What about Wa State?

Why isn't Wa State, the autonomous\socialist entity in Myanmar (Burma) not on the list of Mass Anarchist Society's? I think it should be added. Someone3113 (talk) 12:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wa State is ruled by Maoists so I don't think it can be classified as Anarchist or anarchist-adjacent at all Tarekelijas (talk) 16:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Standard for Inclusion

This article lists a wide variety of things as 'anarchist communities', including ephemeral Communist republics and protest movements. For inclusion on this list, shouldn't there be a requirement that an organization be both anarchist and a society? Flameoguy (talk) 22:52, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This lack of a clear inclusion criteria is why I gave up on editing this list years ago. I honestly don't think it can ever be good, as this list is a magnet for people that want to throw everything but the kitchen sink in here, often without any reliable sources. That someone has just added Liberland and Democratic Kampuchea isn't an aberration, it's indicative of how poorly conceived this list is.
I could recommend we TNT this list, but I know that would likely not be a popular solution. What we can do is go through the sources and verify whether these societies were described as "anarchist", removing the ones that aren't. There's also some questionable sources like anarchist pamphlets and magazines that should probably be removed/improved. -- Grnrchst (talk) 09:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How is this list differentiated from the List of stateless societies? czar 10:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably, this list would cover communities created by or controlled by political anarchists, while the other list would cover any society without a state. The 'mass societies' section on the article could probably be removed in its entirety, with any verifiable entries transferred to the list of stateless societies article. Something like Revolutionary Catalonia is dubiously an 'anarchist community' in the first place.
Flameoguy (talk) 00:09, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From what I can see, anarchist communities are communities acting according to anarchist principles regardless of whether they have fully established their ideals (i.e. abolished the state) whereas stateless societies don't have a state and may not explicitly act according to anarchist principles. I feel this probably addresses @Flameoguy's concern that Revolutionary Catalonia and some other communities weren't anarchist. While they weren't entirely stateless, they acted according to anarchist principles, considered themselves to be anarchist, and are considered by many to be anarchist. Aethyrial (talk) 00:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Czar; @Flameoguy; @Aethyrial: I think a good way to help establish clearer inclusion criteria in the list would be to add quotes to the citations and maybe to require quotes moving forward. This would help ease verification of what it is an editor thinks a source says that qualifies it as an "anarchist community", which could encourage more of a discussion cycle for additions. I'm normally not very keen on in-citation quotes, but I think it might be a good route for this article. -- Grnrchst (talk) 16:28, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A good example I just came across: When verifying the sources for Patagonia Rebelde, I saw that they they described the events as a suppressed strike or uprising, rather than a specific "community" or "society". Do we let any mass strike or uprising onto the list? Or do we require there be some kind of clear social unit that formed from it? -- Grnrchst (talk) 17:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
add quotes to the citations ... ease verification Agreed—good idea! czar 03:40, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm of the firm belief that strikes an uprisings do not constitute communities, and that the ephemeral governments created by anarchists or socialists are not "mass societies" in the sense implied by this article.
Flameoguy (talk) 17:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 July 2023

List of anarchist communities → List of libertarian socialist communities – Many of the communities listed on this page weren't/aren't anarchist. For instance, Rojava is based on an ideology of democratic confederalism, which is explicitly not anarchist but a form of socialist communalism and libertarian municipalism--an ideology formed by Murray Bookchin as a libertarian socialist rejection of anarchism[1][2]. Similarly, the Rebel Zapatista Autonomous Municipalities are not explicitly anarchist, being influenced by both Marxism and anarchism in favor of Neozapatismo and semi-direct democratic local governments.1[3]. To give a historic and prominent example, the Paris Commune was not explicitly anarchist either, again having broad socialist influences (even if there were disproportionate leanings) including anarchism, Marxism, and old-style social democracy [4].

Finally, I will add that perhaps a couple of these societies are not explicitly libertarian socialist either, such as Cherán; but I believe that this new title would still be a broadly better descriptor of the societies listed overall than the current one, given that this article is not listing alleged right-wing libertarian societies such as the Republic of Cospaia, but it does list various non-anarchist libertarian socialist societies. Editors could potentially add new notes or sections anyway classifying societies like Cherán as related but not necessarily libertarian socialist. 4kbw9Df3Tw (talk) 21:09, 20 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Adumbrativus (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will strongly oppose this move for reasons stated above, but also because anarchism is notable on its own and should not be subsumed into a broader libertarian socialism in any encyclopedia. Flameoguy (talk) 17:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EZLN and Paris Commune?

EZLN rejected being Anarchist: https://web.archive.org/web/20090813155006/http://greenanarchy.info/etc/ezln_response.htm

'You are right. The EZLN and its larger populist body the FZLN are NOT Anarchist. Nor do we intend to be, nor should we be. In order for us to make concrete change in our social and political struggles, we cannot limit ourselves by adhering to a singular ideology. Our political and military body encompasses a wide range of belief systems from a wide range of cultures that cannot be defined under a narrow ideological microscope. There are anarchists in our midst, just as there are Catholics and Communists and followers of Santeria.'

Similarly with the PAris Commune. The source for it being Anarchist is Bakunin. But this doesn't seem reliable. Not only were Anarchists not the leading faction of Communards, but also Marx also praised the Commune for being a model of a dictatorship of the proletariat, as is explained in the Paris Commune page. There is a contradiction here, and a more modern, 3rd party source is needed to call the Commune Anarchist Genabab (talk) 09:13, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Genabab:
  • Re: The Zapatistas. Yes, the cited source is actually a questionable one, coming from an anarcho-syndicalist magazine. That the EZLN has explicitly rejected such categorisation unfortunately hasn't been enough reason for many Wikipedians, who insist on labelling them with eurocentric terms like "anarchist" or "libertarian socialist" anyway.
  • Re: Paris Commune. Absolutely, Bakunin is not a reliable source. But not only that, he doesn't even refer to the Paris Commune as anarchist, he refers to it as "revolutionary socialist".
I've gone ahead and removed both until someone can come up with more clearly reliable sources. -- Grnrchst (talk) 09:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ank youh Genabab (talk) 09:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thank you* Genabab (talk) 09:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Categories