The concept of mutual aid laid out by Kropotkin is very much applicable to international relations. Many anarchist organizations are internationalist, eg indigenous struggles supported the German occupation of Lützerath. True, this isn’t about the infrastructure needed but anarchism isn’t isolationist
I don’t even see the problem. If workers collectively come to consensus about the design, what hinders them from agreeing on a schedule and working on it?
How small, decentralized communes will handle such a big enterprise, delivery of steel, schedule of works, deliver of engine etc. without some central planning?
Decentralized can still mean that there is a big system of councils. The difference is that these are bottom up organized. If there is a consensus to build something big, there will be a way to make it. Maybe a committee that’s only for this specific task and will dissolve afterwards and can be desolved by the council earlier.
The video has some. Maybe most best known is the CNT which was a network of free association. A modern example would be Rojava which is not democratic centralism but democratic confederation and therefor decentralized. Of cause, all these are suppressed by all states and therefore it is difficult to implement. Arguably, quite a lot of (but by far not all) organizations before modernity were hieracy free and some still are. the famous anthropologist and anarchist David Graeber once said that anthropologists have a affinity to anarchism because they know it works. He himself did research in Madagascar where, according to him, the state does very little in the rural areas. You should read his work or watch this interview from arround 2005.
Yes. Reminder to liberals and anarchists, socialism and international trade aren’t mutually exclusive.
I’m not entirely sure how to read your comment but anarchism and international trade aren’t mutually exclusive either.
Explain then
The concept of mutual aid laid out by Kropotkin is very much applicable to international relations. Many anarchist organizations are internationalist, eg indigenous struggles supported the German occupation of Lützerath. True, this isn’t about the infrastructure needed but anarchism isn’t isolationist
How to build a big cargo ship under anarchism?
I don’t even see the problem. If workers collectively come to consensus about the design, what hinders them from agreeing on a schedule and working on it?
How small, decentralized communes will handle such a big enterprise, delivery of steel, schedule of works, deliver of engine etc. without some central planning?
Decentralized can still mean that there is a big system of councils. The difference is that these are bottom up organized. If there is a consensus to build something big, there will be a way to make it. Maybe a committee that’s only for this specific task and will dissolve afterwards and can be desolved by the council earlier.
Zoe Baker made a good video about anarchism and democracy. You should check it out. It’s also about decision making in big scales within the anarchist tradition.
Any historical serious precedence of a success of such a management system?
The video has some. Maybe most best known is the CNT which was a network of free association. A modern example would be Rojava which is not democratic centralism but democratic confederation and therefor decentralized. Of cause, all these are suppressed by all states and therefore it is difficult to implement. Arguably, quite a lot of (but by far not all) organizations before modernity were hieracy free and some still are. the famous anthropologist and anarchist David Graeber once said that anthropologists have a affinity to anarchism because they know it works. He himself did research in Madagascar where, according to him, the state does very little in the rural areas. You should read his work or watch this interview from arround 2005.