OK I read the article two things I have to say. WTF. And how absolutely we have a term for it. But after that it was a great read. But comparing it its still fucked up
Because most people use the word anarchy for a society without rules and without order. Right of the strongest, 365 days The Purge or something like that. But anarchism isn’t about that, but about a peaceful way of living without hierarchies and rulers. I was sure, that is not, what OP meant.
My question was about OP’s use of the term. Why do you think he misused it? “What do we do if X happens” —> “anomie is different from anarchy” seems like a non sequitur.
As I wrote before, I think OP meant to ask what happens if the US falls into a state of anomy. Nearly everybody who talks about that, uses the word anarchy instead, which is wrong.
That would be pretty nice to see functioning anarchic societies. You are using the wrong term, you mean anomy.
I think we will get a bit of a taste of that in the next years.
OK I read the article two things I have to say. WTF. And how absolutely we have a term for it. But after that it was a great read. But comparing it its still fucked up
Why do you say anomie instead of anarchy is the term OP should be using?
Because most people use the word anarchy for a society without rules and without order. Right of the strongest, 365 days The Purge or something like that. But anarchism isn’t about that, but about a peaceful way of living without hierarchies and rulers. I was sure, that is not, what OP meant.
My question was about OP’s use of the term. Why do you think he misused it? “What do we do if X happens” —> “anomie is different from anarchy” seems like a non sequitur.
As I wrote before, I think OP meant to ask what happens if the US falls into a state of anomy. Nearly everybody who talks about that, uses the word anarchy instead, which is wrong.
Should be clear enough now, I hope.
Why do you think he was wrong? He didn’t say anything that suggested he didn’t know the definition of anarchy.
We had somalia