what I've come up with is that anarchism is the political philosophy and practice that opposes all authority along with its justifying dogmas, and proposes the unending pursuit of anarchy, a world without rule, where self determination, mutuality, and free association form the basis of our society. And so basically the rest of this episode is going to be me breaking down how I came to this definition, what I'm expounded upon with this definition, So for one, just taking a look at the structure of it, we are looking at an oppositional stance and a propositional stance, opposing and proposing. You know, we're not just for the negation of all things, although there are schools of anarchisms that do lead in that direction. But also, of course, we want to be constructive. We're not as some people seem to presume, you know, obliterating the states and then leaving warlords in their weak you know.

Yeah, Baconin sucks in a lot of ways, but the creative verge is a destructive one has the order of events correctly, where like the point is to create something.

Yeah, Baconin sucks in a lot of ways, but the creative verge is a destructive one has the order of events correctly, where like the point is to create something.

Exactly exactly, And as you know, Bikinnan is one of the rely a thinkers of anarchism, though I've never really been partial to him, you know, yeah, to me usually I've been more of a Krapotkin and Mali Testa a guy. But lately, as as you know, so problematic as he is as well, I haven't getten into a bit more. I recently got the pictures of put On Reader that Ian McKay put together for a k Press.

Exactly exactly, And as you know, Bikinnan is one of the rely a thinkers of anarchism, though I've never really been partial to him, you know, yeah, to me usually I've been more of a Krapotkin and Mali Testa a guy. But lately, as as you know, so problematic as he is as well, I haven't getten into a bit more. I recently got the pictures of put On Reader that Ian McKay put together for a k Press.

Extremely problematic guy, oh boy, Yeah, but he.

Extremely problematic guy, oh boy, Yeah, but he.

Certainly wrote a lot. And so when I think through and seecret what jim stones of his of his work I can find, you know, yeah, I think that's that's important to sift through.

Certainly wrote a lot. And so when I think through and seecret what jim stones of his of his work I can find, you know, yeah, I think that's that's important to sift through.

He's a He's a mixed and baffling figure who also was a pretty large influence on Marx if you like read him, even though Marx hates him, which is very funny.

He's a He's a mixed and baffling figure who also was a pretty large influence on Marx if you like read him, even though Marx hates him, which is very funny.

Marx also didn't always understand step Honestly, I don't think necessarily always had like a very consistent application of his ideas, hence the misogyny. Despite being an anarchiss and becoming a politician at one point in his life and all that jazz.

Marx also didn't always understand step Honestly, I don't think necessarily always had like a very consistent application of his ideas, hence the misogyny. Despite being an anarchiss and becoming a politician at one point in his life and all that jazz.

Yeah, and people may know this who listen to this show, but the term libertarian was invented by anarchists specifically to describe how they were different from ver Dawn because they weren't sexist, Like, it's the whole.

Yeah, and people may know this who listen to this show, but the term libertarian was invented by anarchists specifically to describe how they were different from ver Dawn because they weren't sexist, Like, it's the whole.

Thing actually, wasn't away of that.

Thing actually, wasn't away of that.

That's yeahs interesting, Yeah, that's why, and that's why in most parts of the world libertarian is like is a term that means anarchist. It's just it's mostly largely in the US where that's not a thing because the right libertarians like took it.

That's yeahs interesting, Yeah, that's why, and that's why in most parts of the world libertarian is like is a term that means anarchist. It's just it's mostly largely in the US where that's not a thing because the right libertarians like took it.

Yeah. Well, unfortunately, the US's cultural hegemony has sort of propagated that American version of the term as the popular one. But yeah, yeah, whether you're talking about anarchists or libertarians or mutualists, you're all getting it from basically that same sort of original phool of the late nineteenth century early frankieinth century thinker and I were sort of using their sort of explorations to build something up a political philosophy. But in my definition I call it a political philosophy, but that can be a contentious way of describing it. You know, anti politics is a tilm that's used to describe opposition to or distrust in traditional politics. Social politics is usually associated with the art and science of government. So there are anarchists who would argue that anarchism is not a political philosophy, it's actually an anti political philosophy.

Yeah. Well, unfortunately, the US's cultural hegemony has sort of propagated that American version of the term as the popular one. But yeah, yeah, whether you're talking about anarchists or libertarians or mutualists, you're all getting it from basically that same sort of original phool of the late nineteenth century early frankieinth century thinker and I were sort of using their sort of explorations to build something up a political philosophy. But in my definition I call it a political philosophy, but that can be a contentious way of describing it. You know, anti politics is a tilm that's used to describe opposition to or distrust in traditional politics. Social politics is usually associated with the art and science of government. So there are anarchists who would argue that anarchism is not a political philosophy, it's actually an anti political philosophy.

I think these people are very okay.

I think these people are very okay.

This is one of the things about being an anarchist, right, this is the thing thing about being a leftist, and it's something you have to be able to set aside when you have to do things. But a lot of veg A leftists is being annoyed at other leftists. And I could put together an actual, detailed theoretical critique of anti politics, but mostly the people who talk about anti politics just annoy me.

This is one of the things about being an anarchist, right, this is the thing thing about being a leftist, and it's something you have to be able to set aside when you have to do things. But a lot of veg A leftists is being annoyed at other leftists. And I could put together an actual, detailed theoretical critique of anti politics, but mostly the people who talk about anti politics just annoy me.

It's like an affect thing.

It's like an affect thing.

I feel you to me, It's like it's a I like to pick up, look around at, you know, play with fur little bit, put it back down kind of thing. You know, I'd like limited to it, but I think it's like it's good to look at more than one ankle of definition and an understanding. Yeah, I mean, of course, I suppose a critique that could be made of define anarchism as anti politics is a sort of a narrowing of the definition of politics suggest that sort of art and science of government when politics can also be defined really broadly as just about the relationships between people and groups, which anarchism is concerned with primarily. So, but I do find it an interesting point to wrestle with, and so other than it being a political philosophy or anti political philosophy, we could also define an anarchism as a practice. This is something that I believe Greeber did in his life. He saw anarchism. In one interview he said, code it's possible to act like an anarchist, to behave in ways that will work without bureaucratic structures of coatient to enforce them, without calling yourself an anarchist or anything. In fact, to us act like anarchists, even communists a lot of the time. To be an anarchist for me is to that self consciously as a way of gradually bringing a world entirely based on those principles into being and good. So this is basically the idea that anarchism is not just something you think in ahead. It's a method of change or something that you practice. It's something that the facts anarchists don't even want to call themselves anarchists because they see anarchist about something that you do rather than something that you are.

