Are Lemmy anarchists okay? How does this person have 24 upvotes? In what universe are anarchists NOT doing class analysis, (therefore) don't want to abolish capitalism, and don't want to fight archism?
I suspect this is just because libs absolutely DESPISE comrade @Cowbee@hexbear.net and will upvote anything smart-sounding that supposedly addresses whatever is being discussed?
Also, gotta love the whole "I have this opinion and many anarchists will disagree and that's what anarchism is about". Like, buddy, you haven't read one book or talked to one anarchist IRL, let alone organized in your entire life.
I think there is a much simpler answer (not that implementation is always simple) which is that "hierarchies," delegations of authority, must be democratically decided, and therefore that there can be many or few of them and it should be decided based on what is most functional. There can be no other sort of authority except those decided in that manner.
I guess "some" is doing a lot of work, but in general I think it's better to try to have consistent systems so long as the public will remains the same so that we can be more resilient to various types of emergencies (which themselves require ad-hoc organizing, but should where possible by the government already have procedures in place for the creation of the ad-hoc groups).
It just sounds like we're saying the same thing tbh with some minute differences and sone pettiness too.
Sorry if the "doing a lot of work" part sounded more derisive than I intended it. Glad we roughly understand each other.
It is doing a lot of work though. I need to read more theory :(