Anarchy is a political structure where there’s basically no one in charge, right? But wouldn’t that just create a power vacuum that would filled by organized crime, corporations, etc.? Then, after that power vacuum is filled, we’re right back at square one, and someone is in charge.

Are there any political theorists that have come up with a solution to this problem?

  • lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    The voting process was started not by an admin but a user.

    You are 100% misrepresenting what happened with the communities vote to push your biased narrative that it was undemocratic.

    And the staff are allowed to have their own opinions. They do not need to be stoic bastions of neutrality, they’re members of the site and get to argue their position as much as anyone else.

    Matter of fact is the majority of the community voted in favour of defederation, and not one user has proposed a vote for refederation.

    You may not like the result, but it was a 100% fair and open form of governance.

    • Asofon@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      You think the red A stands for Anarchism?

      Also you’re clearly not reading what I wrote so, not much point in replying further. I already covered the points you attempt to make.

      • lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The initiative was started by Draconic Neo, who made the post is irrelevant.

        I’ve read what you’ve said, and it’s clear you’re a dishonest shitstirrer than anyone with a legitimate complaint based on why factually happened.