I feel you to me, It's like it's a I like to pick up, look around at, you know, play with fur little bit, put it back down kind of thing. You know, I'd like limited to it, but I think it's like it's good to look at more than one ankle of definition and an understanding. Yeah, I mean, of course, I suppose a critique that could be made of define anarchism as anti politics is a sort of a narrowing of the definition of politics suggest that sort of art and science of government when politics can also be defined really broadly as just about the relationships between people and groups, which anarchism is concerned with primarily. So, but I do find it an interesting point to wrestle with, and so other than it being a political philosophy or anti political philosophy, we could also define an anarchism as a practice. This is something that I believe Greeber did in his life. He saw anarchism. In one interview he said, code it's possible to act like an anarchist, to behave in ways that will work without bureaucratic structures of coatient to enforce them, without calling yourself an anarchist or anything. In fact, to us act like anarchists, even communists a lot of the time. To be an anarchist for me is to that self consciously as a way of gradually bringing a world entirely based on those principles into being and good. So this is basically the idea that anarchism is not just something you think in ahead. It's a method of change or something that you practice. It's something that the facts anarchists don't even want to call themselves anarchists because they see anarchist about something that you do rather than something that you are.

Yeah, that was a graverline.

Yeah, that was a graverline.

I think Cala Gwynn kind of had a similar relationship towards calling yourself an anarchist.

I think Cala Gwynn kind of had a similar relationship towards calling yourself an anarchist.

Yeah, that's that's possible. That that sounds really, really familiar.

Yeah, that's that's possible. That that sounds really, really familiar.

Yeah, I think I think a line was like, she didn't feel like she could because you had to do it. But yeah, it's a it's a pretty common way of thinking about anarchism that I like a lot.

Yeah, I think I think a line was like, she didn't feel like she could because you had to do it. But yeah, it's a it's a pretty common way of thinking about anarchism that I like a lot.

Yeah, for sure. Another part of the definition of anarchism that I put forward is the opposition to all authority, and that a statement could actually get me some pushback, getting in some trouble with some anarchists. Surprisingly, and I'm sorry I blame Nome Chomsky, Oh my god, as a historian, as a linguist, okay, whatever. Sure, but it was not historically controversial among anarchists to say that you were opposed to all hierarchy and all authority.

Yeah, for sure. Another part of the definition of anarchism that I put forward is the opposition to all authority, and that a statement could actually get me some pushback, getting in some trouble with some anarchists. Surprisingly, and I'm sorry I blame Nome Chomsky, Oh my god, as a historian, as a linguist, okay, whatever. Sure, but it was not historically controversial among anarchists to say that you were opposed to all hierarchy and all authority.

Yeah.

Yeah.

You know, the definitions of those terms do get confused often because, like a lot of words in the English language, they do have multiple meanings. You know, you don't want to fall into the equivocation fallacy, where you use a word or phrase in one way and then you use it in another way in the same argument. So someone might say, for example, anarchism opposing authority is stupid because authority just means having a difference in expertise or a difference in influence, or that hierarchy opposition to hierarchy is stupid because you know food chains or you know the hierarchy of needs. But as you know, anarchists will focused on very specific things or we use these terms, so arguing against it with other definitions doesn't make sense. And by hierarchy is anarchists are French as stratification of society, which gives some individuals, groups, or institutions authority of others. An authority refuses to recognized right above others in a social relationship, to give commands, enforced obedia to control, property, to exploit, and so on. And I really don't see the benefit in Chomsky's sort of unjust authorities or unjust hierarchy is approach to define him anarchism.

You know, the definitions of those terms do get confused often because, like a lot of words in the English language, they do have multiple meanings. You know, you don't want to fall into the equivocation fallacy, where you use a word or phrase in one way and then you use it in another way in the same argument. So someone might say, for example, anarchism opposing authority is stupid because authority just means having a difference in expertise or a difference in influence, or that hierarchy opposition to hierarchy is stupid because you know food chains or you know the hierarchy of needs. But as you know, anarchists will focused on very specific things or we use these terms, so arguing against it with other definitions doesn't make sense. And by hierarchy is anarchists are French as stratification of society, which gives some individuals, groups, or institutions authority of others. An authority refuses to recognized right above others in a social relationship, to give commands, enforced obedia to control, property, to exploit, and so on. And I really don't see the benefit in Chomsky's sort of unjust authorities or unjust hierarchy is approach to define him anarchism.

Yeah, because I mean the thing about hierarchies is that every hierarchy argues it's just like you would get slave owners, like doing these whole speeches about like the inherent morality of slavery, like it's not actually a it's not actually like an ethical position that leads you to like the opposition to hierarchy, because again, every every hierarchy is self justice, is self justifying.

Yeah, because I mean the thing about hierarchies is that every hierarchy argues it's just like you would get slave owners, like doing these whole speeches about like the inherent morality of slavery, like it's not actually a it's not actually like an ethical position that leads you to like the opposition to hierarchy, because again, every every hierarchy is self justice, is self justifying.

Exactly, which is why I say oppositions all authorities and they're justifying dogmas because all of them have dogmuds, including the example that Chomsky uses, which is typically of the parent pulling their child away from traffic. That is not an exercise of authority. And the relationship between a parents and a child is something that kind of should be interrogated, you know, that is a KaiA taking relationship primarily a relationship of responsibility. It does not have to be a relationship of authority, and the sense and I suppose yeah, and the way.

