How does a stateless society (anarchy, comunism...

peregonovka :^)

It can't, because a stateless society can't get bigger weapons than small firearms. The moment groups get tanks or artilery or shit like that civil war breaks out and lears and states get going.

a large scale change in social values and the resulting actions

mad ancap teenager detected

ancaps aren't anarchists and you're still historically illiterate, sorry

>Ukraine
How did that turn out again?

>a large scale change in social values

In all societies?
At once?
And I suppose every revolution is successful, world wide? Simultaneously?

>conquer it

Conquer what? There is nobody to surrender. You can declare yourself king, but nobody will acknowledge you. Try to impose your will and you'll get never-ending rebellion.

>Try to impose your will and you'll get never-ending rebellion.
Not likely.

Execute a few percent of the population and the rest will accept that they have been conquered. Most people just want to live a comfy ordinary life and aren't willing to die fighting for an ideal.

catalunya, ukraine of the top of my mind

>Try to impose your will and you'll get never-ending rebellion

Yeah, because supression of dissent never happened in the history of humanity

>teenage kids actually believe that
In real life you only need make an example out of one villager for the rest of the village to obey your commands.

Primitive societies are anarchist-ish. If anarchism were sustainable we would be anarchists to this day. Instead every complex society is hierarchical because anarchist ones got conquered and submited.

>ancaps aren't anarchists and you're still historically illiterate, sorry
They may be delusional and autistic but they're still anarchists.

automation of labor

Stopped reading at
>stateless society (anarchy, comunism
Neither of those are necessarily stateless, lurk moar

The same way any other state protects its citizens. A military.

>itt communism is refuted yet again

/thread

depends how you define state

Anarchy is necessarily stateless unless you define "state" in such a way that it means "any group of people who make decisions."

Wrong, many Anarchist movements don't advocate the abolition of government, just the curtailment of it.

How spooky.

Global revolution to get rid of all the states, hence why communism needs to have a dictatorship of the proletariat before statelessness.

Also guns for everyone.

I think it's you who needs to lurk more.

In a library.

this

who /techno-communist/ here?

>citizens
since it's not a state there are no citizens, they protect themselves.

And that of course works out wonderfully.

>automation of labor
so basically, it wouldn't ever happen?

just because a society is stateless doesn't mean its without defense. the defense would have to come from a non-state entity, ie the people who populate the society that is stateless. a people's militia would need to be able to be summoned at any period in time in which the society is threatened. that militia would defend the society from any predatory state.

>le black and white thinking

who would support a fully automated labor force? you couldn't automate all jobs at the same time and that means there would be people losing jobs without the benefits of no-one having to work. people don't like being replaced by robots

who would train this militia?

Veeky Forums and /k/.

A stateless society would have made itself so unappealing to a foreign power, that they wouldn't want to invade. Sort of like how they say if you are going to be raped make yourself as gross as possible by messing yourself and smearing it all over.

>Anarchy
>Hierarchy
yeah nah.

/out/ can contribute too.

people with experience in combat training who are allied with the stateless society and have an interest in training members of the stateless society to be able to defend themselves.

if it turns out no one has combat experience, the stateless society will have no training, which means they'd be exponentially more likely to get fucked by any predatory state.

>dude they'll just volunteer lmao xD

Isn't that what the army already does?

obviously if those with combat experience don't feel like or want to train the rest of the stateless society then yeah it won't get done. it is about volunteer work.

the OP supposes that there's some sort of predatory state though that still exists in the same timeframe as the stateless society. if the stateless society knows this, and still values their organization and would wish to protect it against predatory states, it is really not unreasonable to expect people who do have combat experience to step forward in an attempt to train the stateless society's members.

your use of greentext does nothing productive aside from pointing out how my response is a common one. what's your grievance with the volunteer response? why isn't it reasonable to you? give me arguments, not memes.

they get paid in the army, for some its an easy paycheck because they can't find work

people want to be rewarded for their time. you're asking people to risk their lives for the sake of this stateless society and assuming that people would do it for free. why would anyone risk their lives for nothing?

>why would anyone risk their lives for nothing?

the continued survival of the stateless society's form of organization is not 'nothing' to the people who are involved in the the stateless society. if you're a part of that sort of community it's because you believe in that form of organization. you're telling me that people would just sit in their houses as a predatory state attacks because they wouldn't be paid a wage for it.

does that make any sense?

why are you assuming nationalism exists in a stateless society?