• 4 Posts
  • 67 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 28th, 2023

help-circle

  • you control the lesser power (individual) with a bigger power (the “ourselves”).

    to quote: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca213

    anarchists recognise that individuals are the basic unit of society and that only individuals have interests and feelings. This means they oppose “collectivism” and the glorification of the group. In anarchist theory the group exists only to aid and develop the individuals involved in them.

    While groups cannot think, individuals cannot live or discuss by themselves. Groups and associations are an essential aspect of individual life

    Anarchism rejects the abstract individualism of capitalism, with its ideas of “absolute” freedom of the individual which is constrained by others. This theory ignores the social context in which freedom exists and grows.

    In practice, both individualism and collectivism lead to a denial of both individual liberty and group autonomy and dynamics.

    The link goes into more detail.

    It’s not like humans didn’t arise from more anarchist structures.

    A Definition for a term I’m about to use:
    Archy - Hierarchy, Rule, structure of command and subordination, opposite of anarchy.

    How did humans “rise” from anarchist structures? I wouldn’t call whats going on right now any better than the pre-archic societies. Those societies were destroyed because they didn’t have the structures to protect themselves against archy anarchy isn’t just no archy, it’s conscious opposition to archy. Now that we understand archic structures and their influence we can start opposing it. Pre-archic societies couldn’t

    having spontaneous mobs forming to upholds the customs

    Why would you need mobs? often times a single other person would be enough to stop/deter anti-social behavior.

    as long as they are kept in check by a bigger power

    Who controls that bigger power and what’s stopping them from becoming corrupt? There is no bigger power than the state and police is the state. You can’t have anything bigger. As soon as you have representative democracy the people will go from humans to a resource. They will be grown and molded to not care about their society and just root for their team. Governance isn’t something you can delegate to others. It makes you lazy and means you will stop thinking about the actual problems and start fighting with anyone who disagrees with you.

    Representational democracy does not work. The state is a living system that has interests of it’s own and those will always be prioritized over the citizens. Sooner or later every state devolves into authoritarianism. All the while screwing over anyone who wants to live without it.





  • Seriously, what are you talking about?

    Anarchy. I’m an anarchist. I’m talking about anarchy. People do not need to be controlled/enforced/governed. We are perfectly capable of organizing a society ourselves. Stopping violence should not be the responsibility of a special group but everyone. Social pressure is more powerful than direct violence. Otherwise the police would not have such a cushy job.

    What would be the motive to write or follow laws?

    No one needs to write laws. Custom is already a ruleset that most people in a society follow. You don’t need laws on top of that. It’s unnecessary and creates cases where the right thing cannot be done because it’s illegal. Government creates a ton of unnecessary busywork that most people do not need to concern themselves with. What does the government do that you couldn’t do with free association and an empowered populus?

    Do you follow laws just because you’re afraid of the police? Or is it because of the social pressure to not cause a fuss. Do you need rules to be written down on a piece of paper for you to follow them? I think not. I’ve followed a lot of “made up” rules because I understand these rules make my life better. Human beings are capable of working together without needing someone else to tell them how to live their life. We did it for millennia before archy clawed it’s way into every society (by colonizing the anarchic ones because they were “primitive”)

    It’s not the CEOs/police or the existence of their function

    Yes it is. You cannot have police that doesn’t abuse their power. If you have a position in society that gives people power, It’s the power-hungry that fill them. Everyone that doesn’t want to dictate other peoples lives will not fill those positions. so sooner or later they are going to be filled by people who want power and nothing else. It’s no coincidence archy keeps devolving into fascism and totalitarianism. It’s inevitable. Society elevates people who want power so you end up with people who believe they are god and can do no wrong.


  • No. We do not need cops. The police will always be a corrupt hand of state violence. As long as there are cops (as in special people who are allowed to use violence) in any form they will ultimately become corrupt. As long as law is enforced it is not equal, and it will never protect “the people”. The people are the only ones that can protect “the people”. You don’t need cops, you need everyone to start policing people around them. That is the only way everyone gets protection.

    ACAB! All power to all the people!


  • Wube (creators of Factorio) have the best customer policy in game development.

    • Don’t go on sale so you will always pay the cheapest price.
    • if you have the game on steam you can download a DRM-free version directly from their website. (alongside all old versions)
    • Encourage the community to create mods, host your own mod portal accessible inside the game.
    • Make a good game.
    • Be open about game development through monthly blog posts.

    The only way I would like it more is if the game was open source but since that’s impossible to sell I will take this.


  • Glad to see I’m not the only one having rambling problems. Hope you’re ready for a swim (of an alphabetic variety).

    But just quickly wanted to get in that I very much dislike cars, just a convenient example because of cars being notoriously long to get in the Soviet union.

    the soviet union is the primary reason why I shy away from communism (technically state capitalism but that doesn’t matter).

    any system has successfully met all the fundamental basic needs of health, shelter and food, and is no longer capitalist.