Exactly, which is why I say oppositions all authorities and they're justifying dogmas because all of them have dogmuds, including the example that Chomsky uses, which is typically of the parent pulling their child away from traffic. That is not an exercise of authority. And the relationship between a parents and a child is something that kind of should be interrogated, you know, that is a KaiA taking relationship primarily a relationship of responsibility. It does not have to be a relationship of authority, and the sense and I suppose yeah, and the way.

That it turns into a relationship of ownership is something that genuinely can and should be opposed. But it's also something that like gets a lot harder to oppose when you're sort of stuck up on this like, well, actually, no, it's good because this is authority or whatever. So I think the way that Chomsky obfuscates the stuff makes it harder to actually do politics.

That it turns into a relationship of ownership is something that genuinely can and should be opposed. But it's also something that like gets a lot harder to oppose when you're sort of stuck up on this like, well, actually, no, it's good because this is authority or whatever. So I think the way that Chomsky obfuscates the stuff makes it harder to actually do politics.

That's useful exactly because then it also makes it its hard of people to set a question. The authority the more comfortable with, or the hierarchy is the more comfortable with. So you'll see that way. So gold On you can say, although we don't actually oppose all hierarchities, you know, your parents thing, and you really you see in ground in a sense, because you make it harder to identify and really question those things, because you're you're shutting down that avenue of questioned it, you know. And so when we speak of authority, we're really speaking about that right, the right the authority that gives to certain people over other people, you know, privileges that are recognized and enforced, and a right being a sort of a priority that is above others. You know, the right of authority is a guarantee to actions or resources that absolve the individual holding that right of consequences. The right of authority compels and supporting the desires and needs of those below that authority. So you know, authorities have the right to command recognized and enforced by the underlings. You know, they're the right to enforce the obedience of the underlings are the right to control all the properties the earth has been carved into. You know. The right absorbs them of certain consequences and sort of goes in one direction. It's a unilateral sort of thing. So the authority can take your house, you know, the bank, the government, the landlord. They can take your house, but you can't take theirs. You know. An authority can assault you, whether be a soldier, police officer, whatever, you cannot assault them. An authority can take the fruits of your labor. They could take from these wealth of what you produce, but you can't take from them. That's theft, right. An authority cannot be an authority by themselves. They have to have authority over They have to have a hierarchical social relationship that deprives some their benefit. An Anarchists oppose authority because, you know, among other reasons, those subjects of authority become controlled, They become dependent, exploited, prevented from accessing their full potential and even their bare necessities. A really that prevented from accessing their full potential is why a lot of anarchists have spent a lot of time targeting or approached to pearance in an approach to entry heat. You know, just this morning I was reading a bit of Emma Goldmun as she was talking about Phaer's schools. The way that she speaks also she was an excellent rights and excellent speaker, but the way that she did so, and the way she approached and recognize this need to tap into our potential, particularly from young to prevent it from being limited by the impositions of authority. It's just extremely profound. It's necessary, acessary to start at particularly at that age, but really at any age, to break away from that condition that that recognizes and enforces and obeys and accepts authority and the right of authority. You know, if everybody, if everybody, including their underlings, decided tomorrow not to recognize and enforce the authority of presidents, of kings, of capitalists, that freight would be gone in an instant. Also, when he starts with us being able to actually question, to challenge, to resist authority, and that's something that has existed since humans have been in humans throughout history, we see this sort of compulsion to resist authority, and that sort of seed of resistance is what anarchists hope to have thresh.

That's useful exactly because then it also makes it its hard of people to set a question. The authority the more comfortable with, or the hierarchy is the more comfortable with. So you'll see that way. So gold On you can say, although we don't actually oppose all hierarchities, you know, your parents thing, and you really you see in ground in a sense, because you make it harder to identify and really question those things, because you're you're shutting down that avenue of questioned it, you know. And so when we speak of authority, we're really speaking about that right, the right the authority that gives to certain people over other people, you know, privileges that are recognized and enforced, and a right being a sort of a priority that is above others. You know, the right of authority is a guarantee to actions or resources that absolve the individual holding that right of consequences. The right of authority compels and supporting the desires and needs of those below that authority. So you know, authorities have the right to command recognized and enforced by the underlings. You know, they're the right to enforce the obedience of the underlings are the right to control all the properties the earth has been carved into. You know. The right absorbs them of certain consequences and sort of goes in one direction. It's a unilateral sort of thing. So the authority can take your house, you know, the bank, the government, the landlord. They can take your house, but you can't take theirs. You know. An authority can assault you, whether be a soldier, police officer, whatever, you cannot assault them. An authority can take the fruits of your labor. They could take from these wealth of what you produce, but you can't take from them. That's theft, right. An authority cannot be an authority by themselves. They have to have authority over They have to have a hierarchical social relationship that deprives some their benefit. An Anarchists oppose authority because, you know, among other reasons, those subjects of authority become controlled, They become dependent, exploited, prevented from accessing their full potential and even their bare necessities. A really that prevented from accessing their full potential is why a lot of anarchists have spent a lot of time targeting or approached to pearance in an approach to entry heat. You know, just this morning I was reading a bit of Emma Goldmun as she was talking about Phaer's schools. The way that she speaks also she was an excellent rights and excellent speaker, but the way that she did so, and the way she approached and recognize this need to tap into our potential, particularly from young to prevent it from being limited by the impositions of authority. It's just extremely profound. It's necessary, acessary to start at particularly at that age, but really at any age, to break away from that condition that that recognizes and enforces and obeys and accepts authority and the right of authority. You know, if everybody, if everybody, including their underlings, decided tomorrow not to recognize and enforce the authority of presidents, of kings, of capitalists, that freight would be gone in an instant. Also, when he starts with us being able to actually question, to challenge, to resist authority, and that's something that has existed since humans have been in humans throughout history, we see this sort of compulsion to resist authority, and that sort of seed of resistance is what anarchists hope to have thresh.

Fortunately, we have to go to ads.

Fortunately, we have to go to ads.

Disaster fiasco, your principles in shambles.

Disaster fiasco, your principles in shambles.

But here here's ads.

But here here's ads.

