Skip to content
Binding Chaos
Governance

Autocoercion

Updated August 5, 2026

Transparent, consensual coercion a society applies onto itself.

Expanded explanation

Autocoercion is a society coercing itself with its own knowledge and consent. The two qualifiers do the work: it is transparent, so the coercion is visible rather than hidden, and it is consensual, so those subject to it have agreed to it. This sets it apart from the coercion of an authoritative endogroup imposing its will from above. Autocoercion is the community binding itself to rules it has openly chosen, the collective equivalent of self-discipline rather than domination. It belongs to Marsh's account of what non-hierarchical organization can look like: a society does need to constrain behaviour, but it can do so through coercion that is out in the open and agreed to, rather than through a ruling group's hidden or imposed force.

Examples

Rules chosen in the open
A community that binds itself to constraints it has openly agreed on is practising autocoercion, not submitting to an outside power.
Consent as the dividing line
The same restriction imposed by a ruling endogroup without consent would be ordinary coercion. Applied transparently by the society to itself, it is autocoercion.

How others use it

Political philosophy has long treated self-imposed law as the basis of legitimate authority, from Rousseau's general will and the social contract to Kant's autonomy, where binding yourself to rules you author is freedom rather than subjection. Marsh's autocoercion sits in that lineage but is defined by transparency and consent specifically, and set against the coercion of an authoritative endogroup.

Sources

Defined in the Binding Chaos series glossary, within the governance material of Abstracting Divinity.

Recommended reading path

Then read in full: Abstracting Divinity.

A suggested order for exploring this corner of the theory.