@paula this poll sort of contradicts itself, i don't think anarchism counts as a form of government?
@julialuna @paula well, only if one understand "anarchism" as "no-government"; and "government" singularly as "State", a "centralized political organization". And things are more complicated than that.
Anarchist strategies, in a broad sense, advocate for anti-statist "self-manegement" or "self-organization" and decentralized forms socialist/communalist governance, such as federalism or confederalism see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_anarchism plus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_confederalism
what a question! nobody who isn't fucked up likes to be governed.
Also, the choices offered are not forms of governments, and so are not answers to the question posed. They are ideologies, policy fields and forms of social reproduction. They come on different levels of abstraction which makes them incomparabel.
I vaguely guess, you’re interessted in political mentalities. In that case the question would be: do you prefer an inclusive society or one in 50 shades of exclusion?
@paula I beg your pardon, but, anarchism is/can be understood as a form of socialism. So, the cold distinction between one and other (especially when opposed to drastically disparate options), opens the possibility that you meant “anarchy” in a crude sense.
Me, a social anarchist, can't answer this poll correctly, unfortunately. Plus, many people will read anarchism plainly as "no-government" (and that's quite incorrect, in my humble opinion)
@firstname.lastname@example.org "I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."
Professor Bernardo de la Paz
@paula I chose anarchism because I thought this was specifically in a fediverse context (i.e. "how would you like to be governed on fedi"). Was that a wrong assumption?
@paula none of these would work because they're ideological purists. I think the best approach would be a mix of several systems in different degrees in various places.
Humans are complex.
@paula I don't know how you define "environmentalism" but if we want to minimise suffering, then taking measures to drastically reduce emissions right now and make human behaviour sustainable from now on should be an absolute priority.
@paula interesting poll. anarchism is a bit of a weird answer to the question since by definition it cannot govern anyone, and “authoritarianism” is so vague as to be meaningless. but socialism, environmentalism, and internationalism are great answers imo.
Wien ist anders.
Vienna in the Fediverse