Why should anarchy be so bad

The houses and apartments to those who live in them!

Yes, it would be nice, you and I think. Unfortunately, the reality is different. Bad living conditions, hustle and bustle, less wealth, mountains of rubbish, contaminated food, air, water, ozone hole, traffic infarction, sexism, xenophobia, nationalism, poverty, hunger and and and ...

We don't need to complain about that, this and much more is well known. But as is so often the case in life: There is nothing good unless you do it!

Because this mentality of complaining about all the mess and then resignedly laying your hands on your lap brings nothing, except even more frustration. And suppressing the problems is no longer of much help, as our whole everyday life is affected more and more.

So let's go, roll up your sleeves, performance is in demand again. But not performance that is forced from us through wage labor or in some other way, no self-determined performance. Work and activities that are fun, that in spite of everything bring joy and joy in life.

Who does the land belong to?

Yes, actually you and me and all residents. Or?
No, as we all know, insurance companies, banks, speculators, real estate dealers - just a few rich people - own entire streets and divide the city districts among themselves so that they can make more and more profits at the expense of others through renting and selling. So far so bad.

But where does this come from? The earth really doesn't belong to anyone. We come into the world without nothing and leave without anything. The earth, nature is only a loan that we have to handle with care. A piece of land cannot be owned by a person, a group / company, with which one can do what one wants. Anyone who treats land irresponsibly, contaminates it, uses it for personal gain and excludes others from the use and wealth of the land, must be deprived of the right of use!

There can be no reorientation of the ruling urban politics without problematizing this relationship of property. It would make sense to list the ownership structure of land in the city districts. Because property relations as they exist today were enforced with violence, war, murders, nasty tricks, etc. And should we accept that? The law of the thumb according to the motto: Should we accept the strength is always right? What kind of image of man is that?

No, that's not how we imagine a human, free society.

Don't worry, nobody should get out of their hard-earned house or condominium. For personal use, adequate living space must be left or created for everyone.

The point is that all those who cannot use their apartments and houses personally are deprived of their right of disposal and given to the people who live in these houses and apartments.

After all, it should be clear that in property that one cannot use personally, one can hardly develop any other interest than that of as much personal profit as possible. Then it does not matter whether the site is fallow, used as a commercial area or as a residential area, the behavior of property speculators depends on the expected profits.

Market economy or planned economy?

This question does not arise for us.

At this point the old prejudice must be dispelled that the "free" market economy can solve the problems at hand through supply and demand. The "free" market economy is at best the lesser evil compared to the centralized planned economy as it was exercised in the former Eastern Bloc countries. Because of the central planning and the curtailment of all grassroots initiatives, it was no wonder that entire cities could fall apart there.

But even in the capitalist market economy, cities, villages and apartments fall apart. Here the labor and housing market is taken under the central command of money and profits. In the end, many people have no right to a self-determined home.

It is obvious that if you want to produce something, you have to plan. And that there must be a market where the goods produced can be sold. The point is then that we work independently, that is, that the companies manage themselves and that hierarchy and rule in the market and planning are prevented.

Live independently and without rulership

A perspective oriented towards the needs of the people is the provision of the land and houses to the users. Only those who actually live personally / together in a house / apartment or cultivate a garden / field would therefore have a right of disposal. Personal / common property should be guaranteed to everyone. In this way, a mindful approach to things will develop and people will realize that when they work together of their own free will, they are capable of creativity and prosperity and happiness are possible for all.

It is difficult for an individual to maintain an entire house, for all residents together, it may be easy. It can cause problems for the residents of a house to design a street according to their ideas, all residents together, if they can contribute their ideas and suggestions independently and equally, will certainly be able to achieve great things.

Compromises are then certainly necessary and decisions have to be made. But if everyone can be included in the decision-making process, it will be easier for those whose ideas are not realized to accept it as well.

What is important in the overall concept of "domination-free, self-determined living" is people's initiative. From nothing, comes nothing! Small steps are also important!

So much the better when people get together for activities.

  • It should be considered whether the idea of ​​cooperatives in housing construction and housing management could not be reinforced again, but with clear grassroots control.
  • Social housing only becomes social when people are not pressed into standardized apartment blocks, but when they can help plan their future home as early as the planning phase. I. E. also that privately financed housing construction must be abolished, since housing construction should only ever be approached from a social and ecological point of view.
  • It must be possible to use the surrounding area. So no concrete and sterile lawn, but play areas, ponds, hills, community meeting places, trees, cheap shopping ...
  • Motorized individual traffic must be pushed back in favor of the quality of living.
  • The fight must be declared in high-rise buildings and satellite towns.
  • Ghetto formation should be avoided.
  • As soon as new buildings, conversions, renovations, etc. are planned, these must be disclosed with all information and discussed without time pressure.
  • People want to get out of the auditorium and onto the stage: amateur drama instead of profit theater!

All of this can be summarized as follows:

* From gigantic solutions to small, decentralized steps
* From new purchases to repairs
* From demolition to conservation
* From separation to mix
* From stone to green
* From risk to safety
* From planning participation to personal initiative
* From high costs to cheap solutions
* From looking to using
* From admiring to creating
* From consuming to working out

People must have a basic right to housing!

The dependence of tenants on homeowners

  • leads to fear
  • prevents self-development
  • creates forced behavior towards partners and children
  • creates hardship in the event of a conflict up to being uprooted from the "home" (rent increase, termination)
  • reinforces the lethargy towards the given environment
  • does not allow the apartment to be adapted to changes in the people living in it, e.g. offspring
  • gives the opportunity to be exploited by intermediaries (brokers)

The creation of partial ownership in larger community facilities

  • enables identification with the living environment
  • promotes conscious, self-determined adaptation to the community
  • strengthens the affiliation to a community, a district, street, house through "feelings of home" familiarity)
  • promotes appreciation for foreign and own areas
  • promotes self-help
  • Develops initiative when living requirements change, when living / living community is shrinking or expanding
  • creates the basis for creativity in your own space
  • enables self-determined cost / benefit setting

The improvement of the living situation, from a purely structural point of view, can only be an impetus for an overall more humane city. In addition, z. B.

  • New forms of neighborhood-related social and cultural work, the decentralization of administrations, the delegation of decisions to the smallest possible level, local media ...
  • The claims behavior of the people towards the state authorities on the one hand and the controlling external provision of the administrations on the other hand must be cracked.
  • Critical trust must be established in those working in the administration, as long as they are willing to cooperate honestly.
  • Attention should be paid to the continuity of progressive district work.
  • The diversity of structural designs and social coexistence should be promoted. Bye bye standard solutions.
  • Without identification there is no self-determined value creation, without value creation there is no satisfaction.
  • Self-managed district centers / shops would be places to get to know each other, forum for discussions and the organization of activities.

So there are enough opportunities and work to tackle the poor living and working conditions. Let's tackle it!

Since we are not a party and do not strive for power, it is not so important to us that everyone call themselves anarchists and join us. We are concerned with a better life. Anyone who thinks and feels like us can get involved anywhere. Nevertheless, we are happy about everyone who wants to join us.

For a self-determined, domination-free life!

Anarchy, prosperity and happiness for everyone!