340
when they say they're a communist (quokk.au)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/mop
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 8 months ago (18 children)

Zapatista

The Zapatistas themselves say they're neither anarchism or communism, but their own thing.

Historically the biggest threat to anarchist revolution hasn’t been capitalism

Weird how you've been convinced the guys you literally need a revolution to displace is worth less of your energy than calling other people trying to do the same thing red fash.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 20 points 8 months ago* (17 children)

    Being your own thing and living by mutual consent is anarchist. Labels are ultimately irrelevant, actions matter.

    We need a revolution to displace any authority. Authority will never wither away on its own.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (16 children)

    any authority

    P sure you mean unjust hierarchies, your mom telling you to go to bed and the anarchist copelected community representative or whatever telling you you're not allowed to feed the bears in your backyard are examples of authority.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (15 children)

    No, I mean any authority.

    "Unjust Hierarchies" is Chomsky libshit take on anarchism.

    We want horizontal organisation, not top-down authority. Don't just tell me not to feed the bears, work with me, talk with me, educate me on why not to feed the bears.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (14 children)

    So like when your neighbor in Anarchistan keeps feeding the bears, causing them to overrun the town, is the rest of the town just supposed to tolerate it? How is society supposed to work without any kind of authority?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 8 points 8 months ago* (13 children)

    Anarchistan? Is that implying the 'stan' prefix means some run-down place. That's really bordering onto some racist shit, and I'm already straining my tolerance for you as is.

    Believe it or not, most people are not going to want to invite bears into their backyard especially if aware of the dangers. If the town decides to make rules against it, they town can act on it and solve the problem. Anarchism is not do whatever you want, whenever you want. It's horizontal organisation and mutual consent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    Anarchistan? Is that implying the ‘stan’ prefix means some run-down place.

    -istan just means "land of", I picked anarchistan because it had a ring to it and I was in Kazakhstan a couple months ago.

    Believe it or not, most people are not going to want to invite bears into their backyard especially if aware of the dangers.

    I picked that example because that happened when a bunch of libertarians decided to make their own town., though usually they dont get beyond 1 person scamming the rest.

    What if the woman who wants to feed bears donuts stops consenting to the town rules? Do they have the authority to stop or remove her?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 8 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I know what it means. I also know it’s used by racist chuds to talk bad about places, and you were using it to highlight a town where bears would run rampant… Not a good look if you had no ill intentions.

    Libertarians are not Anarchists. Ancaps steal anarchist ‘branding’ to push capitalist bullshit. It’s like the Nazis calling themselves socialists, it means nothing and their ideology is not related.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    You're (deliberately?) bendng the definition of aufthority in order to score a point. You know that what you describe doesn't fit the anarchist critique of "authority".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    I'm asking these open ended questions to give you an opportunity to explain what authority means within an anarchist context and how a community can deal with someone doing something that is potentially harmful to the rest of the community.

    score a point.

    If someone thinks anarchists complaining about communists instead of engaging with the systems that actually have power is silly, how do you think they'd feel about the reverse?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    But anarchists oppose authority. In an anarchist utopia, there is no authority. Here's an explanation of the distinctions anarchists make

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    You didn't answer my question, but the thing you linked me suggests you don't think industrialized civilization should exist?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (2 children)

    I didn't answer, because the question didn't make any sense.

    you don't think industrialized civilization should exist?

    Another term that you're probably misunderstanding in bad faith.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (1 child)

    I described a scenario where ordinarily we would use someone with a position of authority to deal with a problem. I asked you what the anarchist solution is.

    All you've done is accuse me of bad faith and tell me I'm not using definitions correctly without telling me what the correct one would be in these contexts or telling me literally anything about anarchy. Oh and linked a paper where a person says they don't believe children should be required to go to school and that Industrial civilization is simply unfit to nurture human life and then told me I must be misunderstanding what is meant by "industrial civilization".

    I am trying my best here, but you're not giving me much to work with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    I asked you what the anarchist solution is.

    "The anarchist answer"™️ probably looks like a militia of delegates, woven into a process of restorative justice.

    Tap for spoilerAnd now you're probably gonna pull an Engels and claim that that's authority.

    without telling me what the correct one would be in these contexts or telling me literally anything about anarchy.

    That's not true. I shared an article explaining why your definition doesn't fit what we're talking about.

    Oh and linked a paper

    It's an essay.

    where a person says they don't believe children should be required to go to school and that Industrial civilization is simply unfit to nurture human life

    Called it!

    School is an institution that was introduced to prepare the children of the proletariat to work in industry. That's why going to school is mandatory in (most) capitalist countries.

    You better read up on what havoc industrialization wreaked on family condition. The natural urge of children to play and learn being surpressed in order to prepare them for capitalistic exploitation and sort them into the financial caste they're supposed to be in is something you condone?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    Idk if it's smart to base a system pff the assumption that people always act in their own best interest, that's how we got where we are in the west.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    No it’s not.

    We have a system where we assume someone else is going to act into our best interest and vote for them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    In practice, yes, but Keynesisn theory, what the west's political economic system is based on is fundamentally based on that assumption that people act in their own best interest. The whole invisible hand theory is also based on the same assumption

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent