Proposal: Anarchism

This has been proposed before, and a clear issue was that the terms 'anarchy' and 'anarchism' have many different meanings to different people, even from academic and historical perspectives, though perhaps more from cultural perspectives.

However, 'stateless societies' is a fairly objective term with one meaning that should be inclusive of all interpretations of 'anarchy' and 'anarchism'.

I don't think the difference between historical bomb-throwing and philosophical anarchism will confuse anyone who actually participates in the site. This is supposed to be a Q&A for experts. The proposed title does not match the listed scope for the site—it is too narrow. – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:22
@wolf Did you take part in the prior Anarchism proposals that have been submitted over the years here at Area 51? – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:23
the ones that have no record of discussion? – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:25
@wolf So it sounds like your answer is: no? – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:27
@wolf You are actually touching on the significance of the prior proposals: they all failed. A large contributor to the reason they failed is that roughly half of the participants associated Anarchy with chaos and the other half something else. This results in half of the participants voting down the other half, thus the proposal eventually dies and gets purged. If that is your goal or you don't believe me, then change the name back to Anarchism so you can see it happen. – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:37
surely you must understand that I am skeptical without your proof, proof that could have been better explicated in the original proposal if it was necessary to understanding it. I see no evidence of confusion at all in the current questions as to whether this is a Q&A about philosophical anarchism or about rioting. And even if "anarchism" was to be confusing, going in the direction of just "statelessness" loses the anti-institutionalism that was included under the original title. "Anarchism" fits the bill quite concisely, and would otherwise require a long title to cover the same bases. – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:47
@wolf The lack of proof (purged proposals), in this forum, is supporting of my claim. I feel you are not appreciating how difficult it is to move from proposal to beta, and then from beta to actual site. Having an already difficult task combined with minuscule-sized community, then have one half of that community battling against the other half of that community, makes the whole effort pointless. – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:53
as I said, I cannot appreciate something I do not know. I take you at your word/experience, but "lack of proof" is not evidence. It doesn't help that you refer to five upvotes as community, especially when there are only 18 followers and your accepted answerer isn't even one of them... Let's address scope confusion if and when it arises because as of now there is none. 18 people have signed on for anarchism—they might be okay with a narrower scope, but just let the proposal run its course? – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 18:03
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Concur, great idea. If there are no objections in the next week or so make the change.

It has been 10+ days, this answer has 5 up votes, while the don't change answer has 2 down votes. I made the change. – James Jenkins Nov 17 '16 at 18:06
Still thinking about this, but as of now I vehemently disagree. See below. – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:19
@wolf I have restored the title as voted by the community. As Paul has pointed out in related comments, as proposer you have one vote the same as everyone else. – James Jenkins Nov 27 '16 at 18:24
You weren't even following the proposal... how is this a "community" decision? I never even implied I had a supervote, but I do contest that this is a consensus or even communal decision. – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 18:25

Actually I would disagree. The term Anarchism is significantly broader than Stateless Societies. Where the first is naming an absence of ruler (or rule), the other refers to an absence of state. The interception between both might be considerable but I would argue the difference is still relevant.

To exemplify my point of view I would note that Anarchism does have a strong relation with "anti-authoritarian" philosophy. There are several possible sources for this "authority" other than a "State". This would include wealth inequality, social bias (gender, racial, religious, etc., discrimination), among others.

If the idea of this community is to explore all of the "faces" of self-governed societies I think the name Anarchism works better than Stateless Societies. I'm guessing it's the very common comparison between Anarchism and Chaos that served as original motivation for a change of name, but it seems to me that a disconnection with the historical background (admittedly quite colorful and sometimes giving rise to contradictory social ideologies) will prove detrimental in the long term.

You are supporting my position through example. – Paul Nov 9 '16 at 16:05
@Paul Could you elaborate? Are you saying this site is meant to be about societies without state? – armatita Nov 9 '16 at 16:07
This is the correct answer. The Q&A is not limited to discussions of state but of organizing without hierarchy (even within "state"). "Stateless Societies" pigeonholes those discussions. "SS" as a scope can't be much of a proposal... it would lead to endless "how does a flat society organize X centralized project?" questions. And armatita's point about social authority also stands—all of anarchism's rich history of equity-based proposals is lost by limiting Q&A to statelessness. – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:19
@wolf Every SE site will go beyond a narrow interpretation of its title. For example, Server Fault could be narrowly interpreted to mean the site is exclusively for error messages on servers. However, the actual description of the site includes pretty much everything related to management of IT systems in a business environment. The same can easily be true of this proposal. – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:27
@Paul, I don't think there is any confusion that Server Fault, Stack Overflow, and Arqade are not literal descriptors of their content, especially because they were only titled later after the theme was set. For the purposes of a proposal, the idea is to have the title suit the scope, which after this recent change, it does not – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:30
@wolf I suspect you are having issues with something that happens quite often when the founder of something disagrees with where the community wants to take itself. You are free to disassociate if you do not like it. – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:32
@Paul, five passing upvotes is as much "the community" decision as your personal introduction to anarchism is not patronizing. If you're not interested in building consensus, heed your own advice. – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 17:35
@wolf You are the one oblivious the history of Anarchism proposals here at Area 51. You can pretend it didn't happen and that you speak for some silent majority, but the activities observed here seem to be in dispute with your claims. – Paul Nov 27 '16 at 17:41

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .