imported>PoliticalAustralian No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "<references />" to "") |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
[[Category:Societies]] | [[Category:Societies]] | ||
[[Category:Europe]] | [[Category:Europe]] |
Revision as of 17:57, 2 April 2024
</image> <image source="map"></image> <label>Type</label> <label>Level</label> <label>Location</label> <label>Inhabitants</label> </infobox>Free Frisia or Frisian Freedom (or Friesische Freiheit or Fryske frijheid) refers to a period where the state and feudalism were absent from a significant portion of Frisia (Now claimed by the Netherlands and Germany) from 993 to the early 1500s. Society was run via a confederation of democratic towns, villages and farming communities, allowing a sort of semi proto-libertarian socialism to be experimented with in Medieval Europe.
Decision-Making
Friesland had no Knighthood or Ridderschap. In Friesland, the feudal idea of nobility, which gave the right of control in the country, was deemed incompatible with the "Frisian freedom". The region also had no forced labour. Some "nobles" still had a major influence in the region due to their great land ownership. The right to vote in local matters was based on the ownership of land, in which a person owning one unit of land received the right to have one vote. This meant that men owning large areas of land could cast more votes. Voting men used their influence to choose a mayor from one of the thirty municipalities, who in turn represented all of Friesland. Each city had eleven votes.[1]
Environmental Protection
According to Peter Gelderloos, the decentralized nature of Frisia at the time allowed it to practice some of the most advanced engineering and environmental protection experiments in the world at the time:
Water management in that lowland northern country in the 12th and 13th centuries provides another example of bottom-up solutions to environmental problems. Since much of the Netherlands is below sea level and nearly all of it is in danger of flooding, farmers had to work constantly to maintain and improve the water management system. The protections against flooding were a common infrastructure that benefited everybody, yet they also required everyone to invest in the good of the collective to maintain them: an individual farmer stood to gain by shirking water management duties, but the entire society would lose if there were a flood. This example is especially significant because Dutch society lacked the anarchistic values common in indigenous societies. The area had long been converted to Christianity and indoctrinated in its ecocidal, hierarchical values; for hundreds of years it had been under the control of a state, though the empire had fallen apart and in the 12th and 13th centuries the Netherlands were effectively stateless. Central authority in the form of church officials, feudal lords, and guilds remained strong in Holland and Zeeland, where capitalism would eventually originate, but in northern regions such as Friesland society was largely decentralized and horizontal.
At that time, contact between towns dozens of miles apart — several days’ travel — could be more challenging than global communication in the present day. Despite this difficulty, farming communities, towns, and villages managed to build and maintain extensive infrastructure to reclaim land from the sea and protect against flooding amid fluctuating sea levels. Neighborhood councils, by organizing cooperative work bands or dividing duties between communities, built and maintained the dykes, canals, sluices, and drainage systems necessary to protect the entire society; it was “a joint approach from the bottom-up, from the local communities, that found their protection through organizing themselves in such a way.” Spontaneous horizontal organizing even played a major role in the feudal areas such as Holland and Zeeland, and it is doubtful that the weak authorities who did exist in those parts could have managed the necessary water works by themselves, given their limited power. Though the authorities always take credit for the creativity of the masses, spontaneous self-organization persists even in the shadow of the state.[2]
Decline
The decline and end of Free Frisia was rooted in foreign nobles asserting their own power and retaking territory. The region was surrounded by hostile feudal communities from all sides and could not withstand hundreds of years of constant attack.[3]