    I’m using the word capitalist the classical (marx) sense of private ownership of the means of production. Companies are capitalist and coops are socialist. one is privately owned, the other collectively.

    <sidenote> Yes. Soviet Union was capitalist. state ownership isn’t socialism, only collective ownership is, and just calling them collectives is not collective ownership. </sidenote>

    Freely associated groups, who set rules amongst themselves? Doesn’t sound very anarchist at all, sounds quick democratic

    Why? If there are no hierarchical structures, Eg the rules are made collectively, why would it not be anarchism? On the democratic part I would say that without majority rule, which is still rule and thus would be opposed by anarchists, it shouldn’t be called democracy as the original meaning of the word is “people rule”.

    Sure, Europeans states are free to do what they want, with certain restrictions they agree to by being part of the EU.

    States are fundamentally archic structures, and the EU is even more archic. They are all managed top-down. You have someone at the top of the pyramid who says what will be done. That’s archy. That’s vertical organisation.

    Anarchy is managed differently, through horizontal organisation. Instead of choosing people who will have power over you, you use your own social potential to build collective power to resist the archic power. I view anarchy as a fluid machine. Like a water bubble in 0g. The parts of the machine (people) can move around and bounce off of each-other which changes the shape of the machine. Every cog shapes the machine to fit them. Archy is a machine made of steel someone comes along, sets up the shape, and if a gear doesn’t fit they get ground to dust. Anarchy is chaotic organisation. It doesn’t do in-groups and out-groups, instead seeing the world as a single group, and empowering everyone in that group to find their place. In such conditions any harmful activity is completely pointless.

    Bad people will always exist. But archy rewards bad behaviour by allowing them to get to the top. Anarchy is nothing more than saying “people are imperfect, so no-one should have the right to rule, as every ruler will make mistakes”.

    On the topic of defence. There is no need to have centralized defence. decentralized defence forces can work wonders. If someone comes and attacks your group the entire group will defend itself. Why should it fall on anyone specific. There are many ways to defend and an anarchist group would encourage everyone to defend the group in their own way.

    supply and demand aren’t made up things we can leave behind in a post capitalist world.

    Maybe supply and demand aren’t, but economics are: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionC.html#secc12. (If you didn’t notice the AFAQ has different sections, The complete A4 PDF is 3077 pages)

    Money is great. It’s just accounting, and allows for greater personal choice

    Money is one of the foundations of archy. as soon as you have a concrete number that is associated with a single person those people have power and authority over those with a smaller number. You can’t have a fair society with money. And if everyone’s basic needs are met then why do you even need it. how can you have an economy if people can just opt out of it.

    Small freely associating groups are no longer possible we have cities of millions.

    Why? Computers have allowed people to stay connected to hundreds of people. And even though it’s currently used to incentivise consumerist isolationism, it doesn’t have to be. Why do you think that millions of groups of millions of people can’t work without some centralized oversight? I would say they would work better because they won’t have the bottlenecks of centralisation. Why can’t every apartment block be a commune? Why can’t the chef that lives next door make the meals for all of you? Why can’t the cleaner clean all of your appartments? Why can’t that truck driver bring the chef fresh produce from the farmer he’s known for 20 years so all of you can eat and be merry? Why can’t that work in a city of millions? If an apartment block doesn’t have a chef someone who wants to go to the nearby school and learn. Why does society need to be made up of people who don’t know each-other, doing everything they can to screw over everyone else because that’s how you get ahead in life? AND WHY SHOULD WE LIVE IN A SYSTEM THAT ENCOURAGES IT? That’s all archy is. Means for awful people to screw over others. If not everyone is good then no-one is capable of rule.

    are you seriously suggesting not having a police force? Not having courts?

    ABSOLUTELY! ACAB! (Originally an anarchist slogan until it’s mainstream adoption during BLM) The police are professional bullies, no matter what shape they take. If the responsibility of the enforcement of rules falls on a single group, that group makes the rules. Law enforcement should be the duty of everyone. you see something doing something you think is wrong, go up to them and tell them to stop. If other people are around ask them what they think is going on. no-one else is responsible for your safety but yourself, by keeping others safe. Tit-for-tat. By protecting those around you, you’re creating a culture of mutual protection so when you’re in trouble that culture will help you. The courts and police were not meant to protect people. They were made to protect property and the ruling class. The only reason they protect people is because the people that threaten the ruling class often threaten normal people as well. (Also the facade of justice gives them plenty of bootlickers) For every person that got justice out of the courts there is another that got screwed over. For every woman that sent their abuser to jail there is another whose life was screwed owner by false allegations.

    Justice does not come from books and laws. but from the reactions of people. in a communal justice system the shame of being outed is far more motivating for not committing crimes than fear of jail. Just look at how effective christian rule was during the medieval ages.

