Political Memes

No they don’t. It’s just a very broad political viewpoint with a ton a varied opinions within it. No two anarchists will believe the same thing, and that’s true for all political beliefs, which is why they’re all like this and hard to define specifically.

Then my interpretation is as valid as yours.

Mutual cooperation and direct democracy are ways to come up with agreed upon rules. Not everyone will agree with all of them, but it will be agreed that the majority want something. There will still be a need for enforcement, yes. That doesn’t require a hierarchy. Everyone will be equal in voting and equal in how it’s enforced.

This process creates a hierarchy, a majority in-group that gets their way and a minority out-group that does not.

No, because everyone will be equal in its creation and decisions. A flat plane is not a hierarchy.

And a rich man is equally not allowed to steal bread or sleep under a bridge. Starting from a level playing field does not mean that things remain equal through the process.

No. People who don’t engage in good faith will be removed by the cooperation of everyone else. Just like the" Paradox of tolerance" is not a Paradox, because it’s based on a social contract and breaking it means you’re no longer protected by it. The same applies here. If you break the social contract then punishment must be applied.

If it only works by removing people you disagree with then it requires buy-in, you're just removing everyone who isn't engaging in good faith so you don't have to count them. This does not refute my initial claim. There is nothing intrinsic to anarchism that defends against bad-faith actors from hijacking the process, there are no checks against greedy thugs with lots of friends.

You are coming to this conversation with prior assumptions, not an open mind. I’m not an expert on Anarchism, but there is plenty of information out there that can answer your questions better than I can.

I went through this half a lifetime ago and ultimately decided anarchism didn't make sense to me. I think something akin to a Leninist vanguard party is a necessary evil, and I think some kind of rigid law-and-order structure will always be necessary.

I would recommend being open to the idea that your beliefs of what Anarchism are are wrong or what’s the point?

If I wasn't open to it I wouldn't have gotten this far. I think you're earnest even if I disagree with some of your assertions and I'm sorry that I'm sometimes a dick. It's rare that someone outside the big three lefty domains will engage like this.