this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
34 points (100.0% liked)

Anarchism and Social Ecology

2609 readers
13 users here now

!anarchism@slrpnk.net

A community about anarchy. anarchism, social ecology, and communalism for SLRPNK! Solarpunk anarchists unite!

Feel free to ask questions here. We aspire to make this space a safe space. SLRPNK.net's basic rules apply here, but generally don't be a dick and don't be an authoritarian.

Anarchism

Anarchism is a social and political theory and practice that works for a free society without domination and hierarchy.

Social Ecology

Social Ecology, developed from green anarchism, is the idea that our ecological problems have their ultimate roots in our social problems. This is because the domination of nature and our ecology by humanity has its ultimate roots in the domination humanity by humans. Therefore, the solutions to our ecological problems are found by addressing our social and ecological problems simultaneously.

Libraries

Audiobooks

Quotes

Poetry and imagination must be integrated with science and technology, for we have evolved beyond an innocence that can be nourished exclusively by myths and dreams.

~ Murray Bookchin, The Ecology of Freedom

People want to treat ‘we’ll figure it out by working to get there’ as some sort of rhetorical evasion instead of being a fundamental expression of trust in the power of conscious collective effort.

~Anonymous, but quoted by Mariame Kaba, We Do This 'Til We Free Us

The end justifies the means. But what if there never is an end? All we have is means.

~Ursula K. Le Guin, The Lathe of Heaven

The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking.

~Murray Bookchin, "A Politics for the Twenty-First Century"

There can be no separation of the revolutionary process from the revolutionary goal. A society based on self-administration must be achieved by means of self-administration.

~Murray Bookchin, Post Scarcity Anarchism

In modern times humans have become a wolf not only to humans, but to all nature.

~Abdullah Öcalan

The ecological question is fundamentally solved as the system is repressed and a socialist social system develops. That does not mean you cannot do something for the environment right away. On the contrary, it is necessary to combine the fight for the environment with the struggle for a general social revolution...

~Abdullah Öcalan

Social ecology advances a message that calls not only for a society free of hierarchy and hierarchical sensibilities, but for an ethics that places humanity in the natural world as an agent for rendering evolution social and natural fully self-conscious.

~ Murray Bookchin

Network

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm new to the concept of anarchism, at least as a vision of society that actually has had thought put into it, so my apologies if this question seems stupid of self centered.

Risking losing context as I ask this, I'm curious about how advanced medicines like insulin (things that aren't small molecules, require rDNA, multinational logistics, supply chains and quality assurance, etc) would work and be distributed. What about advanced medical devices like insulin pumps, subcutaneous glucose monitors, etc?

I know there are some types of anarchist who would say those things wouldn't be needed without industrialization (im not going to gratify that take with a reaponse), but I suspect most still recognize the need for things like this, since millions of people would die without them.

I guess the root of my question is what the motivation would even be for someone to work on projects like that. Type 1 diabetics make up ~0.1% of the population at the highest, and a major hurdle from my perspective would be getting people to work on something needed by so small a population, but requiring such intensive resources to produce. And especially in any kind of transition period, I find it basically impossible to imagine the able bodied revolutionary actually giving a shit whether people like me live to see the "after."

I've done some looking and it seems like broadly, the attitudes range from "you'd make it yourself and its okay because you'd have time to if all your basic needs are met" to "well surely someone would do it altruistically." I also found a few people who just said "people die, get over it," and "the real problem is you should've died when you were 7 but we played god," but I have to assume (hope?) that such ideas are fringe. I'm hoping especially to hear from someone who actually understands why insulin (and pumps and CGMs and all that) are complicated, hard things that probably won't get made purely by volunteer labor at the huge scale needed. Like, it's not one of those things you can whip up at a local pharmacy, its far too complex for that.

I guess in all, I like the idea of a society without hierarchy, where self determination and community engagement become the de facto environment...but from my admittedly novice perspective, it sure doesn't feel like much thought has been given to how those of us with extremely short expiration dates should stability evaporate actually survive the transition.

Over the last week that I've been reading and thinking about this, I keep coming back to the inherent (though hopefully temporary) loss of stability that comes with any revolution. In that kind of scenario, I just...die. Along with millions like me. Either from supply chains failing during transition, or my own bullet because I'm staring down the barrel of an agonizing final week that ends with me dehydrated, starving, vomiting blood and gasping for air. From here it's really hard to see a place for me in an anarchist future.

Sorry, I recognize thats a little dark. But its something im finding myself having to think about more and more as collapse seems to draw ever closer.

