a group of people, communicate their ideas, reach a consensus on whether it should or shouldn’t be done, if people agree then they organise themselves into a group to accomplish the task

That's exactly how the state as a concept came into existence. How are we not currently living in the consequence of what people reached out of anarchy? It seems like we are already living what anarchists suppose will happen in an anarchist society.

It’s actually kinda rare for people to use coercive violence to get people to cooperate.

looks at human history What?

cooking at a community gathering or working at a restaurant

What does that have to do with anarchism?

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm super exhausted but you're wrong about the state. The modern nation state comes out of the directorate post French revolution, and the proto state going back to like Ur and other early cities in Mesopotamia was based off slave taking by warriors primarily, enabled by appropriation of grain. Anthropologist James C Scott writes about this a fair bit, he's notably not an anarchist btw if that affects assessment of bias.

re coercive violence: I mean it in the sense that it is something individuals don't spend much time doing. Obviously when you look at millions of people over decades it happens but it is much much less common than consensus seeking. Think of the ?millions? of interactions people have and how few involve violence or the threat thereof.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What you misunderstand is that the same thinking you want to apply now lead to these first cities. They thought that was consensus then as well. We only in hindsight decided that, for example, it is unjust if people are enslaved or not allowed to vote. It still started with communities making up their rules and these grew. It's the same thing as what anarchists are proposing is the way to do it.

You just have to look at any society without police and a legislative to see that they all oppress those who are perceived as weaker. Usually it is kids and women who don't have rights in these communities.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

no they didn't. They built walls to stop the population fleeing into the surrounding hills.

Re police I think you should look into the history of them. Peelan policing as an ideal has some neat ideas but it was still essentially a compromise with aristocracy. It's very interesting.

No police doesn't mean no safety shit. I have arthritic thumbs and my dog is freaking out in storm, Angela Davis writes interesting things about modern cops if curious. a bit usa centric but interesting nonetheless.

[–] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 3 points 1 year ago

You need to revisit your anthropology. Complex societies like chiefdoms and states arise with the ability to own and accumulate private property which in turn leads to the ability to control resources.

I'm not an anarchist and don't know a lot about it, I just think it is important to discuss the matter on a sound factual basis.