6 ms·

My guy, I've spent a decade reading up on that word. You want to talk Bookchin, Kroptkin, or Öcalan I'm available any time. Respect to my anarchist comrades wh

My guy, I've spent a decade reading up on that word. You want to talk Bookchin, Kroptkin, or Öcalan I'm available any time. Respect to my anarchist comrades who are all or nothing, but I recognize the current system we live in, and I'm not going to throw away the useful tools before replacing them.

diob 4y ago
Heck, even Chomsky is an anarchist. I don't know what the comment to you was insinuating, that we shouldn't fix things? Big https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/330/819/e47.png https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/330/819/e47... energy.
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  "I don't know what the comment to you was insinuating" Obviously that anarchism means, being opposed to all government activity, regulation and rules, so he cannot call him an anarchist if he wants rules for a river. But the thing with anarchism is, that there is not really a authorative definition accepted and in use ..
  - TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
    > But the thing with anarchism is, that there is not really a authorative definition accepted and in use .. Sure there is: anarchism (n.) "political doctrine advocating leaderlessness," 1640s; see anarchy + -ism. anarchy (n.) 1530s, "absence of government," from French anarchie or directly from Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek anarkhia "lack of a leader, the state of people without a government" (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), abstract noun from anarkhos "rulerless," from an- "without" (see an- (1)) + arkhos "leader" (see archon).
    - cowthulhu 4y ago
      I disagree with anarchists as much as the next guy, but a quick google gets a bunch of results that contradict your definitions. It seems that anarchism is, at best, very rarely defined in the way you provided.
      - TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
        Which is why I quoted the original meaning and root words. etymonline.com
        cowthulhu 4y ago
        Well no fair! I’m sure the original meaning of “earth” is “the thing at the center of the universe”, but we’ve moved on from that definition!
        TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
        Earth means soil, dirt, that sort of stuff. It's meaning has stayed consistent. What is unfair about using a word how it was meant to be used?
        cowthulhu 4y ago
        Language evolves, otherwise we’d all be talking like Shakespeare. Am I getting trolled?
        TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
        Language evolves, but whenever people misunderstand each other by using the same word differently, it is perfectly fine to defer to the original meaning to avoid confusion. Especially, when no agreement is reached otherwise; Same applies to literally every other dispute, like marriage, property, labour, music, etc. Whomsoever originally wrote/performed the music, gets to name the song and tag their name to it. Whomever gets married first, gets dibs on wedding night. Whomever does the work, gets the spoils. etc.
    - hutzlibu 4y ago
      The joke was, that anarchists in general are not a big fan of authorative things, so you can cite all the definitions you want - there will be still lots of anarchists who will oppose that and have their own definition. And yes, they are contradictive, as for example some anarchists negate all authorithy all the time (at least in theory), while some are fine with voluntarily authority, with a grey area into unvoluntarily authority. (In my opinion, there is allmost no anarchist opposed to all authority - they might say so, but only because they negate the existence of informal hierachies and do not consider collectivism (theft) as a shape of authority for instance. Lots of hypocrisy going on there, but there are self aware and righteous folks among them)
      - TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
        Some people oppose all 'hierarchies', and say that is anarchism, but it is clear those are different words, and good luck getting rid of hierarchies without mass genocide, unless that is the real purpose.
        hutzlibu 4y ago
        "good luck getting rid of hierarchies without mass genocide, unless that is the real purpose" The idea of the peaceful anarchism like gandhi represented is, to convince people to just stop following unjust orders. No need for genocide this way and he showed, that this can work sometimes. The problem I see rather with the natural developing of informal hierachies in group dynamics. In other words, there will be leaders, even if they say everyone is equal.
    - ancapsfascists 4y ago
      This is not, by any stretch, what modern anarchists would use as a definition. Try instead, "a society free from unjust hierarchies". Most anarchists are comfortable with the idea of democracy, elections, and delegation of decision making. As long as it's consensual and democratic. Think of like, "hey, we need a treasurer to manage the finances". Anarchism is not a unified idea. Anarcho syndicalism is different from Anarcho communism is different from Anarcho socialism.