Just hoping anyone has insights to share. And if i respond in the comments and i seem a little forceful, I promise I'm not trying to be a dick, its just that this is kind of existential for me, so I am probably going to be prone to pushing back or really pressing on certain aspects. If im being rude, please dont hesitate to tell me and I'll try to reframe to avoid that. It's neither the goal nor the intended process.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Finished typing!

that absent capitalist abuses, the world would not want for doctors

How do you know this?

dream job material

This is a slave mentality. Menial and grueling work persist whether capitalism persist or dies: chores, building, sewage, waste disposal, material gathering, your examples, etc.. It just won't be coerced by force of a rich exploiter (bourgeoisie). Right now the materials you exemplified are extracted via slavery. Anarchists just want the extractors to be fully recompensed for their work, not stolen to.

the production of some medications is too complex

Anarchists fully comprehend people are diverse and different. Complexity is our bread and butter. It's more of: should CEOs deny your life, or do we keep living our already complex lives?

yes, but in a practical boots on the ground way, how would this part work?”

It already does. Removing capitalism doesn't end our living support systems. Parasites instead are sending people to deathcamps because they do not want to support everyone but themselves.

[–] sambeastie@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

This is a slave mentality. Menial and grueling work persist whether capitalism persist or dies: chores, building, sewage, waste disposal, material gathering, your examples, etc… It just won’t be coerced by force of a rich exploiter (bourgeoisie). Right now the materials you exemplified are extracted via slavery. Anarchists just want the extractors to be fully recompensed for their work, not stolen to.

Yes, exactly. All of those examples you listed are things that I can see pathways for in a world without any hard or soft coercion pressuring people to do them. Solutions to getting that work accomplished are numerous, including having more people do less of that work (lightening the burden on everyone and minimizing the amount of time anyone needs to spend on it), and simply opening the position up to people who want to do it (you mention building, but I actually know a few people who I think legitimately would choose construction in a world absent any external forces demanding they do it). And I feel like the actual production and distribution of advanced medication sits in a weird middle ground where it's often too specialized to farm out, but not quite as passion inducing as building or even material gathering can be. Like, am I just completely off on the notion that humans aren't built for repetitive, tedious tasks like that and people wouldn't choose it if there were other options?

EDIT: Sorry, forgot one more thing I wanted to say

How do you know this?

Learning skills that help heal sick people is one of the most brazen examples of prosociality I can think of, and I have no doubt that the more obvious, more visible helping professions would thrive in a world where capitalism and strict heirarchy were non-factors. It's the stuff so far down the chain that most people never think about it that confuses me.

[–] TurtlePunk@slrpnk.net 2 points 6 days ago

Here there, trying to bring a bit of an answer to your question: what insitives working those essential jobs "down the chain" that aren't obvious to everyone.

I think that first the idea of sharing the load on more ppl so that they don't have to do it all the time is great.

I saw somewhere else for a similar question "make the jobs sexier" as in make them as much enjoyable to do as you can :(some ideas i have but maybe it's not all applicable) personalise the "workplace" and decorate it. Put some speakers so ppl can share their fav musics , make them eat with other ppl from the local community during breaks so that they don't feel lonely/between themselves, create spaces around or within the "factory" where you can do other stuff/hobies. make demonstrations to ppl who don't know the job to raise awesomeness of it. (+ as many ideas as u can think of)

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

am I just completely off on the notion that humans aren’t built for repetitive, tedious tasks like that and people wouldn’t choose it if there were other options?

It’s the stuff so far down the chain that most people never think about it that confuses me.

The issue you're really confusing is that the stuff far down the “chain” will still have to get done capitalism extinguished. People still need laboratories to experiment drugs, still need to synthesize molecules, everything you are thinking, but without the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie need not exist. Anarchists call that “chain” “grueling work” or “difficult tasks.” “Chain,” in that idiomatic phrase, really does come from slavery chains.

[–] sambeastie@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't think I'm confusing that? I'm not arguing "keep capitalism," I'm trying to build a mental model of what incentives drive people toward doing that in between zone of grueling work that doesn't tend to light a fire under people, but isn't so easy to diffuse the workload of.

Maybe it's not as special a case as I think it is. I don't know.

Also, can you explain why you linked the Psychology Today article? I'm stupid, I don't really see the connection.

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

incentives drive people toward doing that

Living. Just trying to stay alive. I know plenty of folks with type 1 diabetes that went into the medical profession just to be able to synthesize their own insulin.

it’s not as special a case

Correct.

why you linked the Psychology

Mammals are neurologically wired for “repetitive tedious tasks.” It’s how we survived thousands of year in our harsh planet. Adding a little more work to synthesize medicine and tools like we already do is nothing more special than when we were making spears and clothes in the wilderness.