For example, a thief steals a loaf of bread and the owner of the store can gather a mob to lynch a thief. Anarchy has the great potential to administer unproportional justice.

You shouldn’t come into an anarchist community and start answering questions about anarchism when you clearly haven’t done your homework.

But hey, since OP is interested in how anarchy would work, let’s go over how such a society would respond to the scenario that you’ve painted. Vigilante justice is never impossible in any society, but that doesn’t mean it would be tolerated. The requirement to have disputes arbitrated by a neutral third party is pretty universal. What differentiates anarchy is that arbiters are freely chosen by (possibly delegated) mutual agreement, instead of the state forcibly inserting itself into every dispute as the supreme arbiter.

Let’s say the thief was a member of a commune. Since the thief is dead, their dispute with the baker and the lynch mob can be claimed by their next of kin, or closest equivalent. Either way, we’ll say that the dispute gets delegated to the commune as a whole, which collectively handles security and dispute resolution for its members.

The baker has a contract with a company (probably organized as a workers cooperative) that offers security and dispute resolution services. For simplicity, let’s say that the members of the lynch mob also use this company’s services.

The commune and the company might have different sets of rules that their members agree to, but it’s reasonable to assume that they both recognize:

• The thief should not have stolen the bread, as it was a product of the baker’s labor and was not being offered for free. While the commune functions primarily via gift economy, they defer to local norms in these situations.
• The baker would be entitled to restitution for both the stolen bread and the costs necessary to secure that restitution
• Killing the thief to stop them from stealing in the moment would have been a wildly disproportionate response
• This was not merely done as an act of immediate defense, but an act of retribution
• The baker made no attempt to resolve this dispute through a neutral third party
• The members of the lynch mob all acted as accomplices to the murder

From there it’s just a matter of negotiating what restitution is owed to whom. Perhaps the commune and the company can’t come to an agreement on what exactly is owed, so they agree to defer to a neutral arbiter of their own. They may both be members of a local federation of dispute resolution bodies, which would simplify handling this.

Agreed. Anarchists often find US liberals incredibly frustrating to deal with, for some good reasons. A lot of that comes from them being one side of the status-quo ideology, in that both US liberals and US conservatives are descended from classical liberals. They’ve tended to resist scrutinizing most of their received wisdom because they largely haven’t needed to.

However, they’re currently more likely to be receptive to our ideas than they’ve ever been before. Some will end up being “go along to get along” Good Germans. Many others, possibly even a majority are somewhere between nervous and terrified about the future right now, and would welcome new ideas on how to deal with the situation.

They may not be ready to fully switch ideologies, but that’s something that depends on a more gradual background process. If we can refrain from anarcho-purism and meet people where they are, we can make a lot of progress and put ourselves in a much better position to survive and resist.

Ah yes, the “good German” strategy. It may or may not actually work for you.

Liberal democracy has been decaying for a while, so this result was going to happen sooner or later. If we don’t want to be dragged backwards into autocracy and feudalism, then anarchism is the path forward.

The electoral system is so focused on the specific immediate task at hand, the election these people were hired to win (and working people to the bone doing it), that there’s never any room to step back and build something long-term. No one is planning for the Democratic party five or ten years from now (at least, not in a way that affects local organizing) because that’s ten or twenty times as long as the average staffer is expected to last. The feeling seems to be that every minute spent planning for something further out than the next election is a minute not spent working on winning the next election.

So, when I get on my anarchist high horse now and talk about how we need to spend our time, energy, and money on something other than electoral politics, it’s not the voting part that upsets me. It’s all this bullshit. Every election, we have to burn out all our most promising organizers in six months because there was no infrastructure for them to build on, and they have to make it all from scratch every time. It’s like we’re working extra hard to pay off our last payday loan, then taking out a new payday loan at the end, ensuring we’ll have to do the same thing over again next time.

I feel like this part bears emphasizing, given the arguments over it that I’ve seen recently. I’m aggressively neutral on the question of whether or not anarchists should vote. The hour or less per year that an individual anarchist may spend on voting just doesn’t matter. Almost all the waste of electoralism is in the time, energy, and money spent on campaigning, and having nothing to show for it afterwards if your candidate loses.

On the other side, if a fellow anarchist doesn’t want to vote, fighting with them about it isn’t worth the social cohesion cost. Even if you see value in voting as a rearguard action, we’re not a big enough bloc for their non-voting to really matter.

Are the liberals going to stop being annoying if anarchists write enough impassioned comments about how voting is in fact NOT infinitesimally good, but is ACTUALLY infinitesimally bad?

Seriously y’all, move on. This doesn’t matter. You definitely have better things to do with your time, even if it’s just idle leisure. Go, be free. Let anarchist voting discourse chain you no more.

At what point will anarchists stop bikeshedding about voting?

Apparently we need Leninists to tell us how to be anarchists. It’s a good thing TheOubliette is here to show us the light and encourage us to enlighten ourselves by reading theory that Marx, Lenin, and other comrades have so generously blessed us with. /s

Funny enough, the highest concentration of actual anarchists I’ve seen is on hexbear

Good joke, comrade.

Hexbear anarchists are sus, all two of them. I won’t say they’re categorically not anarchists, but I’m going to be automatically suspicious of any anarchist that loves hanging out with Leninists.

I miss 90’s techno-libertarian utopianism. A little naive in retrospect, but I’m holding out hope that it’ll still have some relevance going forward.

Ah, gotcha. Those are one-time passwords. Same acronym, so it’s easy to confuse them.

But yeah, I agree that everything should use (T)OTP for two-factor authentication, instead of SMS messages. The later mainly provides a false sense of security and presents only a minor hurdle for attackers to overcome.