    Anarchy is about creating a culture that opposes archy. A culture that makes the security of all the people the responsibility of all the people. A culture that ensures everyone has a place in society that they have chosen, not been pushed into. A culture that doesn’t assume anyone needs to be governed.

    To me anarchy is the society of kindness. Where the power consolidates among those that gain the most respect. Respect that, if abused, will be taken away.

    Anarchy is society in it’s most complicatedly simple, chaotically ordered, and collectively individual. It’s my reason to live. So I hope you can see why these ideas matter to me.


  • Val@lemm.eetoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldMom has a Bachelor of Facebook.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    As an Anarchist I’m irresistibly compelled to respond to this in order to spread propaganda. (Sorry for the ramble I don’t know how to write concisely.)

    To start I don’t use communism, democracy or even socialism to refer to my beliefs. I use anarchy. That’s because anarchy in my mind is concrete. no-archy. against hierarchy. Even though anarchy does follow the classical definition of communism, and is socialism, as in worker-owned means of production. These words are unnecessary as anarchy does the trick. And communism has too much bloody history to most people, me included.

    Anarchy is not possible in the current cultural space. Anarchy requires a complete transformation of all parts of society, including culture. A lot of your problems come from having underlying archic (hierarchical/capitalist) beliefs. For an anarchist society to succeed these beliefs must be abandoned.

    This is because of some of the variants I think are a bit generous in their belief that people won’t act selfishly:

    This is a comprehensive answer on a popular FAQ: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca215

    Anarcho-communism? Sure, if …

    This entire paragraph is based in tribalism. An inherent idea that people belong to distinct groups that compete with each-other. It is one of those archic beliefs that I mentioned. There are many different responses to this but I believe in federation (Thanks to this video: https://youtu.be/lrTzjaXskUU timestamp 36:44). This system envisions the anarchist society not as distinct groups but a large number of intersecting groups. No group would “raid” other groups because they have friends in all those groups. On top of that everyone in an anarchist society should be educated enough to understand that everyone in the society has a role to play and hurting them is hurting the society which is in turn hurting them.

    On your opinions on money. It seems you do not understand how an anarchist economy would function. In anarchy you wouldn’t buy something, you would order it from the person or co-op who makes those things. Generally used items like food and clothes would probably be available for free, but anything requiring construction would be ordered. This allows you to receive a completely personalized item. Otherwise people would just work for no reason and end up with things they don’t need. I don’t see any point in producing an item just so it would sit on a shelf somewhere. There might be a small storage for conveyor-produced items in order to reduce order times, but in general retail wouldn’t need to exist.

    Also due to your usage of “managers wield influence” I can see you haven’t read any socialist theory as in socialism and anarchism the managers are responsible to the workers. If they are acting in corrupt ways that’s because the workers don’t care enough to uncover it and change the manager. And when it comes to “oversee production for their own personal gain” I am left wondering what personal gain would that be. without money there is no incentive to hoard and if that personal gain is abusive then it will be discovered and the manager changed.

    Else you’re left with a system where you’re waiting years to get a car,

    The fact that you think cars are a thing in a socialist society again reveals your inexperience. Cars are a fundamentally capitalist construct that have no use in socialist societies.

    finite resources but unlimited desires.

    The unlimited desires (that I’m interpreting as material as spiritual and mental desires don’t need resources) are exactly the thing that anarchy seeks to destroy. It is a poisonous mindset cultivated by capitalism that leads to catastrophe (for example look out the window). It is incompatible with continued existence and the destruction of it in an individual is the first step towards anarchism. It was made with the specific need to fuel the hyper-consumerism of the modern age. You get told from everywhere that you need more stuff. Understanding that you don’t is fundamental to all anti-capitalist thought.

    I want to suffix this post with a point that if any of this comes across as rude then that was not my intention. The points made reflect my own ideas and opinions and other anarchist will have their own. I hope you consider what I wrote (and again sorry for the rambling.)







  • You could have a command that recommends commands and then you select them on a drop-down list.

    Alternatively if the dataset is verified you wouldn’t need to worry about it running dangerous commands, since it doesn’t know any. Or you could have a list of verified commands that run automatically and any command not on that list requires confirmation.

    But this is missing the point that most of the time I know exactly what command I want to run so adding a LLM Is quite useless. The reason so much of linux is still relying on commands is because for a lot of people (myself included) commands are quick and efficient.



  • Sorry! I over-reacted. You are absolutely right. I am just used to the communist/syndicalist side and so when seeing someone talk about anarchism being against taxes the mind immediately jumps to the an-cap conclusion.

    However I wonder how does individualist anarchism deal with wealth inequality? And the above mentioned economic freedoms limiting political freedom?



  • If this is sarcasm, then this is a conflict of terms that I thought about including in the meme but decided against for a snappier message. Listening can be read as either “obeying” or “hearing out”. This meme was made with the “hearing out” meaning in mind.

    If its not and you use that meaning of listen then Yeah, Ain’t that great.