Maybe with enough bribes, Apple can get the SC to just invert the whole ruling: now every Fortnite transaction has to give Apple a cut, even when its unrelated to their platform.

The website only works with Chrome

Come on. Obama's continuation of presidential power-creep is not what enables Trump. Trump getting elected, taking over the Supreme Court, getting elected again, having all the billionaires lick his ass, etc is what enables him.

If you wanna lay it on Obama, blame him for not taking the right wing seriously enough and going after them at the local level where they had been building strength for the past 50+ years. Or for not betraying all his moderate-conservative supporters to implement some seriously progressive policy.

This, but in a hopeful voice instead of sarcastic 🙂

(Being surrounded by people who think more progressively will tend to shift people’s views)

The link I originally replied to said

Many people seem to think that anarchists are proponents of violence, chaos, and destruction ... In reality, nothing could be further from the truth

I don't see how it's possible to oppose the massive governments and billionaires of the world without destruction, so I wanted more information.

If you're out there committing various crimes to further your ideology, then that seems like you're doing your best.

I think these are good ideas. What I don't understand is how they survive in the world. Let's say you're an anarchist community of 200 people living in Palestine...?

Thanks!

Have you decided? If so, are you going to do anything about it?

who is it that you think should rule the entire world?

I suppose my objection is that "The Anarchist Library" seems like it's got some kind of grand vision behind it for a world without masters. But it sounds like you're saying that Anarchy is just going, "wow my masters are crap and i wish i didn't have to do their dumb shit." If so, I guess I'm an anarchist. Feels kinda lame, is all. And I empathize with the picture of text in the OP that says it's lame. |-:

That's an understandable position. Maybe more denialism than anarchism?

I appreciate the larger-context link, but it's not very convincing. It doesn't even convince itself in the end:

Now, you might object that all this is well and good as a way for small groups of people to get on with each other, but managing a city, or a country, is an entirely different matter. And of course there is something to this.

I've gotten the exact same lecture from Libertarians. "Life would be perfect if everything was run via free-market capitalism!" But I'm similarly unconvinced because there's noting to indicate that at the inter-state level it would be anything but fantasy.

Unless your pitch is that Anarchy just means, "love thy neighbor"? In which case, cool I'm on board. But I think it's confusing to use an existing word with a meaning to mean something totally different.

OK, cool. That definitely helps things.

I think where we're disagreeing is that I think in a capitalist society the promise of money will inevitably corrupt the government (because it's made of people). Maybe it can be avoided if the government performs additional regulatory action to stop anyone from getting too wealthy, but that sounds like beyond the limits that you want to set for government.

Without force

Whoah, whoah. Why'd you rule that out?

Your business plan: quality goods at reasonable prices. My business plan: hire some goons to kill you and take your stuff.

Historically, this has a lot of precedence.