79
Solarpunk
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2026
79 points (67.9% liked)
Memes
56790 readers
604 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
How authority is defined and how Engels actually logically provides an answer to the question whether organization without authority is possible
A short 'logical' essay can give any answer in an abstract sense, but that doesn't discount empirical examples.
Always seemed to me like Engels begs the question, takes "anarchy = chaos" as a starting assumption.
Empirical examples... that you have not provided?
It's trivially easy to think of examples of "organisation without authority" in nature, in history, in software.
Provide a trivially easy example that you can think of (in the concrete sense) and let's examine it together
You provide one, you have a brain, you don't need me to spoonfeed you.
I provided you not only one, but two (cotton spinning wheel and railway example), assuming you're familiar with Engels text.
I see you're either scared to be challenged ideologically or it's not as trivially easy as you make it seem to be.
No, those aren't examples of "organisation without authority"; they're the opposite.
I only see two possibilities –
Brother in Christ if this is your reading comprehension I'm not sure how to help you. I'm arguing with Engels here: Meaning organization without authority isn't possible. How the fuck do you expect me to provide an example of organization without authority if it's not something I believe in dipshit?
Ok bye
"How the fuck do you expect me to use my brain when my beliefs are in the way?!?"
I expected exactly this tbh. You even admit that it's your "beliefs" that blind you to the examples we see all around us. No point talking to a hostile deadminded Believer.
I don't have any ownership of the point, it's not mine, it's common-sense.
If it's common sense and trivially easy to understand why can't you just explain it to us?
Youse have already answered that: because Beliefs stop you from seeing.
Sounds like it's not trivially easy to understand OR common sense.
It sounds more like your beliefs prevent you from engaging in good faith.
Got it, thanks.
You're welcome!
Also gotta say your performance in this thread was like watching a 13 year old squirm getting caught lying about their report card.
Don't see how you got that. I would rather not spend my time on 'please argue with me on the internet' people, especially when their starting point is mental incapacity ("I am unable to think of [easy to think of thing]!"). That's all I have said. Why would I wish to argue with them?
Hope you're having a great day.
"Prove my point for me"
Such as?