Talk:Anarchism

Rolling back?
I'm unsure why you reverted my rollback. I don't want to get into an edit war so I'm bringing it up here. To me, it was an easy decision to roll it back as it was clearly ideologically motivated, created a broken link, and had multiple grammar and spelling errors. Am I missing a reason why it should stay on the page? armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 15:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it's a matter of Living Persons. Don't write anything that could potentially be libel unless you have very good citations about someone.  16:28, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I see. Mine was just a rollback, but that definitely makes sense. Still not a huge fan of where the page is at now in that section, so maybe just remove that paragraph entirely? armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 16:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Paragraph is clunky and needs rework. Point is that AnPrim requires billions of people to die, and that's even if it's workable in practice or stable after nearly everyone is gone.  That's not even getting into the issue of, well, we already know what happens when a primitive society meets a more technologically advanced society.  17:14, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ...and fix'd. 17:19, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, wasn't quite sure how to rework it. Looking good! armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 18:12, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

" The reality is that the Kurds' goal is Kurdistan"
thoughts: I am not here to argue that the Rojava project was anarchist (it was as much Bookchinism, as it was Maoist from my understanding.) There are many different Kurds, with many different stated goals. This section was specifically about Rojava tho. The people involved with the Rojava experiment were pretty explicit that they were attempting to live Abdualla Ocalan's system of Democratic Confederalism (it's outlined in a pretty hefty pamphlet, or super tiny book, that can easly be found on the internet for free if you wanna give it a read) clearly says they have moved on from the Maoist thrid world national liberation struggle (ie NOT trying to create an independent Kurdistan.) And believe that Democratic Confederalism could have spread from Rojava to Syria and Turkey, then the Middle East, the EU, and indeed to globe.

But then again people will say a lot of things to get support for what they really want, and may even be lying to themselves, so who knows. I just think that sentence was a little wack, and uninformed, but what do I know?

this is the only edit I am probably ever going to attempt to make to a wiki (talk page because, i really can't be bothered to be draged into anykind of potential edit war on a main page) all five of you infested in this subject, have at it yeah?, so meh, no user name. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 2600:1700:4e00:8590:7da9:925d:722b:b6e1 / talk
 * I actually a have academic papers on hand that seem to complicate the narrative regarding Rojava present in this article, but Rojava certainty isn’t anarchist in the strictest sense. The citation in our article seems to be from an opinion piece published in Al Jazeera, which would make me question the reliability somewhat. One for being an opinion piece, but also that Al Jazeera is a state-owned enterprise by the Qatari government that aligns itself with Turkey who are both opposed to the YPG and declare it a terrorist organization. Both nations provide support and ally against Rojava in the current Rojava-Islamist conflict.  - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 06:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

violence and terrorism and ferguson protests
no doubt there were some at those protests protesting violently and could be called anarchists. lots of other people too. no idea if prominent activists at those protests were anarchists. no idea if those activists who later died 'in suspicious circumstances' were anarchists. if i am being generous, and agree that they were anarchists, what are are trying to say here? that anarchism, or their activities in support of anarchism is got them killed? 2 years after the protests? if that were so, the association with the bomb throwers this section highlights is an unfair one, as they are victims of violence, not committing violence. if they were indeed anarchists, it is unknown if anarchism had anything to do their suspicious deaths. white supremacists seem like more probable candidates, if they were all killed as a response for their activities during those protests. certainly who their families suspect had a hand in. if indeed their is anything suspicious about their deaths. 2 murders, unsolved and and apparently unrelated otherwise, 4 suicides. grieving families say suspicious circumstances, at least one suicide disputed by their mother, in her words her son was 'lynched'. might be true, might be simply a grieving mother. just as likely the only thing suspicious about the deaths is a text book case of black lives not mattering to the police.

As it stands, there is nothing to say they were anarchists, nothing to suggest anarchism was in any way related to their deaths whether their deaths were to do with ferguson or not, and in any case they are the victims here. i removed this section as the anarchism angle is tenuous and linking to their deaths as somehow to do with anarchist terrorism just does not fly. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with the removal. It looks like that section was added in June 2020 by Tuxer.  14:22, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

The large scale problem section is not very good
The Dawn of Everything showed humans lived in decentralized large polities for millenia, also the section doesn't even tackle anarchism whatsoever. Its not very good and it needs to be removed

Please don't just unilaterally rewrite my edit
If anything you could add the bit that it's unknown if a confederation style of government could work without being under siege without rewriting my detailed description of the Zapatista political process. Carthage (talk) 03:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok I didn't see the edit summary. You're right that the Zapatistas probably deserve their own section, but I think my text should still be included as it is an accurate description of the Zapatista political process. Carthage (talk) 03:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * EC ok we need to stop talking past each other.
 * The section added isn't useless, but it's written as basically an advertisement for them. They'd be better off listed somewhere amongst the forms of anarchism, and I'd encourage you to do so.  In practice, the Zapatistas have some anarchist leanings, but also capitalist leanings, along with tribalism, etc etc, and currently exist in a constant state of war with the Mexican government.  This makes them similar to both Rojava and the Kibbutz systems, thus my rework.  03:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait a sec I'm adding your work to the allegedly anarchist section. 03:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That's an acceptable compromise. I added the section in the first place to make it less incomplete, as anarchists have written about this subject and there are practical resolutions to this critique. There also exist forms of anarchism that aren't incompatible with market economies, including mutualism and left-Rothbardism. I also think that neozapatismo itself needn't necessarily follow a classical Western model of anarchism to be "anarchist", and either way it's still libertarian socialist. While we're at it we should add an article on libertarian socialism to the to-do list, as it is a bit broader than either anarchism or libertarian Marxism, both being pretty broad labels (there are forms of anarchism that are practically just anti-authoritarian Marxism and forms of anarchism that are as mentioned above economically centrist.) Carthage (talk) 03:17, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That's an acceptable compromise. I added the section in the first place to make it less incomplete, as anarchists have written about this subject and there are practical resolutions to this critique. There also exist forms of anarchism that aren't incompatible with market economies, including mutualism and left-Rothbardism. I also think that neozapatismo itself needn't necessarily follow a classical Western model of anarchism to be "anarchist", and either way it's still libertarian socialist. While we're at it we should add an article on libertarian socialism to the to-do list, as it is a bit broader than either anarchism or libertarian Marxism, both being pretty broad labels (there are forms of anarchism that are practically just anti-authoritarian Marxism and forms of anarchism that are as mentioned above economically centrist.) Carthage (talk) 03:17, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I think if anything this critique of mass society is more of a critique of individualist anarchism than it is social anarchism. Also thanks. Carthage (talk) 03:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Conflict avoided, hooray. I'm tempted to add the Kibbutz systems to the allegedly-anarchist section, though every wiki is nervous around the Topic That Shall Not Be Named.  03:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)