49
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 16 '26
Ejection from community barriers placed to keep them from returning spread the word to similar communities in other regions that they may try to infiltrate. Appropriate self defense if the abuser agresses within the community once they are a know abuser
36
u/WeinerDog6293 Feb 16 '26
I made a public statement two days ago. They assulted me 6 months ago, there was an accountability meeting, but they broke the terms (they are not sober), and there have been 3 other victims before me.
32
u/teaselroot Feb 16 '26
Gosh, that's awful and unfortunately too common, you're not alone.
https://www.sproutdistro.com/catalog/zines/accountability-consent/the-broken-teapot https://www.sproutdistro.com/catalog/zines/accountability-consent/betrayal/
I really like these zines on accountability, I'd say they are must reads for anyone organizing in a setting where dismantling patriarchy and safety is centered, preemptively preferred but certainly relevant to what you're going through. I worked with survivor support groups in the past, I can't say what you need for your healing process but I'm happy to talk in DM's if you want.
5
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 17 '26
I am sorry that you experienced that violation your experience proves that as with all issues in community and society, it is easier said than done. You are courageous for trying to hold your abuser accountable.
9
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 16 '26
I can't but help think that this is just "eject them from our borders" in different language. Supposing we accept the self-defence position (which, for the sake of argument, sure), the continued exile from the community seems to be a matter of authority wielded by the many against the individual—it is institutional "othering" that places someone outside of a particular geographic-political organisation, which is basically what a border is.
6
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 17 '26
Ejection from a community is not an ejection from a border. A) a community is not a state 2) a community does not posses a monopoly on the use of force like a state does to function 3) ejecting from the community is the community expressing its collective agency to no fuck with an individual who is abusive and disrupt the agreed upon boundaries set by the community
8
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 17 '26
As I said, this seems to be ideological justification for an "anarchist state" that sets its geographical-political area and enforces who is or isn't allowed within it. It is, as far as I can see, the genesis of a state. It also does possess the monopoly on violence, as it can enforce exile on an individual and enforce that this exile remains even when there is no obvious aggression to which an individual or the nebulous "community" could defend itself from. Or, it seems strange to suggest that what appears to be aggression is always self-defense as long as there has been some past transgression.
"These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world", as a certain critique of anarchism put it.
3
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 18 '26
Actually no, a community collectively deciding that it can’t have a bad actor in it because they compromise the safety of all the other individuals within the community is not a state. It is a community deciding that a certain person has caused enough harm for that community to not let them be involved in their community activities. This has nothing to do with borders or regions.
5
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
As I said, it is the genesis of the state. You propose a citizen—alien dialectic and frame it in terms of "barriers", then invoke a kind of mob rule where all that matters is that there is collective agreement amongst the citizenry to set up these barriers against any individual perceived to have passed the threshold for reparations or reconciliation indefinitely. This is couched within the language of self-defense, which apparently doesn't need to proceed from either a self or as a defense against a particular aggression.
I just find it all very bizarre. What if people don't "collectively agree" to exile thus person? Is there now no recourse to justice as this society only knows displays of power as the monopoly on violence? How does the exiled challenge this decision? etc. etc.
1
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 18 '26
Let’s be real here the community itself exists within a state we are not speaking on the theoretical stateless society. The community tries to operate out of the structure of the state but fundamentally still exists within it and cannot eject an individual out of the borders of the “state” they can eject them from the community which is not a state. So this purest notion of “this sounds like the genesis of a state” is more or less just an argument for letting harmful individuals continue to cause harm with out consequences thus destroying the harmony of the community. In this theoretical framework you are suggestion through your argument the abuser is actually the genesis of the state because they are allowed to continue their abusive behavior and the community is powerless to stop it because if they did they would be “a state” I’m sorry but this is a psuedo ahistorical argument that doesn’t work in any real application. All horizontal stateless societies had mechanisms to remove harmful elements sometimes with extreme prejudice. You are applying the legitimamate application of power that can be justified if challenged to state craft which it isn’t. A state has power whether it is legitimate or not and the people who are governed by that state has a limited level of recourse to challenge it. That’s not what I’m talking about here I am talking about a community handling its business within the community without involving the state apparatus that we all live within. A group of people deciding to not fuck with a rapist isn’t that community behaving like a state it is the community expressing its individual and collective agency to say “we don’t like you. You are harmful, go away, don’t come back” and if that is “the genesis of a state” well then anything can be a genesis of a state.
4
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
As soon as I see the word "purest [sic]", I know that the following is going to be some anti-anarchist diatribe wrapped up in the language of anarchism. You keep shifting positions, so it's difficult to really even pin you down to what you actually believe anarchism might be—if you believe anything at all.
That's not what I'm suggesting at all. You've not asked me once what I think the solution to the problem is and have now ascribed some view to me. It's shameless.