We are back. So, like I said before, authority gets confused with a lot of different things. Force and violence is the main one. It's one that Marxists in particular love, that sort of conflation of authority with any use of force. You know, the slave resistant a slave owner is actually an example of authority.

We are back. So, like I said before, authority gets confused with a lot of different things. Force and violence is the main one. It's one that Marxists in particular love, that sort of conflation of authority with any use of force. You know, the slave resistant a slave owner is actually an example of authority.

Incredibly silly people who are otherwise reasonably intelligent will just say this stuff. It's like, really, what are we doing here?

Incredibly silly people who are otherwise reasonably intelligent will just say this stuff. It's like, really, what are we doing here?

Just come on? Yeah, yeah, I mean force and violence associated with authority, and there they can be a mechanism of defending an authority. But they're not in and of themselves authority. They're not the source of authority. They don't cost you authority, and you could just as easily use them to resist authority. Yeah.

Just come on? Yeah, yeah, I mean force and violence associated with authority, and there they can be a mechanism of defending an authority. But they're not in and of themselves authority. They're not the source of authority. They don't cost you authority, and you could just as easily use them to resist authority. Yeah.

I want to go back to the slavery thing specifically about authority, because the argument that it's an imposition of authority for slaves to free themselves is an argument that was specifically made by the Southern plantation class. Like that was that was their argument about federal tyranny, was that specific argument. So it's probably not a good theoretical basis for understanding what authority is. If if if you're if you're making the same argument as the Southern plantation class, it's gonna just just cause it's gonna leave the.

I want to go back to the slavery thing specifically about authority, because the argument that it's an imposition of authority for slaves to free themselves is an argument that was specifically made by the Southern plantation class. Like that was that was their argument about federal tyranny, was that specific argument. So it's probably not a good theoretical basis for understanding what authority is. If if if you're if you're making the same argument as the Southern plantation class, it's gonna just just cause it's gonna leave the.

One out there exactly exactly. And really we have to understand violence. Forces are things that are used by authorities. But if I punch somebody in the face, that doesn't make me an authority over them. You know, if I defend myself from me in a punch, that doesn't mean me in authority of the person trying to punish me. The source of authority is really about that that right, that position, that recognized right above others, that position, that social relationship above others. That's what grants authority. It's recognition. The general of an army is not an authority because he's holding a gun to the heads of all the other soldiers and making them do things. The generals here is to be a recognizing authority because of his position and the privileges and rights and powers that that position gives him. If tomorrow all the soldiers decided to till in on their general, as has happened historically, that is one hundred percent possible. That is an instance of four sort of violence being used to resist authority rather than being used to, you know, be authority. Another thing that gets confused with authority is influence or or respect. So influence is really something I mean, I might find somebody's a ees or qualities or achievements admirable, right, so I respect that about them. That does mean they have an authority over me. I might be inspired by someone in a way that affects my character or development, will behavior. But again that isn't that influence doesn't automatically trust into authority. You'll find that a lot of the anarchists think because of the late nineteenth twentieth century, they were very influential. They were not authorities, but they had a profound impact on the people around them, and they were profound inspiration to us even to today.

One out there exactly exactly. And really we have to understand violence. Forces are things that are used by authorities. But if I punch somebody in the face, that doesn't make me an authority over them. You know, if I defend myself from me in a punch, that doesn't mean me in authority of the person trying to punish me. The source of authority is really about that that right, that position, that recognized right above others, that position, that social relationship above others. That's what grants authority. It's recognition. The general of an army is not an authority because he's holding a gun to the heads of all the other soldiers and making them do things. The generals here is to be a recognizing authority because of his position and the privileges and rights and powers that that position gives him. If tomorrow all the soldiers decided to till in on their general, as has happened historically, that is one hundred percent possible. That is an instance of four sort of violence being used to resist authority rather than being used to, you know, be authority. Another thing that gets confused with authority is influence or or respect. So influence is really something I mean, I might find somebody's a ees or qualities or achievements admirable, right, so I respect that about them. That does mean they have an authority over me. I might be inspired by someone in a way that affects my character or development, will behavior. But again that isn't that influence doesn't automatically trust into authority. You'll find that a lot of the anarchists think because of the late nineteenth twentieth century, they were very influential. They were not authorities, but they had a profound impact on the people around them, and they were profound inspiration to us even to today.

Yeah, there's there's a paper I always think about where I found it, like a kind of liberal, well like a maybe center lefty academic writing about Mela Tessa, who we've we've talked about a lot on this show. There's an Italian anarchists did a whole bunch of stuff. So when the Italian revolutions are happening in nineteen eighteen, nineteen nineteen, like Baltesa comes back to Italy because he'd been all over the world doing a whole bunch of other stuff, and he gets called like like Italy's Lenin.

Yeah, there's there's a paper I always think about where I found it, like a kind of liberal, well like a maybe center lefty academic writing about Mela Tessa, who we've we've talked about a lot on this show. There's an Italian anarchists did a whole bunch of stuff. So when the Italian revolutions are happening in nineteen eighteen, nineteen nineteen, like Baltesa comes back to Italy because he'd been all over the world doing a whole bunch of other stuff, and he gets called like like Italy's Lenin.

For those who listened to some of my Anarchists History episodes, you know that he kind of shows up sometimes. You know that he shows up an easier literally everywhere. He shows up all over the place.

For those who listened to some of my Anarchists History episodes, you know that he kind of shows up sometimes. You know that he shows up an easier literally everywhere. He shows up all over the place.

Yeah, all for Latin America is in the US, and you know, and so he gets called like the Leadin of Italy. And this paper was about like was he act Did he actually act like Lenin? And the conclusion that they came to was like, well, no, he didn't try to. He didn't come back to Italy to type, to seize control of the country like he simply did not because he was an anarchist, because that's what it means to sort of, you know, have influence, but not.

Yeah, all for Latin America is in the US, and you know, and so he gets called like the Leadin of Italy. And this paper was about like was he act Did he actually act like Lenin? And the conclusion that they came to was like, well, no, he didn't try to. He didn't come back to Italy to type, to seize control of the country like he simply did not because he was an anarchist, because that's what it means to sort of, you know, have influence, but not.