      - hutzlibu 4y ago
        "a society free from unjust hierarchies" What would be a just hierarchie? "Most anarchists are comfortable with the idea of democracy, elections, and delegation of decision making. As long as it's consensual and democratic" Most anarchists I met, not so much. Till the extreme point of "anarchists don't vote". Not even in a small group. There is a consensus or there is no decision. I like the idea of doing things in a consensus. But only one person in a bad mood can then block everything. But when you remove that person, it is not really a democratic consensus anymore, but majority rule .. which is fine by me, but is probably not "pure anarchism" anymore.
        ancapsfascists 4y ago
        I've met those types of anarchists. They get nothing done in the name of ideological purity. They'll still be getting nothing done two centuries from now. I think incrementalism is a dead end too - at some point we need to make some hard cuts away from current systems, but it's self defeating to not acknowledge the material reality in front of us.
        ancapsfascists 4y ago
        A just hierarchy might be: "we are working with a federation composed of 40 other anarchist groups. We elect a delegate and delegate small decisions to them, and they can be removed easily by the group." "We have a safety officer on the factory floor who has the power to stop the work of others if there's a concern. They can be replaced easily" "A teacher removing students who are disruptive to learning, but finding them alternative learning models." An unjust hierarchy is when one person has power over another for no reason and whose power is self reinforcing or permanent. (A wealthy capitalist has more power, and gains power faster than a factory worker.)
lazide 4y ago
How do you reconcile being an anarchist with calling for federal rule making interventionism?
- ancapsfascists 4y ago
  Here's an analogy: let's say you work on cars and you've got a decent set of tools. You have a friend who has an excellent set and a whole shop. You can imagine yourself running with your ideal set. But the first step isn't "throw out all your tools and get a $20 Walmart box of assorted tools." I can imagine a society built on mutual aid, and I practice that everywhere I can. But I have access to tools today. I can vote, I can use my voice to influence the government. What's my alternative, given the reality of today? Convert everyone asking the Colorado river to council communists before the river dries up? My tool box isn't perfect, but it has some good tools in it. Many of them I'd ideally get rid of and replace, but I'm not going to ignore the tools I have until I replace them with better ones.
  - lazide 4y ago
    That literally sounds like the opposite of anarchism to me. But you do you I guess?
    - ancapsfascists 4y ago
      Sounds like you don't know many anarchists? Most of the anarchists I know are focused on: Building mutual aid networks locally, first and foremost. We help us, we protect us. Think food, clothing, and shelter for anyone in need. Advocate for harm reduction. Given there are a lot of systemic problems that will take years to unwind, it's important to offset those harms, even if it's not your ultimate goal. I vote. It takes me ten minutes, it reduces the harm by electing progressive politicians who might be able to lower the power of capital. That doesn't make me not an anarchist. I can hold an ideal and also recognize reality simultaneously. Finally, anarchists educate. They are focused on teaching that anarchism isn't "the purge", it's a system built on the idea that every human deserves respect. We have the means to care for everyone and still enjoy some luxuries.
refurb 4y ago
An anarchist who promotes the government taking rights by force? Im a communist who loves free markets!
- ancapsfascists 4y ago
  Market socialism and market communism exist. I think they are bad ideologies, but they exist. Don't confuse ideals with immediate needs. My ideals, and what I'm willing to do today in the name of harm reduction aren't always aligned. It's called "making compromises" and "using your judgement". A blindly dogmatic adherence to ones own idealism is a recipe for all talk but no material improvements.
  - listenallyall 4y ago
    > blindly dogmatic adherence So then what's with the insistence (and multiple reminders) of self-labelling as "anarchist"? Why not pragmatist, or harm-reducer, or just not labelling or categorizing yourself at all?
    - cowthulhu 4y ago
      I think he calls himself an anarchist because his core beliefs are anarchist?
    - ancapsfascists 4y ago
      Because I'm an anarchist, that label is both correct and useful?
antifa 4y ago
Kropotkin is my favorite geologist/climatologist.
dontlaugh 4y ago
As a communist, respect to pragmatic anarchist comrades. State power can be useful, even if we both wish to be rid of it.
- ancapsfascists 4y ago
  Heck yeah. I might disagree with my communists friends, but we're closer together than we are far apart.

