pull down to refresh
I agree. What I described as Democratic Society is not a term invented by me.
It comes from Abdullah Ocalan, who founded the PKK and laid the foundation for the most successfull anarchist project I know, Rojava. It's the opposite of a State, which is oppressive in nature. Democratic Society like agorism, of which the highest form is voluntary trade, it happens everywhere and has always existed.
But this doesn't mean that it's indestructible. Humanism, Basic Communism, Agorism how ever you want to call it, can be strong or weak. Todays atomisation of society, social media etc. weaken it imo., so it's something we need to work towards and earn it's place. Just like our ancestors did it.
I hope you understand better, but I appreciate your feedback and opinion.
System D is just infrastructure, not a third flag. I personally would not spend much time on the name: “Democratic Society,” “free society,” “liberating society”, IMO, the moment it needs a capital-letter title, it starts wanting the things a state wants: a border, someone in charge of the story, etc.
Neuwirth’s point is the opposite. It already has rules. They are unwritten, local, and enforced by people who still have to see each other tomorrow.
Cohesion, yes. Self-defence, yes, but the first defence is not a militia. It is reputation that cannot be seized and logistics that do not need a licence... That is why “the masses can safely invest in existing Monero businesses” is the right next problem: building the rails so a normie can use Monero :)