Like rule exactly exactly. And that really gets into some of the interesting conversation around anarchism and leadership and the different ways ad can sort of interpret the concept of leadership. But I'll see that for another discussion. There are two other things that authority gets confused with that. I want to address the first is coordination. And what's interesting with coordination is that it's very much tied to authority a lot. In the present day. You know, a lot of the rules we have in the current system, coordination authority get tied up together. So you have a manager of an enterprise, and that manager coordinates all of the workers in that enterprise, but the manager also has authority over those workers, you know, to fire, to discipline, to go all these sorts of things. Or a general in an army might have a coordination role of ensurance that there's communication between various militias or you know, various regiments, and that the soldiers within that regiment know exactly what their goal is, what their task is, and how they can go about to accomplishing it. That there's in many ways a coordinating role, but it's also tied up with the authority of the general, as in the right above the soldiers, you know, to command them, to enforce, obeliens, to punish, and that sort of thing. So we get tied up between a coordination and authority a lot. But coordination does not have to be ties of authority in its simplest form of coordination can just be the communication of information between parties to ensure they work together smoothly and effectively. That can and already does take place between equals. So, okay, here's a good example. You know, you're trying to move a couch into a house or an apartment. And for those of you who have had to squeeze a couch and through a doorway, you kind of know what I'm talking about is already because you have to kind of come at this at a certain angle. You know, the the size of our doorway and the dimensions of a coach require very particular approach. So you might have somebody who stands to this side and the talent person okay, all right. So it's likely in this way because when you lift in a heavy coach, you kind of just want to put it down. You know, you can't really think, okay, what anger should take it out? So you might have somebody in a position to say, all right, back up, okay, come forward, okay, So it's slightly into the left, that kind of thing. That's a coordinative rule. But that person there's an an authority over anybody there. It's just communicating information to ensure the shared task that the people involved have can be executed effectively. So that's a long way of saying that we can't have coordination and organization in our It doesn't have to be or it doesn't have to involve authority. Finally, one of the pet favorites of confusion is the confusion between authority and expertise. Authority and expertise really example of the equivocation I was talking about earlier, because authority is a synonym for expertise by certain definitions, but the kind of authority and I suppose has nothing to do with expertise, which is what Baquen was talking about with his authority the book maker argument. Now, if I could go back in time, I would just go and tell the quien listen, A lot of people are not going to read this in full. I understand the full context. So maybe don't use the word authority here. Maybe be more specific and use the word expertise or something so people don't get confused, because I mean reac in context, it becomes very clear. But they are people who take the title of that article, or they take one quote or one passage just taken out too context from the whole, or they take like, for example, it's a version of that article that is cut off from the entire thing on on Marxist dot org. I think so it's like an incomplete version of that text available in one page, and then the full versions of yourble in the anarchists life very incredible. See have people who basically use that article to argue that actually, you know, vi Cutan wasn't against authority, but in context it makes sense what he's talking about authority. They he's specifically talking about expertise, and he still says that in the end he's not going to be commanded by that expert He's just going to take their perspective into account because he understands the incompleteness of his own perspective. That is a very different relationship from the sort of commander in support nation that we see in an authoritarian relationship. And while expertise often gets conflated with authority in positions in the current system, that often is damaging to authority itself. If you think about the relationship people have, for example, with and this is a sort of a contentious one, but even if the relationship people have with like their own like poostyl doctor, the family doctor, wh is the relationship that they might have with a public health professional. When people go into the postel doctor, it's very easy for them to sort of, you know, accept that sort of expertise. They have a relationship with them, they understand them, they trust them. One of the case maybe of course their places where because healthcare is and accessible, people don't have that relationship with the doctor. But you know, so I'm speaking internationally here.

Like rule exactly exactly. And that really gets into some of the interesting conversation around anarchism and leadership and the different ways ad can sort of interpret the concept of leadership. But I'll see that for another discussion. There are two other things that authority gets confused with that. I want to address the first is coordination. And what's interesting with coordination is that it's very much tied to authority a lot. In the present day. You know, a lot of the rules we have in the current system, coordination authority get tied up together. So you have a manager of an enterprise, and that manager coordinates all of the workers in that enterprise, but the manager also has authority over those workers, you know, to fire, to discipline, to go all these sorts of things. Or a general in an army might have a coordination role of ensurance that there's communication between various militias or you know, various regiments, and that the soldiers within that regiment know exactly what their goal is, what their task is, and how they can go about to accomplishing it. That there's in many ways a coordinating role, but it's also tied up with the authority of the general, as in the right above the soldiers, you know, to command them, to enforce, obeliens, to punish, and that sort of thing. So we get tied up between a coordination and authority a lot. But coordination does not have to be ties of authority in its simplest form of coordination can just be the communication of information between parties to ensure they work together smoothly and effectively. That can and already does take place between equals. So, okay, here's a good example. You know, you're trying to move a couch into a house or an apartment. And for those of you who have had to squeeze a couch and through a doorway, you kind of know what I'm talking about is already because you have to kind of come at this at a certain angle. You know, the the size of our doorway and the dimensions of a coach require very particular approach. So you might have somebody who stands to this side and the talent person okay, all right. So it's likely in this way because when you lift in a heavy coach, you kind of just want to put it down. You know, you can't really think, okay, what anger should take it out? So you might have somebody in a position to say, all right, back up, okay, come forward, okay, So it's slightly into the left, that kind of thing. That's a coordinative rule. But that person there's an an authority over anybody there. It's just communicating information to ensure the shared task that the people involved have can be executed effectively. So that's a long way of saying that we can't have coordination and organization in our It doesn't have to be or it doesn't have to involve authority. Finally, one of the pet favorites of confusion is the confusion between authority and expertise. Authority and expertise really example of the equivocation I was talking about earlier, because authority is a synonym for expertise by certain definitions, but the kind of authority and I suppose has nothing to do with expertise, which is what Baquen was talking about with his authority the book maker argument. Now, if I could go back in time, I would just go and tell the quien listen, A lot of people are not going to read this in full. I understand the full context. So maybe don't use the word authority here. Maybe be more specific and use the word expertise or something so people don't get confused, because I mean reac in context, it becomes very clear. But they are people who take the title of that article, or they take one quote or one passage just taken out too context from the whole, or they take like, for example, it's a version of that article that is cut off from the entire thing on on Marxist dot org. I think so it's like an incomplete version of that text available in one page, and then the full versions of yourble in the anarchists life very incredible. See have people who basically use that article to argue that actually, you know, vi Cutan wasn't against authority, but in context it makes sense what he's talking about authority. They he's specifically talking about expertise, and he still says that in the end he's not going to be commanded by that expert He's just going to take their perspective into account because he understands the incompleteness of his own perspective. That is a very different relationship from the sort of commander in support nation that we see in an authoritarian relationship. And while expertise often gets conflated with authority in positions in the current system, that often is damaging to authority itself. If you think about the relationship people have, for example, with and this is a sort of a contentious one, but even if the relationship people have with like their own like poostyl doctor, the family doctor, wh is the relationship that they might have with a public health professional. When people go into the postel doctor, it's very easy for them to sort of, you know, accept that sort of expertise. They have a relationship with them, they understand them, they trust them. One of the case maybe of course their places where because healthcare is and accessible, people don't have that relationship with the doctor. But you know, so I'm speaking internationally here.

