this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2026
26 points (90.6% liked)
Anarchism
2784 readers
24 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
Other anarchist comms
- !anarchism@slrpnk.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- !anarchism@hexbear.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.ml
- !anarchism101@lemmy.ca
- !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As shown by the hexbear comrade here, a lot of people just assume that no leader equals chaos. I find very hard to deconstruct this assumption, i think because it is deeply rooted in our societies. What i usually do is to point out that it's not leaders that bring order, but organization. Most people then say "well yes, but you can't have good organization without leaders", which is more manageable to discuss, though most of the times people didnt change their mind in my experience. My main argument, which can take many forms, is that there are lot of times in our lives where we organize without leaders : in some families / homes, during trips with friends, when playing casual games or sports, even in some demos or movements.
It doesn't really answer you question, but there's a passage of Bakunin's God And The State that i really like, where they point out that authority does not necessarily mean leader. So if you can convince someone that it's authority they like and not leaders, you can then bring up the anarchist version of authority : restricted in time, matters and always up to debate.
Can you imagine consulting an architect about whether removing this stone would collapse the orphanage and the architect said it would and then not allowing anyone to impose their authority on you?
100%.
The point is precisely that we trust the advice of the architect in this matter because they are more knowledgeable than us, not because they or someone else imposed their authority on us.
And if they talk shit about how to educate children in the orphanage, we won't trust their advice because they are not knowledgeable then, and we do not let them impose their authority on us.
Again. If you go and try to remove the cornerstone or a building because you want to change the aesthetic and the architect says "that will cause building to collapse", and you go to do it anyway, then who is going to stop you if you refuse to comply with the advice?
Well the people that are benefiting from that orphanage would not be very happy and probably would stop you.
And on a more metaphorical level in an anarchist society no one person should have the power to ruin what it too the whole community to build.
By you not wanting the architect to impose his better judgement on you, you are imposing your stupidity on other people, and they in turn have the same right to reject your ability to do so.
The point is precisely not to remove the stone if someone with pertinent knowledge/expertise/whatever says it's a bad thing, because then their authority makes temporarily sense.