It's a conflict between an Authoritarian and Libertarian viewpoints, as I see it. The definitions of these two, I took from thepoliticalcompass. Easily comparable to Individual vs Collective empowerment.
None of the two is inherently good or bad though. It is that they should somehow be balanced out. E.g. an anarchic society won't stand a nearby aggressive dictatorship. Wars are usually fought and won by strong Authoritarian societies while the peaceful ones get wiped out.
I haven't figured out how to address the issue and I probably should try because I have my own scarcity to deal with first.
Spreading awareness is a good small step to start though. Proper education and proper spirituality might be a ground of a strong yet non-aggressive liberal society.
Rule by force is the disease, who and how are symptoms.
Until the masses reject the premise that it is ok to use violence to control those people because reasons, this is what we get, varying levels of tyranny.
@todkrank = lol, what a name. Very amusing :)
Are you german?
True. Nevertheless anarchy is something one can spread the word about, yes.
Maybe we can find a metaphor or an easy to understand meme or story...
todkrank is very poetic! I never though about it much at the time I picked it (in school) but now I keep it because it reflects the truth of existence. Could as well pick lebenkrank to add more drama but the former is neater.
I'm ukrainian; imagine how many syllables one would have to use to convey the same idea, but it would still be interpreted literally: "смертельно хворий". :)) What kind of nickname is that?!
There actually was an anarchic republic on the former ukrainian territories, led by Nestor Makhno. Didn't exist for too long, thanks to the Soviets. One of their mottoes was, "Liberty or Death!" on a black flag (Воля або смерть).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makhnovia