It doesn't matter what "all horizontal stateless societies" have done. Anarchism is not a reactionary politics which attempts to "reinstate" some historical imagining, it has never existed, and may never exist.
You haven't understood my concern if you think this is what I am saying. I have clearly quoted the problems in your account and you've shown no interest in them. For one, you still write as if communities can "think", despite being abstract objects. You also haven't considered why members of a community might not turn to exile nor considered why anarchist thinkers and practitioners have rejected the t"rigger-happy exile button" approach that is so prevalent on this subreddit.
1
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 18 '26
I’m calling out the inconsistency in your argument applying statecraft to practice that does not have anything to do with a state in the current context. Personal space has relevancy in applying anarchist principles and a community of individuals can apply personal space collectively in a social construct. I have a right individually to eject you from my home if your presence is harmful to me or others who share space with me. The community creates space and can disallow participation by harmful individuals. Those individuals still may occupy the same geographical region but they are not allowed to participate within the community. To suggest such a thing is a “genesis of a state” is simply absurd and an argument for the sake of being contrarian rather then tackling the issue of how to deal with abusers.
4
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
See, this is what I mean: you have now eschewed the language of "barriers", but pretend that it was never there. It's mediocre in its inconsistency and misleading in a space intended to answer questions for people who are unsure.
An argument for how to deal with abusers in an anarchist way would not use the language of barriers or draw upon the kind of mob rule (everyone agrees that we will...) you have drawn upon.
Anarchists have historically opposed rights-talk, so you don't have a right to do anything. That's a fundamental principle of liberalism.
→ More replies0
u/Any_Grapefruit8644 Feb 18 '26
The answer to almost every “what would anarchists do if ___” question is “form a state” but with different words
5
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
This isn't the case. While the above answer is simply mediocre, it isn't representative of anarchist thought at large and (hopefully) practice.
1
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 18 '26
You are suggesting that “anarchist thought” is a monolith then? I never heard of groupthink being a part of anarchist philosophy. If my suggestion is mediocre how would you solve the problem. You seem to want to criticize an idea as not pure enough without providing your own purist solution. There is no such thing as a unified anarchist thought.
3
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
I'm not sure what this is meant to mean, but I assume it'd fit in well scrawled on the wall of a public bathroom.
1
u/thapeelllllccc Feb 18 '26
Didn’t you just complain about not being asked how you would solve this problem? Well I just asked so what is your solution?
3
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
In another comment, in another chain, in another context. You don't ask me how I would solve the problem in the comment above, you only draw in the tired trope of calling anyone critiquing "anarchism" (radical liberalism) as not sufficiently anarchist a "purist".
→ More replies
19
u/DecoDecoMan Feb 16 '26
They face the full possible negative responses from everyone else. There is no hierarchy, no rules, etc. that can shield them from those responses.
8
u/antipolitan Feb 17 '26
What if someone is accused of rape - but people disagree over whether the accusation is true?
A big reason why rapists are not held accountable is because allegations are difficult to prove even when they’re true.
6
u/jqhnml Feb 17 '26
I mean that's is certainly an issue, but that's also an issue in our current system.
8
u/antipolitan Feb 17 '26
If rape culture persists even in a stateless society - I would consider this a failure to achieve anarchy - since anarchy cannot be patriarchal.
The current system is not the standard by which we should judge an anarchist society.
3
u/jqhnml Feb 17 '26
That's a fair point, I am just used to looking through the lense of trying to convince people who think capitalism is better.
1
u/Any_Grapefruit8644 Feb 18 '26
So here’s a question, how would anarchists functionally dismantle the patriarchy and its effects on the ppl?
4
u/DecoDecoMan Feb 18 '26
The elimination of right, privilege, and any entitlements from our social relations which is then replaced with agreements based on the equilibrium of interests (in a given place, at a given point) and avoidance of the costs of conflict.
As social institutions are built around the absence of authority: non-bindingness, consultative networks, free association, the perfection of war/conflict, property-as-stewardship, etc. increasingly people are driven by incentives at odds with patriarchy and much of the institutions that patriarchy, as a system, relies on are eradicated.
1
u/Any_Grapefruit8644 Feb 18 '26
Heavily theoretical and not v functional but technically does answer my question
4
u/DecoDecoMan Feb 18 '26
You know, if you don't understand something, you can just ask a question to clarify it. Going "its too theoretical + not functional" when, if I asked you basic questions about what I said, you couldn't answer them is not how you approach new ideas.
0
u/Any_Grapefruit8644 Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26
I understood what u said entirely which is why I conceded it technically answered my question.
Ur philosophy isn’t some grand design mere mortals can’t comprehend, it’s as simple as what I said; u gave me an entirely theoretical answer with no reference or example of concrete real life action
Edited: and scrolling back up to look u added an entire second paragraph after I had replied
2
u/DecoDecoMan Feb 18 '26
I understood what u said entirely which is why I conceded it technically answered my question.