Yeah, Also I need to put the trans note here, which is that like it is very hard if you're trands to find a doctor that you personally trust, because oh boy.

Yeah, Also I need to put the trans note here, which is that like it is very hard if you're trands to find a doctor that you personally trust, because oh boy.

That is true.

That is true.

That that is a time, that is true.

That that is a time, that is true.

That's that's the influence of you know, CISTA a patriarchy, and it's its impact.

That's that's the influence of you know, CISTA a patriarchy, and it's its impact.

Yeah, and so it's also it's also an example of why you can't just sort of blindly accept the authority. You can't accept the authority of people who have expertise because it's like sometimes they don't exactly exactly like a lot of times, in fact, the credentials don't actually meant that this person knows anything about trans health care, like the ASCO exactly.

Yeah, and so it's also it's also an example of why you can't just sort of blindly accept the authority. You can't accept the authority of people who have expertise because it's like sometimes they don't exactly exactly like a lot of times, in fact, the credentials don't actually meant that this person knows anything about trans health care, like the ASCO exactly.

It often just me and said the police. Sun has been given the stuff of approval by an institution that has been granted authority. Yeah, but the institution being granted authority does not necessarily or should not have a monopoly on expertise and often does not in practice have the full of the sun, and the people who produced by that institution don't necessarily have that full of crafts and everything to see that you know, they can be treated as an unquestioned authority all expert.

It often just me and said the police. Sun has been given the stuff of approval by an institution that has been granted authority. Yeah, but the institution being granted authority does not necessarily or should not have a monopoly on expertise and often does not in practice have the full of the sun, and the people who produced by that institution don't necessarily have that full of crafts and everything to see that you know, they can be treated as an unquestioned authority all expert.

Yeah, and it's something that you have to have a kind of balance between what you know, kind of like neoliberal like technocracy where you get like we put the experts in charge and the quote unquote experts running the economy, like did two thousand and.

Yeah, and it's something that you have to have a kind of balance between what you know, kind of like neoliberal like technocracy where you get like we put the experts in charge and the quote unquote experts running the economy, like did two thousand and.

Eight all come out to that right wing think down?

Eight all come out to that right wing think down?

Yeah, yeah, it's and then on the other hand, the kind of like reflexive contrianism and desire to build a new expert that gets you like RFK Junior as the future like secretary of Health and Human Services. So you know, you have to sort of like Jesus, yes, you have to sort of like balance between sometimes these people fuck up and also, vaccines are good. This is not a problem that requires us to like fly through the pin of a needle. We do have to have a little bit of I don't know, it's not that difficult of a problem to deal with, but but the way that the authority is construed has created a sort of backlash to it that has been used to sort of delegitimate, genuine, useful expertise and create sort of like false expertise.

Yeah, yeah, it's and then on the other hand, the kind of like reflexive contrianism and desire to build a new expert that gets you like RFK Junior as the future like secretary of Health and Human Services. So you know, you have to sort of like Jesus, yes, you have to sort of like balance between sometimes these people fuck up and also, vaccines are good. This is not a problem that requires us to like fly through the pin of a needle. We do have to have a little bit of I don't know, it's not that difficult of a problem to deal with, but but the way that the authority is construed has created a sort of backlash to it that has been used to sort of delegitimate, genuine, useful expertise and create sort of like false expertise.

Yeah, and that's exactly the points I was going to make to the institution of authority and the fact that authorities so frequently, you know, mess up and so frequently like abuse the trust of people, increase the sense of mistrust, a rightful and valid mistrust in authorities that it can often be misdirected or exploited towards ends that are not necessarily equivalent. So, because these people in public health positions are tied up with the government, people already don't trust any legitimate expertise that they may have gets solid essentially by that person of authority, poisoned by their association with a government that has clearly proven itself to not have the best interests of people in mind. All right, So, just to get back to the definition again, anarchism as a political philosophy and practice that opposes all authority along with its justifying dogmas, and proposes the unending pursuit of anarchy, a world without rule, where self determination, free association, and mutuality form the basis of our society. So, I mean, I've spoken a bit about that. Those justified dogmas came at Stromsky a little bit, and we spoke about how that's sort of incoherent because every ideology opposes unjust hierarchies. So I think it's important that anarchism calls out all the justifications. I'm sure you could think of some of the main justifications that tend to be used. One of the oldest justifications is, of course, the divine rights of kings.

