I don't believe you need a state for anarchy or any centralized positions that give authority of power.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I don't believe you need a state for anarchy or any centralized positions that give authority of power.
I agree, but the question is how do we get from here and now - the real world of capitalist relations - to that point in the future where hierarchy and centralised power is no longer necessary? It just seems a little too optimistic to believe that if we abolished the state tomorrow, and left people to free associate, that they would automatically starting behaving and organising in a non-hierarchical way.
That's what I mean when I say anarchism has no viable revolutionary theory - there is no serious discussion, as far as I am aware, of how to make these ideas flourish in the real world. In my opinion, democratic state socialism is the required stepping stone between these ideal and actual worlds.
I think we need to educate in decentralized blockchain systems. Then start slowly replacing what we have with decentralized systems. Perhaps building crypto capitalistic/socialistic/communistic or whatever systems designed to run along side state systems and eventually absorb/moot them.
That's an interesting thought! I certainly think blockchain will be an essential technological tool for ensuring that societies of the future can act in a completely democratic way - at the economic and the social level. I just wonder how long things can continue on their current trajectory before the governments and institutions of the world start to seriously limit blockchain's potential. Centralised power still holds all the cards and isn't likely to give them up without a fight...
We can sneak the systems in. Let's say I start a blockchain ecosystem aimed at replacing local government services. They wouldn't be able to turn the system off, or know who uses it (depending on how it is set up). So they can't directly attack the blockchain or users.
They could attack and block the services provided depending on the physicality of these services.
If this is based in the UK for example where they are constantly cutting services, increasing deaths, crime, etc. The systems would be designed to replace and moot the local failing government services (this wouldn't be its stated goal though). It would start by picking up the slack in slashed budgets, and run along side, and once it becomes a vital needed part of the local infrastructure, trying to stop it becomes a problem, as you have an area depending on it, and the alternative is the government who will just continuously cut services. No one wants that.