You are reading a single comment by @Velocio and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@Velocio
Most anarchists I know would all agree that rules as a concept are fine: "Thou shall not kill" would be agreed upon unanimously.
It's more a case that rules should not be applied by a remote third party. That is to say, rules should be localised, and where rules from one locale to another are universal you can say those were the base societal rules that everyone had to abide to, and that other rules would be hyper-local.
A hyper-locality (a small commune) might agree to ignore concepts of property within their area of influence. Whereas another locality might establish rules of property ownership, inheritance, etc. Who has the right to take either set of rules and impose it on the other?
So it isn't an absence of rules... you can't just go kill someone. But it's the absence of the imposition of rules.