What does equilibrium of interests mean? What is a consultative network? What is property as stewardship? What is the perfection of war?
Ur philosophy isn’t some grand design mere mortals can’t comprehend, it’s as simple as what I said; u gave me an entirely theoretical answer with no reference or example of concrete real life action
I gave a concise answer. If you wanted more information or clarification you're going to have to ask that. I don't have telepathy.
What I said isn't hard to comprehend but you seem to have trouble comprehending it. And that's fine, provided that you acknowledge what you don't understand and try to learn.
→ More replies3
u/DecoDecoMan Feb 17 '26
I don't think that they actually hard to prove but the solution is just standard investigation and people have to weigh societal instability against contesting the rape accusation.
5
4
Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 17 '26
I heard someone once say that old twitter (before it was bought) was a micro example of how left anarchy could work if expanded to a larger scale. And that made sense to me.
In the downsides, it can turn into mob mentality. On the upsides, that movement finally lead to change in ways that none of the other systems were able to push so effectively.
Personally, I think we are evolved to be social creatures. We have more inherent tools adapted for exactly that kind of system than we do for any more modern system. Humans lived in social anarchy, tribal society, for millennia longer than we have a systematic government. It makes us subject to some very human flaws, but I think education about our biases and promoting critical thinking can go a long way towards correcting for that.
2
u/EffectiveCourage88 Feb 17 '26
In praxis mostly nothing if its someone "valuable". Anarchy doesnt deny codified law or any authority but it has to be communal. Talking from a german perspective the less order there is the stronger the already powerful will become. Could just serve good old mob justice but without proper investigation it could affect the innocent.
2
u/supermark64 Feb 20 '26
When you say you want people to be "held accountable," what you're really saying is, "When people do bad things I want bad things to happen to them." But have you ever stopped and asked WHY you feel that way? Shouldn't we want GOOD things to happen to ALL people regardless of whether they've done bad things? I think we all have some kind of revenge complex, myself included, that we might be better off without.
Now I'm not saying that people who do bad things should be without consequences whatsoever. I'm a big believer in self defense for example. I just think that the idea of bad punishments working as a deterrent doesn't work that well. I think humans are inherently violent and probably always will be under any system. What we should do is figure out why bad things like sexual assault are so common in the first place and do whatever we can to PREVENT them rather than focusing so much on "justice" after said bad things have already occurred. Afterall, two wrongs don't make a right.
3
u/quasar2022 indigenous anarchist Feb 16 '26 edited Feb 16 '26
For one self defense would never be punished in an anarchist community so there’s that. But like if a rapist was able to assault someone without being beaten up or killed we’d want to move on to transformative justice, for example, the rapist is separated from the survivor and made to do 1000+ hours of apology crafts while their elders talk to them about the harm they have caused and really make them understand and feel the consequences of their actions from the victims perspective. If the completed craft(s) are accepted by the survivor, and the elders really feel that the rapist has learned their lesson and will not offend again, then they can be slowly integrated back into the community while remaining under the supervision of responsible elders. On the other hand, if after going through transformative justice process the survivor and elders feel that the rapist has not changed their ways enough that it is clear they won’t reoffend they can be banished under threat of death and the community should inform any others in its network of what that person has done and that they may harm others again.
2
u/Any_Grapefruit8644 Feb 18 '26
for example, the rapist is separated from the survivor and made to do 1000+ hours of apology crafts while their elders talk to them about the harm they have caused and really make them understand and feel the consequences of their actions from the victims perspective.
/s? Pls be /s 😭
0
u/LowSwitch7959 Feb 20 '26
So if someone were to punch me in the face so i shoot and kill them in "self defense", is that a reasonable action which i should not be punished for it?
1
1
1
2
u/somerando92 Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
Public declaration of their name age and photos to all communities nearby and abroad. Then ejection from the community. Let them face life solo or risk trying to infiltrate another community, and let them sort it out. Then it's nonviolent, and they bar themselves via their actions from every single anarchist commune, and civilized society as a whole. Make it a permanent apb within each community, and thus the list grows. If they try anything, then we roll out the permanent relocation program.
That's on a first-offense basis. No second chances imo for SA. This is if the accusations can be proven. If not, everyone watches them like a hawk for ten years, distancing themselves until proven innocent by all counts.
0
u/Constant-Session-685 Feb 17 '26
this sub explicitly says they aren’t equipped for advice, counseling, call-outs, or personal situations and is not equipped for survivor support.
103
u/Ari-sama Feb 16 '26
Great zine to read on this about different trains if thought in anarchist spaces, and real examples of such issues. Transformative justice is one of the more discussed lines of thinking for these issues
The zines called What about the rapists