Anarchy is a political structure where there’s basically no one in charge, right? But wouldn’t that just create a power vacuum that would filled by organized crime, corporations, etc.? Then, after that power vacuum is filled, we’re right back at square one, and someone is in charge.
Are there any political theorists that have come up with a solution to this problem?
The post was basically:
feddit.org is a Nazi/Zionist-Bar, let’s vote if dbzer0 should block the community xyz (it was not a vote about defederation).
And the “voting” was done by upvoting/downvoting the post, not through comments. Funnily enough the top comments were complaints against the situation and when this was pointed out it was put aside as “only upvoted because of feddit.org Trolls”. I actually counted and while there were upvotes from feddit.org, the upvote/downvote ratio from only dbzer0-users was 2:1.
Then they said if enough people want to defederate they will put that in consideration. After multiple comments calling for that they decided on it without an extra vote.
It’s like putting an ad on TV with a heavy bias and asking people to press a button on a remote. My idea was that anarchists are supposed to inform themselves about topics that get voted on but I’m pretty sure a lot of them just went with the flow.