Yeah, and that's exactly the points I was going to make to the institution of authority and the fact that authorities so frequently, you know, mess up and so frequently like abuse the trust of people, increase the sense of mistrust, a rightful and valid mistrust in authorities that it can often be misdirected or exploited towards ends that are not necessarily equivalent. So, because these people in public health positions are tied up with the government, people already don't trust any legitimate expertise that they may have gets solid essentially by that person of authority, poisoned by their association with a government that has clearly proven itself to not have the best interests of people in mind. All right, So, just to get back to the definition again, anarchism as a political philosophy and practice that opposes all authority along with its justifying dogmas, and proposes the unending pursuit of anarchy, a world without rule, where self determination, free association, and mutuality form the basis of our society. So, I mean, I've spoken a bit about that. Those justified dogmas came at Stromsky a little bit, and we spoke about how that's sort of incoherent because every ideology opposes unjust hierarchies. So I think it's important that anarchism calls out all the justifications. I'm sure you could think of some of the main justifications that tend to be used. One of the oldest justifications is, of course, the divine rights of kings.

Yeah, that one's mostly been broken. Hopefully we don't have to deal with that shit any war. But I you know, I don't know, I have I have eternal cynicism.

Yeah, that one's mostly been broken. Hopefully we don't have to deal with that shit any war. But I you know, I don't know, I have I have eternal cynicism.

I don't know. Maybe the maybe the American people you in for the Trump dynasty, Yeah, we're going to create their god king. Oh yeah, as imperial presidency. But yeah, I mean in more liberal circles, the justification for authority is usually the social contract theory that individuals implicitly consent to authority. But I don't know about umia. Nobody asked for my consent, and also I don't have any way of relinquishing my consent. Yeah, so is it really consensual?

I don't know. Maybe the maybe the American people you in for the Trump dynasty, Yeah, we're going to create their god king. Oh yeah, as imperial presidency. But yeah, I mean in more liberal circles, the justification for authority is usually the social contract theory that individuals implicitly consent to authority. But I don't know about umia. Nobody asked for my consent, and also I don't have any way of relinquishing my consent. Yeah, so is it really consensual?

No, Like some some fucking assholes at Philadelphia like two hundred years ago were like, we're going to set up a thing, and also slavery is good.

No, Like some some fucking assholes at Philadelphia like two hundred years ago were like, we're going to set up a thing, and also slavery is good.

It's like, really, like, what do we doing here?

It's like, really, like, what do we doing here?

How?

How?

What meaningful way did I agree to this?

What meaningful way did I agree to this?

Yeah? Exactly. And it's not like I can step out of it. I mean, you hold the monopoly on literally every inch of territory on earth, some stately some claim to some part of the world. There's no escape, So it's not a contract that you can opt out of. You know. You know. Another justification that authorities tend to use as an idea of meritocracy and economic darwin itsell that the best of the best, they rise to the top, that they are not really any systemic inequalities or structural barriers. That this is a survival to the fittest, and the fittest win, and the losers are losers, and they fail because they're losers. That's a very cynical sort of take that I don't think many people openly espouse outside of like right wing circles, but it's definitely one of the justifications for authority that gets used. Another one is also in conservative circles, the idea of natural hierarchy. The idea is that hierarchies are part of the natural ordel. You know, people will use avolutionary biology or the just texts or pseuo scientific claims to justify the inequality between genders or races or classes. Colonial and imperialists Poulos, for example, would justify their dominance by claim and cultural superiority. The these ideas have the white man's buddhen and civilizing missions to enforce the authority over other people's and their lands, and that justification, while questioned and challenged to be, still is at the basis at the root of almost every institution in our modern rogue.

Yeah? Exactly. And it's not like I can step out of it. I mean, you hold the monopoly on literally every inch of territory on earth, some stately some claim to some part of the world. There's no escape, So it's not a contract that you can opt out of. You know. You know. Another justification that authorities tend to use as an idea of meritocracy and economic darwin itsell that the best of the best, they rise to the top, that they are not really any systemic inequalities or structural barriers. That this is a survival to the fittest, and the fittest win, and the losers are losers, and they fail because they're losers. That's a very cynical sort of take that I don't think many people openly espouse outside of like right wing circles, but it's definitely one of the justifications for authority that gets used. Another one is also in conservative circles, the idea of natural hierarchy. The idea is that hierarchies are part of the natural ordel. You know, people will use avolutionary biology or the just texts or pseuo scientific claims to justify the inequality between genders or races or classes. Colonial and imperialists Poulos, for example, would justify their dominance by claim and cultural superiority. The these ideas have the white man's buddhen and civilizing missions to enforce the authority over other people's and their lands, and that justification, while questioned and challenged to be, still is at the basis at the root of almost every institution in our modern rogue.

Yeah, it's something I think is going to become increasingly visible in the US over the next few years, coming out of a period where it was like slightly more offiscated. But you know, all of the people who are about to be coming into power, if you if you spend like even the tiniest amount of time, you will see them start talking about like fucking racial IQ shit, and like all of this really pretty pretty explicit ideology that they have that like of this sort of like racial superiority that they think they have. That's like, you know, there's like motivating ideological factor and also the thing of the users sort of justify their power.

Yeah, it's something I think is going to become increasingly visible in the US over the next few years, coming out of a period where it was like slightly more offiscated. But you know, all of the people who are about to be coming into power, if you if you spend like even the tiniest amount of time, you will see them start talking about like fucking racial IQ shit, and like all of this really pretty pretty explicit ideology that they have that like of this sort of like racial superiority that they think they have. That's like, you know, there's like motivating ideological factor and also the thing of the users sort of justify their power.

Yeah, it's unfortunately become in more and more open and common and to see that sort of discourse on mainstream platforms like Twitter. The necessity of order an efficiency tends to also be used as a justification for authority, you know, the idea that authority is needed to maintain order, to keep things in place, to make decisions. And this is really ignoring the capacity that people have already proven historically and presently to organize cooperatively, to organize without authority, to take on horizontal and decentralized approaches, because it's something that is treating complexity as synonymous with hierarchy, that you have to organize this way, you know, it ignores all the inefficiencies hybureaucratic systems, It ignores all the harm caused by authoritarian systems. That just says that you know, we need this thing, these things function, but we don't.

