Dobra Družba – Community or Threat to the System?

Introduction

Every time a new form of self-organization appears, the same question repeats: is it a community filling the gaps of the system – or a threat undermining that system? Dobra Družba found itself right on this border. Not because it was radical in intent, but because it is radical in consequences.

When people who have been excluded for a long time start organizing themselves, they become visible. And visibility is often the first thing that disturbs the system.

Community arises where the system fails

Dobra Družba does not arise from ideology, but from practice. From recurring situations where individuals remain without protection, without bargaining power, and without a legitimate voice. Where institutions do not offer answers, informal networks of help, information exchange, and solidarity begin to form.

Community in this context is not a romantic concept. It is a survival mechanism. People do not connect because they want to, but because they have no other choice. Dobra Družba is merely the formalization of what already existed in the shadows.

Why the system perceives this as a threat

Systems are not sensitive to moral questions, but to shifts in power. And this is where discomfort arises. Dobra Družba does not ask for permission to exist. It does not wait for perfect legislation. It does not accept the role of a passive object of regulation.

Instead, it offers:

self-organization instead of top-down control,

community management instead of an external intermediary,

transparency where silence previously reigned.

This is not an attack on the system. It is a revelation of its limits. And revelations are uncomfortable for any system.

Threat to what – and to whom?

When speaking of a 'threat', the question must be asked: a threat to whom? To intermediaries who lose their monopoly? To platforms living off non-transparent commissions? To moral authorities who prefer to condemn rather than take responsibility?

For people within the community, Dobra Družba is not a threat. It is stabilization. It is risk reduction. It is the possibility to speak about one's own work in one's own name, not through the filters of others.

Threat is relative. What threatens inequality often strengthens justice.

Between legality and legitimacy

One of the biggest tensions Dobra Družba opens is the difference between legality and legitimacy. Some forms of work are legally unregulated or controversial, but at the same time socially widespread. The system often reacts with punishment instead of regulation.

Dobra Družba operates in this intermediate space. Not to bypass the law, but because the law has not yet caught up with reality. Legitimacy does not stem from the perfection of the legal framework, but from the ability to reduce harm and increase safety.

Community as a political fact

Every lasting community is a political fact, even if it does not declare itself political. By existing, it poses questions: who decides, who has access, who bears the risk, and who reaps the benefits.

Initiatives like Dobra Družba are not dangerous because they would disrupt order, but because they show that it is possible to operate differently. And the possibility of an alternative is always the greatest threat to any rigid system.

Community or threat – the wrong question

Perhaps the real question is wrongly posed. Dobra Družba is not either a community or a threat. It is a consequence. A consequence of long-term neglect, stigmatization, and disorder. When these conditions add up long enough, self-organization does not happen as a rebellion, but as a logical step.

If this is a threat, then the threat does not come from the community, but from the system that failed to adapt in time.

And in this sense, Dobra Družba is not an exception. It is merely one of the first that had the courage to become visible.