this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
932 points (98.2% liked)

Memes

53498 readers
370 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago (81 children)

Some cases need binding control, especially related to industrial environments and hazardous working conditions. We develop methods of organizing and structuring ourselves often because it's useful, not because it benefits the person with a broader scope of responsibility, kinda like strategians vs tacticians. Those in these positions can be elected, chosen based on merit, etc, and will serve for greater prosperity than had these positions been avoided out of a moral objection to hierarchy.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net -5 points 1 month ago (8 children)

... and you refuse to understand again.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I understand, I just disagree with you.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

No, you refuse to understand what anarchists understand as authority (just like Engels did).

It's been explained enough to you already that I can rule out anything but refusal to understand.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, I have heard and understand your explanations, I just disagree with them. I used to be an anarchist myself, you aren't explaining anything foreign to me.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, I have heard and understand your explanations

You've clearly not understood the definitions. If you don't engage with the definitions, you can't seriously engage with the arguments.

I used to be an anarchist myself

Obviously, not one with a clear grasp on anarchism, if you think that the only anarchist objection to hierarchy is "moral" in nature.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I do understand the definitions, again, I disagree with your arguments. Simple as that. As for being a former anarchist, I know that anarchists don't only object to hierarchy on moral grounds, but the way you framed it made it seem as such.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I do understand the definitions, again

Again: I disagree with your assumption that you do. If you really do, then you refuse to engage with them on purpose, which is worse.

I don't see any pointein carrying on this conversation. I've stated my point. I expect you to write your final "nuh-uh!" without any signs of will that you actually want to engage in any discussion, but I will not further engage, because I see talking to you pointless.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I tried to have a conversation, and all you did was refuse to respond while insulting me. I doubt I could have done anything to convince you I was willing to have a conversation beyond just lying and saying I agreed with you, so I do agree that us speaking seems to be pointless.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net -4 points 1 month ago
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (77 replies)