• rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    16 days ago

    Do the government and the police protect us, though? I’d like to request some proof of the basic premise.

    (Not from you personally, but as a counter-argument)

    • dustycups@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      Slavery is illegal?
      I know there are failures everywhere (eg American prison system) but without the threat of state sponsored violence and a rules based system we get the worst kind of corruption.
      I’d rather live in Finland than Russia.

        • dustycups@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          That’s why a rules based system is also needed.
          Police in Finland also have guns (I assume) but they the rules they follow are the written law, not what the “boss” says.
          People will always self organise. If we don’t have a formal representative democracy with all its quirky conventions (like not having the opposition assassinated) we end up with mob rule or tyranny. That might protect some but, in my opinion, allows less freedom for ordinary people.

          • dustycups@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 days ago

            PS: The level of actual violence isn’t relevant to any of this. A dictator, or a government, that is in full control only need the threat of violence.

  • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    I think the more common problem for most of us is how would you protect yourself from a government than how would you protect yourself without a government, you don’t need to replace a cancer with anything once it’s cured.

    You can still build organization and specialized jobs within anarchy and without a state government, political parties, etc. Look at anarcho-syndicalism, synthesis anarchism, federated associations, and platformism with principles in decentralization and free association without coercion.

    • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      16 days ago

      People have short memories. The reason the “government” exists in the first place was because everyone agreed that it was better with it, and it turns out people are shitty and they’re going to abuse you to the maximum extent of their physical ability if nothing is there to stop them.

      This “organization” you talk about is literally just government. Sorry you don’t understand the system that was painstakingly set up for you over the last couple thousand years through bloody trial and error.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        That’s absolutely not where government came from. Though I guess if you think government is just any group of people cooperating for any reason then maybe kind of but still not really.

        • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          You have two roads that need to get built and nobody wants to wait. Who gets their road first? There is no escaping the necessity of having a decision maker.

  • drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    How would I protect myself without a government or police? The same way I do now where I work for free and the police don’t show up when I call them.

    The only thing the government does for me personally is coordinate infrastructure projects and even that they’re horrible at.

    (Jutland, Denmark)

  • dumblederp@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    16 days ago

    By not being a shitty person and contributing to my community in such a way that they’d stand together should any of us need protection.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    16 days ago

    The aim is a world where people don’t need to commit antisocial acts to get their needs met. In practice, violence exists because capitalism creates the incentive to commit violence.

  • Comrade Spood@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    16 days ago

    How does the state/police/etc protect me now? They are reactive, they only come after the crime is committed. The time I needed protection and help was 10-20 minutes ago. It would be a lot more efficient to take the resources that go to police and instead put them to use addressing reasons for crime like access to food, shelter, education, and healthcare, breaking down toxic societal issues like misogyny, ableism, queerphobia, toxic masculinity, racism, etc, and establishing effective conflict resolution. And as a last resort having a community defense, where everyone participates in the protection of the community, not just a militarized elite.

    That would be my response.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    I feel like this question comes from a place of extreme privilege. It assumes that people somehow benefit from state violence, when the opposite is true for the vast majority of people. Imagine how wacky this question sounds to a poor black teenager in USA or a Palestinian or most people on the planet.

    Here’s a better question: How do people protect themselves from the government/state/police?

    There is literally no protection. Maybe money and social privilege.

  • SolarPunker@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Policemen aren’t here to protect you, they mostly limit your freedom, and when you’d actually need help it’s mostly a problem caused by governments oppression in the first place.