Proposal: Anarchism

We're starting to bulk up on hypothetical questions about how anything centralized could happen when no one is in charge. The answers will always be imprecise and full of caveats and be primarily based on historical examples of how such scenarios have been handled in the past.

For that reason, I would suggest marking "how does a flat (non-hierarchical, anarchist, etc.) society build X centralized resource" as off-topic because the answer is either that the participants agree to do it together or they don't (and find another way to get the desired effect?)

Instead, I suggest we recommend rephrasing such questions as to what examples or proposals have addressed the need for X centralized resource—making them more historical than speculative questions.

This could also be just a subset of the issue of questions treating anarchist thought as a monolith (how do anarchists do X, etc.) – wolf Nov 27 '16 at 18:21

You seem to be suggesting that philosophers and proponents of stateless societies have been primarily (exclusively?) concerned only with the deeper philosophical implications of a society based on non-hierarchies.

Which I interpret to be claiming that nobody cared to address the practical issues of convincing real people that a stateless society would be superior to the one they are in right now.

Thus, these questions that you want to sum up into a single algo of some sort to point all similar questions at will achieve the result of never seriously considering the actual, practical implementation of the ideas discussed when applied to the modern world.

Not sure where you're reading a hostility to questions about practicality. All I suggested was a change in how we phrase "practicality" questions from open-ended and speculative (not ideal fit for Q&A) to questions about practiced examples (historical)... – wolf Nov 29 '16 at 19:11
@wolf If you want to limit only to historical examples, then you are rejecting all discussions of practical implementation in modern society. For example, there could be zero discussion of private roads in the U.S. The U.S. is almost exclusively public roads, and allowing only the discussion of technologically-obsolete private road networks from 100 years ago means there can be no discussion on theories of implementation. Yet, there are modern philosophers providing reasoned argumentation on this exact topic. I think when you say speculative, you mean "shooting from the hip" answers. not this. – Paul Nov 29 '16 at 20:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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