It’s fundamentally different, and there are many examples of societies like that in history.
Lynchings were society enforcing their will collectively without an authoritarian structure. Lynchings were often (but not always) opposed by authorities who wanted a trial, even if the trial was likely to be a sham.
Black Panthers were the opposite, a community defense that was organized as a response to the abuses of those with authority. Basically the opposite of the groups that committed lynchings.
Being decentralized doesn’t solve the problems of centralized authority without being a tradeoff for the problems of a lack of authority. Both require a society that stands behind whichever approach is chosen and holds people accountable for abusing the social contract. Decentralized might even be better, but it isn’t a panacea.
What historical societies had little to no authority without running into issues with malicious actors?
I don’t disagree with your core point, but it’s useful to imagine and learn from other ways. We need to organize, we need to exist amongst each other, if all systems are corruptible we may as well choose ones that empower individuals, orient towards collective well-being, and ideologically oppose oppression.
![[Sarah Andersen] Capitalism](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/da4ea8ac-7425-4260-b766-1d484fade657.jpeg){kind=link}
Woohoo! Vigilante justice!
No, still not getting it. You’re imagining today’s society without authority.
That’s like thinking veganism is when you’re eating a bun with lettuce and no burger.
It’s fundamentally different, and there are many examples of societies like that in history.
Your caricature is only showing the limits of your imagination and your lack of knowledge
Lynchings were society enforcing their will collectively without an authoritarian structure. Lynchings were often (but not always) opposed by authorities who wanted a trial, even if the trial was likely to be a sham.
Black Panthers were the opposite, a community defense that was organized as a response to the abuses of those with authority. Basically the opposite of the groups that committed lynchings.
Being decentralized doesn’t solve the problems of centralized authority without being a tradeoff for the problems of a lack of authority. Both require a society that stands behind whichever approach is chosen and holds people accountable for abusing the social contract. Decentralized might even be better, but it isn’t a panacea.
What historical societies had little to no authority without running into issues with malicious actors?
I don’t disagree with your core point, but it’s useful to imagine and learn from other ways. We need to organize, we need to exist amongst each other, if all systems are corruptible we may as well choose ones that empower individuals, orient towards collective well-being, and ideologically oppose oppression.
As for examples
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-mutual-aid-a-factor-of-evolution