Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.

Categories

How would a country sized anarchy (without hierarchy) keep intelligence secrets from states?

–1 vote
What about strategic secrets that essential to keep the communities? Would this lead to hierarchy?
by (340 points)
a "country sized anarchy"?

why would such an idea have any relevance (or appeal)? mass and scale are so much a part of the problem with modern human ways, i would surely not want to reproduce that in any anarchist world i inhabit.
by (13.4k points)
hide your passwords! gaurd the food pit!
by
Because we can reach anarchism "in one country", like Iberia; for example, with anarchosindicalism. But after one state is death we should organize anarchy to deal with the other states. So, how would you deal with spies without being in disadvantage, because you can not hide every strategic secret by telling all?

The communes could be confederated.
by (340 points)

"So, how would you deal with spies without being in disadvantage, because you can not hide every strategic secret by telling all?"

what do you mean by "telling all"?  do you think that because one is an anarchist, they cannot keep strategic (or any other kind of) information to themselves? i reject that idea outright. as i reject the idea that keeping sensitive (ie, potentially highly impactful) information away from others is akin to hierarchy. of course it can lead to a hierarchical situation; but then so can so many other things. non-hierarchical social relations do not imply some universal "equality" (which is a bogus concept to begin with, imo).

it seems highly unlikely to me that any spread of anarchy would be somehow restricted or expanded by national/state borders.

 

"But after one state is death we should organize anarchy to deal with the other states. "

so your intent from the get-go is to have anarchy take over the world? not sharing strategic information is (potentially) hierarchical, but imposing anarchy is not? i hope i have misunderstood.

don't get me wrong, i would love to live in a world where everyone lives anarchically. but i know that a substantial percentage of humans do not want to live as such; and it would take generations to suss out how much of that is socially/culturally ingrained, vs authentic individual desire. i have no desire to force others to live anarchically. i just don't want them preventing me from doing so.

by (13.4k points)

Do you think that because one is an anarchist, they cannot keep strategic (or any other kind of) information to themselves?

No, I think that to win a war there's a need of intelligence, and intelligence with secrets would be hierarchical as you say. The other way, it would be easy that they steal our information for the survival of the communes, wouldn't it?

So your intent from the get-go is to have anarchy take over the world? not sharing strategic information is (potentially) hierarchical, but imposing anarchy is not? I hope I have misunderstood.

My intent is that people have anarchy if they want of course, but the privileged class isn't going to give us that right, so we have to take it. When it is done in one country, how would you deal with the other states that wouldn't want the communes to exist? How would you solve the problem of the intelligence to not being hierarchical?

I'm not asking if it's better a "permanent anarchist revolution" or "anarchism in one country" like Trotsky vs Stalin plot, just in the case of "anarchism in one country".

by (340 points)
but the problem with your question is that anarchists reject statehood itself, which would completely change the way war was fougth from the beginning. "State secrets" so many different anti-anarchist things...if i was going to raid some other group or something with my friends, and none of us were just submissively going along with it, we would not want to tell the enemy about it, and protection of secrets in this regard would be just like protection of secrets in any normal life situation
by
Well I don't see any gains in spying on an anarchist society, unless the anarchists in the community had invented something new or had advanced technologically or medicinally, and even then I'm pretty sure anarchists would want to share those things throughout the world. The only way I'd see them not wanting to share would be because corporations would want to steal that and make profit off of it, so in that case they'd need to take the necessary precautions to keep it safe.
by (110 points)

Please log in or register to answer this question.

Powered by Question2Answer
...