Exactly. I like to keep things simple and boil things down to authority. I'm the only one allowed to define me, and I don't have the right to define others. If everyone has absolute freedom to be what they are, then by design no one has the right to define, exploit, marginalize or otherwise or oppress them. if anyone was oppressed, not everyone would have absolute freedom. Then on top of that we put societal contracts. "Here's a time period of my labor, would you trade it for that thing you have". "I'd like to give some of my extra things so that more people can have good things [taxation] "Here's consent, how about you?" "I go by [pronoun]."

Anarchism -> Maximum freedom for all Hierarchism-> Maximum freedom for the one on top.

Smarter people than me have talked about the nuances for ages so as I said, I like to simplify things. Fullyautomatedspacegayluxurycommunism ftw!

[–] mypasswordistaco@iusearchlinux.fyi 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

What if I want to use my absolute freedom to oppress someone else? What if I use my absolute freedom to build a structure that blocks the view of the mountains from my neighbors, who love the view? Whose freedom should get oppressed to solve that?

Honest question, not trying to be a contrarian.