My explanation of authority wasn't meant as a definition but rather a brief summarisation of a complex concept, Andrew does a better job actually explaining it. Like pointing out that Authority is confused with a lot of different concepts like respect or influence. Which I'm starting to suspect is happening here. meaningful human relationships are based on mutual respect. This is not authority as it is voluntary, reciprocated and revoked as soon as the other party steps over the line. This is what I believe is the basis of society and what we need to return to in order to live a truly free life. In modern society in most interactions respect has been replaced with authority. People in positions of power even use them synonymously.
So here's a little bit of lemmy lore for you. You're instance lemmy.ml is considered to be a tankie instance by some users. lemmy.dbzer0.com is an anarchist instance. The user you responded to probably made a generalisation based on this and assumed you were familiar with anarchist/communist/socialist/leftist discourse. From this comment I assume they were wrong.
So on behalf of no-one but myself: Hello! Welcome to Anarchism! The belief that authority should not exist. This belief comes from a lot of different places and wears a lot of different faces. Most short explanations aren't sufficient and long explanation bore most. If you don't mind a little learning here is a link: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca1 and another one https://crimethinc.com/2016/09/28/feature-the-secret-is-to-begin-getting-started-further-resources-frequently-asked-questions#faq or if you like videos: https://youtu.be/lrTzjaXskUU.
Also a little bit about authority: people use authority to mean many things (this is even bought up in the video I linked above). But as far as anarchists are concerned (in general (no specific statement can be made about a group so vast)) authority is the act of coercing people to follow orders or commit involuntary acts. You're boss can coerce you to neglect your health by threatening to fire you. Your government can force you to obey gender roles by threatening to jail you. A rich person can make you do whatever demeaning thing they want by dangling money in front of you (for reference see mrbeast) because otherwise your landlord will kick you out. This is authority and it is wrong. Those in authority can make mistakes, become greedy and start to think they have the power to do whatever they want (mostly because they can). This leads to suffering. My meaning of life is to minimise suffering. Anarchy is the belief that no-one should hold power over others. That all leadership should be scrutinised. It rejects blind faith in single people and encourages to think for yourself so no-one can do you wrong. And if you can't be bothered, it encourages you to find people who genuinely care about you and let them stand up for you.
First of all: Are you assuming I'm in America? If you are then you're wrong. And moving to somewhere currently going through mass deportations is just taking a huge unnecessary risk.
Secondly: while an unstable political situation could be a good motivator to get people organizing collectively, It's also equally likely that an authoritarian state emerges that will suppress any attempt to reduce peoples dependency to the state. While it would be exciting I don't think I'm personally up for it.
I think that it is safer to begin collectivisation somewhere that's more politically stable to grow a big enough following that when hostilities start you could hold your own. Unless some place already has a lot of anarchic/syndicalist thought then It's going to be hard to start it with everyone at each-others throats.
And it's also possible I've misunderstood you're comment and you're using anarchy as a synonym for chaos. In which case I just want to point out that my use is different. When I say anarchy I mean a power structure based on mutual aid and strong interpersonal relations without any leaders or hierarchy.
I am an EU citizen so Ireland will probably be easier but I'm wondering by how much. I'm much more drawn to the UK as I am more connected to It's culture.
My biggest concern is finding new connections. I struggle with it here as well and I don't think moving to another country will just magically make that go away. Although I do feel more confident in English than in my native language.
The Idea is that the enum acts as a union, capable of holding any of the member types, It's not that different from using identifiers and when transpiling to rust I will probably only support variants beginning with string literals (or maybe generate them).
The main reason is that I could use type inference to define the variants in a returned anonymous enum.
I like the pipe symbol because it is useful for distinguishing between enums and structs without keywords. And I just personally think it looks better. And allow for pretty anonymous enums like (|String |Int) for something that can accept both a string and an integer.
The Beatles destroyed it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkR81t3lp-M