Hi. Welcome to the site. Please check out the About Us, and if you have a question about crime and/or punishment, perhaps look at some previous questions along those lines first.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Categories

0 votes
I'm a little confused but I guess I'm starting to understand more. I guess I was grouping "leaders, masters, and rulers" into the same category: Tyrants yet lately, I've noticed more people talking about leadership within an Anarchist organization.

From what I understand, Anarchism isn't opposed to leadership, as long as it is consensual, horizontal, non-oppressive, and the leader is viewed as more of a 'father figure' than a master.

So where is the line drawn? What makes leadership okay and then what makes it a contradiction of Anarchism?
by
"So where is the line drawn? What makes leadership okay and then what makes it a contradiction of Anarchism?"

It isn't a contradiction with anarchism. This is what the idea of free association is about. If people need leaders, then they ought to be able to choose them without coercion. Where leadership would become bad is when people are coerced to follow. Anarchism is full of leaders. Sometimes the leaders are writers, sometimes the leaders are in practical parts of life.

1 Answer

0 votes
by (8.9k points)
...