Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300/hierarchy - Revision history

Reversedragon: retire this scrap as it's been integrated into its main 9k page

2026-04-24T03:05:52Z

retire this scrap as it's been integrated into its main 9k page

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{BopCSS}}<div class="bop top"><h3><time datetime="2026-03-30T22:23:18Z">3-30</time></h3>~~		#redirect[[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300]]
	~~"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is"<br/>~~
	So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em\|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people.

	It's really frustrating because in a way, it's sort of referring to something that's true. In feudal orders, and in capitalism, you have these chunks of people that do a task (manor, factory, etc) and then there's this one person or tiny group that is conflated with the whole group and gets to take credit for what it does. Anarchists think that exists just because humanity socially constructed the concept of owning individuals giving people orders, and thereby constructed governments. They think that a person giving orders is the nucleus of a government, and people giving orders and creating governments is what divides societies into warring states periods, hostile kingdoms, pointless Liberal-republican party fights, and capitalism.<br/>
	This becomes super clear when you read Bellegarrigue — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms but the core """class analysis""" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.
	~~</div>~~


	[[~~Category~~:~~Next nine thousand (~~RD)]] ~~<!-- page ends here.~~
	~~search-friendly numbers: Q4104~~
	~~-->~~

Reversedragon: formatting

2026-03-30T22:29:44Z

formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:29, 30 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{BopCSS}}<div class="bop top"><h3><time datetime="2026-03-30T22:23:18Z">3-30</time></h3>
	<~~pre~~>"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is"		"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is"<br/>
	So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em\|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people.		So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em\|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people.

	It's really frustrating because in a way, it's sort of referring to something that's true. In feudal orders, and in capitalism, you have these chunks of people that do a task (manor, factory, etc) and then there's this one person or tiny group that is conflated with the whole group and gets to take credit for what it does. Anarchists think that exists just because humanity socially constructed the concept of owning individuals giving people orders, and thereby constructed governments. They think that a person giving orders is the nucleus of a government, and people giving orders and creating governments is what divides societies into warring states periods, hostile kingdoms, pointless Liberal-republican party fights, and capitalism.		It's really frustrating because in a way, it's sort of referring to something that's true. In feudal orders, and in capitalism, you have these chunks of people that do a task (manor, factory, etc) and then there's this one person or tiny group that is conflated with the whole group and gets to take credit for what it does. Anarchists think that exists just because humanity socially constructed the concept of owning individuals giving people orders, and thereby constructed governments. They think that a person giving orders is the nucleus of a government, and people giving orders and creating governments is what divides societies into warring states periods, hostile kingdoms, pointless Liberal-republican party fights, and capitalism.<br/>
	This becomes super clear when you read Bellegarrigue — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms but the core """class analysis""" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.</~~pre~~>		This becomes super clear when you read Bellegarrigue — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms but the core """class analysis""" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.
			</div>


	[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here.		[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here.
	~~redirects: (none)~~
	search-friendly numbers: Q4104		search-friendly numbers: Q4104
	-->		-->

Reversedragon: Created page with "

"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is" So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people.  It's really frustrating because in a way, it's..."

2026-03-30T22:23:18Z

Created page with " <pre>"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is" So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people. It's really frustrating because in a way, it's..."

New page

<pre>"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is"
So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people.

It's really frustrating because in a way, it's sort of referring to something that's true. In feudal orders, and in capitalism, you have these chunks of people that do a task (manor, factory, etc) and then there's this one person or tiny group that is conflated with the whole group and gets to take credit for what it does. Anarchists think that exists just because humanity socially constructed the concept of owning individuals giving people orders, and thereby constructed governments. They think that a person giving orders is the nucleus of a government, and people giving orders and creating governments is what divides societies into warring states periods, hostile kingdoms, pointless Liberal-republican party fights, and capitalism.
This becomes super clear when you read Bellegarrigue — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms but the core """class analysis""" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.</pre>

[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]