Yeah, it's unfortunately become in more and more open and common and to see that sort of discourse on mainstream platforms like Twitter. The necessity of order an efficiency tends to also be used as a justification for authority, you know, the idea that authority is needed to maintain order, to keep things in place, to make decisions. And this is really ignoring the capacity that people have already proven historically and presently to organize cooperatively, to organize without authority, to take on horizontal and decentralized approaches, because it's something that is treating complexity as synonymous with hierarchy, that you have to organize this way, you know, it ignores all the inefficiencies hybureaucratic systems, It ignores all the harm caused by authoritarian systems. That just says that you know, we need this thing, these things function, but we don't.

One of the weirder artifacts of the twenty tens was David Raber had an argument with Pure Teel where like they like did a debate and what a Raber's arguments is like, well, what do you mean, like our technical or technological systems mean that we have to organize society in a way like it like it is is the argument that you're making that technological possibility makes us less free.

One of the weirder artifacts of the twenty tens was David Raber had an argument with Pure Teel where like they like did a debate and what a Raber's arguments is like, well, what do you mean, like our technical or technological systems mean that we have to organize society in a way like it like it is is the argument that you're making that technological possibility makes us less free.

It's like, no, sucks, what are you talking about?

It's like, no, sucks, what are you talking about?

And you know this is all people like who make these arguments don't necessarily have an understanding of our systems. The Internet is not organized by one central body. The Internet is already fairly the yes centralized. It's become more centralized upon platforms. But as an infrastructure, the Internet is really a network of nodes that are all over the world and all over space. Or we could take for example, the International Postal system. All the mail that gets distributed around the world internationally is one central global body that's in charge of that. It's multiple organizations that coordinate their activities to ensure that you know, you get your mail. Or we look at even basic supply genes of goods and resources, it's not all handled by one central industrial body. It's not all handled by the government or by one corporation. It's a set of relationships between groups, between companies, between mining companies and resource exstruction companies, and shipping companies and processing plants and factories and toys. All these networks already not undertaken entirely by one central body. They may be organized internally hierarchically, but that can very easily change. Finally, final justification I want to get into is this idea that that authority is the lesser evil. That authority might be imperfect, but it's preferable to boost alternatives like total anarchy. And of course some people say anarchy here that the means in the pejorative sense, or mean like actual anarchy in the sense of the political philosophy, means in the sense of instead of having one central authority, they have one to compete in authorityre in poem, it's a bunch of warlow its fights in full power. That is not anarchy in the sense of anarchists pursue that is, you know, patsy authority fighting predominance, which is if you think about really how historically states came in.

And you know this is all people like who make these arguments don't necessarily have an understanding of our systems. The Internet is not organized by one central body. The Internet is already fairly the yes centralized. It's become more centralized upon platforms. But as an infrastructure, the Internet is really a network of nodes that are all over the world and all over space. Or we could take for example, the International Postal system. All the mail that gets distributed around the world internationally is one central global body that's in charge of that. It's multiple organizations that coordinate their activities to ensure that you know, you get your mail. Or we look at even basic supply genes of goods and resources, it's not all handled by one central industrial body. It's not all handled by the government or by one corporation. It's a set of relationships between groups, between companies, between mining companies and resource exstruction companies, and shipping companies and processing plants and factories and toys. All these networks already not undertaken entirely by one central body. They may be organized internally hierarchically, but that can very easily change. Finally, final justification I want to get into is this idea that that authority is the lesser evil. That authority might be imperfect, but it's preferable to boost alternatives like total anarchy. And of course some people say anarchy here that the means in the pejorative sense, or mean like actual anarchy in the sense of the political philosophy, means in the sense of instead of having one central authority, they have one to compete in authorityre in poem, it's a bunch of warlow its fights in full power. That is not anarchy in the sense of anarchists pursue that is, you know, patsy authority fighting predominance, which is if you think about really how historically states came in.

To be in Yeah, I was like, what do you think we have now, like, what do you think that like one hundred and ninety something states are doing? Like I I don't know, and I feel like a lot of these arguments are just describing the current state of affairs and going well, it could be like that. It's like, oh, what if how would like communes deal with war? It's like when't the Communists are going to war with each other? It's like, well, okay, like what look at the world right now and ask yourself the question, how are states dealing with the problem of war?

To be in Yeah, I was like, what do you think we have now, like, what do you think that like one hundred and ninety something states are doing? Like I I don't know, and I feel like a lot of these arguments are just describing the current state of affairs and going well, it could be like that. It's like, oh, what if how would like communes deal with war? It's like when't the Communists are going to war with each other? It's like, well, okay, like what look at the world right now and ask yourself the question, how are states dealing with the problem of war?

And the answer is they're dealing with a problem of war by going to war with each other? Like what are we doing here?

And the answer is they're dealing with a problem of war by going to war with each other? Like what are we doing here?

Exactly? Exactly. So the more positive side of the definition of anarchy is one that I haven't quite gotten into yet, and I haven't broken down the ideas of mutuality and free association. But I'll save all that for the next episode. If you can't wait until then, my videos on how anarchy works and what ANARCHI needs should whet your appetite. But until then, I've an Andrew sage. You can find our YouTube at Andrewism and feature not seeing true this is it could happen here the show where we chronicle collapse as it happens and explore how do I build a better future, and in my case ocasion, I take a look at the past as well. And that's it. All power to all the people.

Exactly? Exactly. So the more positive side of the definition of anarchy is one that I haven't quite gotten into yet, and I haven't broken down the ideas of mutuality and free association. But I'll save all that for the next episode. If you can't wait until then, my videos on how anarchy works and what ANARCHI needs should whet your appetite. But until then, I've an Andrew sage. You can find our YouTube at Andrewism and feature not seeing true this is it could happen here the show where we chronicle collapse as it happens and explore how do I build a better future, and in my case ocasion, I take a look at the past as well. And that's it. All power to all the people.

It could Happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media.

It could Happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media.

For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website cool zonemedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever.

For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website cool zonemedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever.

You listen to podcasts, you can now find sources for It could Happen Here. Listened directly in episode descriptions. Thanks for listening.

You listen to podcasts, you can now find sources for It could Happen Here. Listened directly in episode descriptions. Thanks for listening.