diob 4y ago

Heck, even Chomsky is an anarchist. I don't know what the comment to you was insinuating, that we shouldn't fix things? Big https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/330/819/e47.png https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/330/819/e47... energy.

hutzlibu 4y ago
"I don't know what the comment to you was insinuating" Obviously that anarchism means, being opposed to all government activity, regulation and rules, so he cannot call him an anarchist if he wants rules for a river. But the thing with anarchism is, that there is not really a authorative definition accepted and in use ..
- TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
  > But the thing with anarchism is, that there is not really a authorative definition accepted and in use .. Sure there is: anarchism (n.) "political doctrine advocating leaderlessness," 1640s; see anarchy + -ism. anarchy (n.) 1530s, "absence of government," from French anarchie or directly from Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek anarkhia "lack of a leader, the state of people without a government" (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), abstract noun from anarkhos "rulerless," from an- "without" (see an- (1)) + arkhos "leader" (see archon).
  - cowthulhu 4y ago
    I disagree with anarchists as much as the next guy, but a quick google gets a bunch of results that contradict your definitions. It seems that anarchism is, at best, very rarely defined in the way you provided.
    - TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
      Which is why I quoted the original meaning and root words. etymonline.com
      - cowthulhu 4y ago
        Well no fair! I’m sure the original meaning of “earth” is “the thing at the center of the universe”, but we’ve moved on from that definition!
        TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
        Earth means soil, dirt, that sort of stuff. It's meaning has stayed consistent. What is unfair about using a word how it was meant to be used?
        cowthulhu 4y ago
        Language evolves, otherwise we’d all be talking like Shakespeare. Am I getting trolled?
        TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
        Language evolves, but whenever people misunderstand each other by using the same word differently, it is perfectly fine to defer to the original meaning to avoid confusion. Especially, when no agreement is reached otherwise; Same applies to literally every other dispute, like marriage, property, labour, music, etc. Whomsoever originally wrote/performed the music, gets to name the song and tag their name to it. Whomever gets married first, gets dibs on wedding night. Whomever does the work, gets the spoils. etc.
  - hutzlibu 4y ago
    The joke was, that anarchists in general are not a big fan of authorative things, so you can cite all the definitions you want - there will be still lots of anarchists who will oppose that and have their own definition. And yes, they are contradictive, as for example some anarchists negate all authorithy all the time (at least in theory), while some are fine with voluntarily authority, with a grey area into unvoluntarily authority. (In my opinion, there is allmost no anarchist opposed to all authority - they might say so, but only because they negate the existence of informal hierachies and do not consider collectivism (theft) as a shape of authority for instance. Lots of hypocrisy going on there, but there are self aware and righteous folks among them)
    - TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
      Some people oppose all 'hierarchies', and say that is anarchism, but it is clear those are different words, and good luck getting rid of hierarchies without mass genocide, unless that is the real purpose.
      - hutzlibu 4y ago
        "good luck getting rid of hierarchies without mass genocide, unless that is the real purpose" The idea of the peaceful anarchism like gandhi represented is, to convince people to just stop following unjust orders. No need for genocide this way and he showed, that this can work sometimes. The problem I see rather with the natural developing of informal hierachies in group dynamics. In other words, there will be leaders, even if they say everyone is equal.
  - ancapsfascists 4y ago
    This is not, by any stretch, what modern anarchists would use as a definition. Try instead, "a society free from unjust hierarchies". Most anarchists are comfortable with the idea of democracy, elections, and delegation of decision making. As long as it's consensual and democratic. Think of like, "hey, we need a treasurer to manage the finances". Anarchism is not a unified idea. Anarcho syndicalism is different from Anarcho communism is different from Anarcho socialism.
    - hutzlibu 4y ago
      "a society free from unjust hierarchies" What would be a just hierarchie? "Most anarchists are comfortable with the idea of democracy, elections, and delegation of decision making. As long as it's consensual and democratic" Most anarchists I met, not so much. Till the extreme point of "anarchists don't vote". Not even in a small group. There is a consensus or there is no decision. I like the idea of doing things in a consensus. But only one person in a bad mood can then block everything. But when you remove that person, it is not really a democratic consensus anymore, but majority rule .. which is fine by me, but is probably not "pure anarchism" anymore.
      - ancapsfascists 4y ago
        I've met those types of anarchists. They get nothing done in the name of ideological purity. They'll still be getting nothing done two centuries from now. I think incrementalism is a dead end too - at some point we need to make some hard cuts away from current systems, but it's self defeating to not acknowledge the material reality in front of us.
      - ancapsfascists 4y ago
        A just hierarchy might be: "we are working with a federation composed of 40 other anarchist groups. We elect a delegate and delegate small decisions to them, and they can be removed easily by the group." "We have a safety officer on the factory floor who has the power to stop the work of others if there's a concern. They can be replaced easily" "A teacher removing students who are disruptive to learning, but finding them alternative learning models." An unjust hierarchy is when one person has power over another for no reason and whose power is self reinforcing or permanent. (A wealthy capitalist has more power, and gains power faster than a factory worker.)

