I don’t know a single real anarchist that believes that they can do whatever they want
Anarchists believe that chaos is actually a quite eloquent sense of natural order (as there is actually no real randomness in nature)
The philosophical axiom is that any sense of controlling the natural (and seemingly chaotic order) is to act as an authoritarian
In chaotic systems, anarchists expect that most people will act 1) rationally and largely in their self interest (for more on self-interest, see “advanced game theory”)
But the anarchist ALSO assumes this- that their opt in is 𝘝𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘺 and this offers them the promise of a consensual society- that they can enter and exit any system as they please.
The macro anarchist view anticipates that anything against the natural order of things will be weighed as revolting and opted out of (intuitively) and thus only a very small minority would express tolerance for anything repugnant to the natural order of things.
IN EVERY SINGLE universe, profiteering on the anticipated sexual abuse of children is reprehensible and against the natural order of things. You do not need a religious or cultural context to understand this- it is self-evident in our human biology (aka our hardware constraints)
Ask every single philosophically sound anarchist what they think about child sex abuse material and I think you will find that 9.5/10 vehemently disagree with aiding and abetting even the plausibility of its expression
Replies (15)
12 protects pedophiles.
The average anarchist would publicly execute these sick fucks.
This is so well-put and succinct.
Nicely done
Thanks! 😊
Any act that involves the exploitation of a person incapable of giving consent and that causes structural harm is incompatible, it’s simple
Who’s volunteering to be the 0.5 in 9.5/10 people? 😂
lol that’s why I gave them a half. They are subhuman.
?🤔
Maybe it's just intentionally distorted optics, but I don't fucking understand when people say anarchism is nothing but pure chaos. Makes me think they just took some talking heads opinion and didn't actually do any reading.
Agree
"promise of a consensual society- that they can enter and exit any system as they please" how about selling yourself, is your body truly yours if you cannot sell it? If I sold myself and change my mind because now I'm a slave I can simply break agreement?
As to children. At what time does child turn into adult? Is a child property of parents or does child own itself?
1) currently, in modern history a person turns into a intellectual adult roughly around 26-27 years old when they shift out high risk v reward mindset into low time preference, second order thinking so long as their prefrontal cortex has properly developed - brain imaging supports this finding, no religious or cultural context necessary
2) in order for any individual to enter a truly sovereign marketplace, they must do so with the capacity for self-driven informed consent - small children do not have this capacity as they are in a concrete stage of brain development that does not scale for abstract predatory thought (ie, when we are children we believe we are much more intelligent than we are until we get into our 30s and understand we knew nothing at all)
3) adults are welcome to sell themselves in agorist marketplaces - see above
4) it is not the expectation that children *will not* attempt this same behavior and that the all the infinite possible channels for this type of behavior will stop being possible, it IS the expectation that appropriately developed adults will not create demand for this content and/or interactive behavior (particularly with prepubescent children and younger)- causing the market to be DOA (dead on arrival) and thus, poor functioning (rather than thriving as it does today)
Next subject.
Who is to decide at what age people own themselvesm? Is there a test or something like that so we know which 26y old person cannot decide over themselves and which 27y can decide over themselves?
Under your thinking does 18y old own itself or is property of parents?
Age is a cultural context… you are stuck in the weeds of a circular axiom- that age would be the defining feature of abuse. It is not.
I will spare you the vicarious trauma of explaining what happens to a minor child’s body when they are raped by an adult who is too big for them… most of society is largely shielded from this information because people like me remain largely outside of public exposure.
If you are a computer programmer, you do not question the logic that an HDMI does not fit a USB C input, the action of interacting with those concepts (inputs and outputs) are self-evident in their design
If violence or coercion (inherent in predatory like behaviors) has been part of an interaction, it is self-evident in the outcome.
Being 18y old can you decide about yourself or not? Can you sell your body at that age or not?
I do not understand where you are deriving the context of age as being the defining mechanism for when an individual can make sovereign decisions
Let me ask you something: when can a CurrentUser make sovereign decisions on a computer. When the current user is smart enough to bypass the restricted authorization access on their terminals programmed Execution Policy.
When a human can do that on their own internal hardware sys, they probably have enough autonomy and decision making ability to participate in a free and agorist society without self or societal imposed limits.
18 years on the Roman calendar may or may not be a demographic overlap for that individual