One time pads or bust motherfuckers.

Not sure if you’re being facetious, but one time pads are for encryption, not authentication. They’re also impractical (and overkill) for most purposes.

You might find this helpful: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/12/user-generated-content-and-fediverse-legal-primer

Like I said, they have to maintain their own patch to make that work, which needs to be updated for each new Lemmy version. It’s not something that mainline Lemmy will do.

then I really will not get into it.

Bet.

If this is your idea of being “sex positive” then I really do not want to get into this argument. I can guess this will quickly play out to any objection as “pearl clutching” and I will stick to the point that your attitude is completely dehumanizing and that there is nothing “positive” about reducing sex to the mechanical/physical act.

DEHUMANIZING? Seriously? I guess you actually are a SWERF. You clearly have no claim to the label “sex positive”. Why would you even want to identify as such?

The view I expressed here is consistent with how sex workers view themselves. Sex work is work. They’re just doing a job. They don’t want to be “rescued” by moralizing radfems. They want more pay and better working conditions, the same as most workers.

Like I said in the first comment, if you feel so strongly about this, go ahead and create your own and see how far it goes. When you start putting some Skin In The Game you will get more credibility or at least accept that things are Just Not That Simple.

And as I’ve said, I’m definitely interested in doing that. If you know of any IT people that want to work on such a project, send them my way. I’ve got experience with programming, leadership, and community building to bring to the table.

Given your attitude regarding (more than just performative) sex positivity though, I’m not sure why you’re egging me on here.

You lamented the fact that unlogged users can not see it and that they can not be found as easily. This is the same as “make it available to the public without any type of check”.

Behold! (nsfw) - no login required, just an “are you 18+?” prompt, which is pretty standard. You can also search for NSFW communities without logging in. If you’re being more moralistic about this than Reddit is, you’re probably taking it too far.

Sexuality != Porn

Porn ∈ Sexuality. Also, I intentionally used a broader term here, because what I’m advocating for is expansive, not restricted to just porn. For example, I miss r/bdsmcommunity and r/sex, which are discussion-only. However, you don’t get those kinds of communities growing in a place as structurally and culturally prudish as the threadiverse.

“toxicity” is dose-dependent.

Yeah, porn is about on par with video games in that regard. Yet we (rightly) don’t suppress gaming communities here.

You don’t see young people destroying their lives because they were promised they could make a lot of money by knitting sweaters or working as electricians, but cases of vulnerable women who regret getting into sex work are infinite.

C’mon, don’t get all SWERFy on me now. That regret is a direct result of (drum roll)… sex negative culture! (And capitalist labor exploitation.)

“If you think sex workers ‘sell their bodies,’ but coal miners do not, your view of labor is clouded by your moralistic view of sexuality.”

Look, I want a world in which, to the extent that jobs continue to be a thing, acting in commercial porn is just as normal and unremarkable as any other job, and people don’t get all judgy about it. Same (hopefully robust) labor protections too. We don’t get to there without abandoning pearl-clutching attitudes towards the resulting product, among other things.

You seem to be implying that I’m arguing something that I’m not? This thread started with me lamenting that piefed.social accounts are prohibited from accessing NSFW communities, and inquiring whether feddit.online would have the same policies. Along with some commentary on the general state of the threadiverse’s culture.

Note that I haven’t asked either admin to host said communities, and I specifically acknowledged the caching issue. Nor am I advocating for them to be treated on absolutely equal footing; they’re specially marked so that people who don’t want to see them can filter them out, which I think is a good thing.

what do you think will happen if you create an online space and put a big billboard saying “here you will always be free to share your NSFW content”?

If you’re specifically advertising it as focused on that, then that’s likely what you’ll get. If you allow NSFW but don’t center it, you’ll end up with something like Reddit, Twitter, or pre-ban Tumblr. While there are things to criticize about those sites, very little of it has to do with porn.

Content discovery of porn should not be as easy and it should not be trivialized under the pretense of “sex positivity”.

Why? That absolutely sounds like a sex-negative attitude to me. It’s treating sexuality as something toxic that needs to be suppressed and hidden even from those that are interested in seeing it. Sex positivity means treating sexuality as a normal thing that is not unusual for people to be interested in.

Every one wants to talk about supportive they are on sex positivity until some men in uniform knocks on their doors because they are running a website that is available for minors all around the world.

Are you speaking from first-hand experience, or is this conjecture? At least in the US, complying with the law isn’t that difficult.

Also, I don’t even want to get in the discussion of “sex positivity” being associated with “easily available porn”.

That’s an odd way to avoid discussing it. Do you think the availability of porn (or prohibition thereof) within an online space has no effect on what kind of culture develops there?

I’ve considered it, but my skillset isn’t really suited to it as a solo project. I can write code, and I have a reasonable understanding of the human factors side of things, but my IT skills are lacking. I’d be happy to join a team of like-minded people undertaking such a project, though.

It’s not that I want the threadiverse to deliver porn to me. I’m capable of finding that myself. It’s that I like sex-positive culture and think it’s a good thing for humanity overall.

As I noted, my complaint isn’t about any specific instance admin. Individually, no one should be required to host or cache anything that they don’t want to. However, the overall trend of blocking NSFW communities is still concerning, and we should advocate for admins to not do that where feasible.

The design decision to hide NSFW communities from logged-out users also plays a part here. Community discovery is bad enough as it is, and this makes it even worse. Last I checked, lemmynsfw was having to maintain their own patch to fix it, and keep updating it as new lemmy versions are released. Kbin and PieFed also copied this behavior, and I assume Mbin inherited it.