lazide 4y ago

How do you reconcile being an anarchist with calling for federal rule making interventionism?

ancapsfascists 4y ago
Here's an analogy: let's say you work on cars and you've got a decent set of tools. You have a friend who has an excellent set and a whole shop. You can imagine yourself running with your ideal set. But the first step isn't "throw out all your tools and get a $20 Walmart box of assorted tools." I can imagine a society built on mutual aid, and I practice that everywhere I can. But I have access to tools today. I can vote, I can use my voice to influence the government. What's my alternative, given the reality of today? Convert everyone asking the Colorado river to council communists before the river dries up? My tool box isn't perfect, but it has some good tools in it. Many of them I'd ideally get rid of and replace, but I'm not going to ignore the tools I have until I replace them with better ones.
- lazide 4y ago
  That literally sounds like the opposite of anarchism to me. But you do you I guess?
  - ancapsfascists 4y ago
    Sounds like you don't know many anarchists? Most of the anarchists I know are focused on: Building mutual aid networks locally, first and foremost. We help us, we protect us. Think food, clothing, and shelter for anyone in need. Advocate for harm reduction. Given there are a lot of systemic problems that will take years to unwind, it's important to offset those harms, even if it's not your ultimate goal. I vote. It takes me ten minutes, it reduces the harm by electing progressive politicians who might be able to lower the power of capital. That doesn't make me not an anarchist. I can hold an ideal and also recognize reality simultaneously. Finally, anarchists educate. They are focused on teaching that anarchism isn't "the purge", it's a system built on the idea that every human deserves respect. We have the means to care for everyone and still enjoy some luxuries.

refurb 4y ago

An anarchist who promotes the government taking rights by force? Im a communist who loves free markets!

ancapsfascists 4y ago
Market socialism and market communism exist. I think they are bad ideologies, but they exist. Don't confuse ideals with immediate needs. My ideals, and what I'm willing to do today in the name of harm reduction aren't always aligned. It's called "making compromises" and "using your judgement". A blindly dogmatic adherence to ones own idealism is a recipe for all talk but no material improvements.
- listenallyall 4y ago
  > blindly dogmatic adherence So then what's with the insistence (and multiple reminders) of self-labelling as "anarchist"? Why not pragmatist, or harm-reducer, or just not labelling or categorizing yourself at all?
  - cowthulhu 4y ago
    I think he calls himself an anarchist because his core beliefs are anarchist?
  - ancapsfascists 4y ago
    Because I'm an anarchist, that label is both correct and useful?

antifa 4y ago

Kropotkin is my favorite geologist/climatologist.

dontlaugh 4y ago

As a communist, respect to pragmatic anarchist comrades. State power can be useful, even if we both wish to be rid of it.

ancapsfascists 4y ago
Heck yeah. I might disagree with my communists friends, but we're closer together than we are far apart.