“State monopoly on violence” is literally one of the main definitions of what a state is - the entity with the monopoly on violence in a certain territory.
If you reject the notion of a state monopoly on violence you reject the existence of the state itself. Which is philosophically a coherent position that places you in the long and storied tradition of anarchism.
It also instantly marks you as an enemy of the state. Any state.
Yep, but the only way change happens is if we break away and change it in the here and now, evolving with our changing environment organically from the bottom up as needs be; to build the new within the shadow of the old, to embrace the nature of our chaotic world and adapt to it, and that is the domain of anarchy.
“State monopoly on violence” is literally one of the main definitions of what a state is - the entity with the monopoly on violence in a certain territory.
If you reject the notion of a state monopoly on violence you reject the existence of the state itself. Which is philosophically a coherent position that places you in the long and storied tradition of anarchism.
It also instantly marks you as an enemy of the state. Any state.
Yep, but the only way change happens is if we break away and change it in the here and now, evolving with our changing environment organically from the bottom up as needs be; to build the new within the shadow of the old, to embrace the nature of our chaotic world and adapt to it, and that is the domain of anarchy.