The vast majority of capitalists believe in the possibility of an ever expanding market on a planet with finite resources.

actually that’s not true. spaceflight is explicitely researched because they understand that you can’t have an infinitely growing economy on a finite planet.

You can be an anarchist and poke fun at naive interpretations of anarchism. I don’t think you have to read “all anarchists are like these hypothetical human pets” into that joke.

Tankies think that the state should own the means of production. Sure, they’ll then claim that the workers own the state, but in reality it’s just owned by the political elite.

Anarchy is more about dissolving ownership. Why would it be right to keep people out of a factory by force just because you work there?

If you have reason to believe they will cause direct or indirect harm, sure, but ownership is no indication of that. In fact production may be causing more harm than good, in which case it would be right to stop the factory’s operations, with force against the workers if necessary.

i think the most accessible way to understand anarchism is to just think of how villages used to work:
There isn’t really a big central authority, people just talk to each other and do what needs doing, if there’s a problem you gather everyone and talk about it, and maybe there’s a couple people everyone defers their judgement to because they actively trust them until given a reason not to.

A modern household is another example: the police isn’t going to arrest you for not putting your toys away; everyone in a household is largely equal and if someone wants someone else to do something they have to convince them in some way, and yet it works fine!

I think there’s going to have to be a long drawn out transitional period both technologically and socially.

We’d probably need some sort of socialist state in between, and to replace corporations, and eventually other forms of private enterprise, with employee owned and ran co-ops.

You’re right to say something as complex a chip fabrication would go out the window if we tried to do this overnight, but I’d like to think localized manufacturing will get us at some point in the mid-to-distant future.

I mean, pretty much you get a group of people together to buils/maintain/run the infrastructure because it needs done. As for the community upstream, have a nice chat and if that doesn’t work, do violence. The most important part is setting the conditions so that a self-sustaining state or similar such group capable of enacting large-scale coercion or hierarchy is difficult/impossible

Industry and anarchism are not mutually exclusive. There obviously would be very little industry left in a post-industrial, post-collapse world so I don’t think that particular example is too relevant.

Anarchism takes no stances on the scale or level of industrialization of a society. Anarchist Spain had factories. The whole anarchist federation there stemmed from workers unions. Anarchism also does not mean a lack of organization or a lack of rules the way that “anarchy” is often portrayed by the status quo. It’s just that the organization happens horizontally and without coercion.

If some place is fucking up the environment, then you organize on the regional level (delegate councils or however the system is structured) to lessen cooperation with the problematic community until they stop doing that.

Edit: If some neigbours continue to be dicks, then you can just go to war. Inb4 “Checkmate anarchists, killing fascts in the spanish civil war sounds a bit coercive!”