12 ms·
"Kolektiva is an anti-colonial anarchist collective that offers federated social media to anarchist collectives and individuals in the fediverse. For the social
by yrro 3y ago
"Kolektiva is an anti-colonial anarchist collective that offers federated social media to anarchist collectives and individuals in the fediverse. For the social movements and liberation!"
In case anyone else was wondering.
Accoridng to <https://breadtube.fandom.com/wiki/Kolektiva https://breadtube.fandom.com/wiki/Kolektiva>, kolektiva.social was launched by "the anarchist video colletives subMedia and Antimidia".
- RobotToaster 3y agoFor "anarchists" they sure have a lot of rules https://kolektiva.social/about https://kolektiva.social/about
- Kab1r 3y agoThat's really not that many rules.
- mc32 3y agoThey fund out that in order to move, the rubber has to hit the road. Idealism and vigorous wishing, does not make things happen in this world, they found out.
- public_defender 3y agoI think you're confusing anarchy with disorder.
- fsckboy 3y agothat would be like confusing chicken and egg!
- public_defender 3y agoIt would. Imagine being pecked to death by a bird, all the while yelling, "Help! Egg attack!"
- chongli 3y agoThat’s the first definition of anarchy: anarchy |'anəki| noun [mass noun] 1. a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems: the country has been plunged into a state of anarchy. 2. the organization of society on the basis of voluntary cooperation, without political institutions or hierarchical government; anarchism.
- guerrilla 3y agoThat definition has nothing to do with political anarchism.
- richbell 3y agoOf course they have stringent rules. If they just let anyone post whatever they wanted, it would be total anarchy!
- chowells 3y agoSounds like someone has no clue what anarchism is! Hint: it's not about rules, it's about hierarchy.
- chongli 3y agoDon’t they also have moderators? People to enforce the rules? Plus an administrator who owns the server and can even remove moderators? That’s a hierarchy.
- briantakita 3y agoIt's just a server, not governance over their collective. Ideally they had backups or people owned their own data on a DHT or Blockchain. Otherwise the administrator has custody over the data...similar to a bank having custody over funds. My understanding is if someone breaks the trust, the victims would have a way to settle grievances...probably through a fine or some other financial means.
- boredhedgehog 3y agoSo you're saying nobody is enforcing the rules? Or everyone enforces them equally?
- lannisterstark 3y agoYou realize that heirarchy is exactly how you enforce rules, correct? You can't enforce rules without heirarchy. Seems to me it's you who has no idea what anarchy is. "no slaves, no masters" doesn't mean people who can arbitrarily enforce "rules."
- EA-3167 3y agoNever, EVER get into a semantic debate with people who are lying to themselves.
- BasedAnon 3y agono you don't understand their hierarchy is totally temporary and they can just change it at any time unlike 'unjustified' hierarchies, also everything will just operate on a gift economy and somehow no one will exploit this
- iguana_lawyer 3y agoI don’t think you understand what anarchism is.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- gcoakes 3y ago> Messages promoting capitalism or meritocracy Fascinating. I thought anarchy was supposed to be all about unfettered freedom of association and trade with no governmental oversight. They seem to be defining it as opposition to the existing societal structure rather than a description of the desired structure. In fairness, I assume their rules are for residents of that server, not accounts which are federated in.
- panarky 3y agoFreedom of association must include the freedom not to associate or it is meaningless.
- andrei_says_ 3y agoI am no expert but my understanding is that anarchy is against rulers, not rules. And, insisting on carefully keeping in check the power of those who are given temporary power over others. Is the intention of your reply to promote the stereotype that anarchy equals lawlessness and chaos? From Wikipedia: Anarchist organizations come in a variety of forms, largely based upon common anarchist principles of voluntary cooperation, mutual aid, and direct action. They are also largely informed by anarchist social theory and philosophy, tending towards participation and decentralization.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hayst4ck 3y agoHow do you enforce rules without hierarchy? How do you make efficient decisions and coordinate actions against an enemy who has decided that hierarchy allows them to wage war more efficiently and effectively. Anarchy hand waives away so many critical problems. It seems like a different flavor of libertarianism. I have a casual belief that anarchy is an ideology pushed by foreign interests (Russia in particular) namely to cause chaos and prevent institutional investment from otherwise liberal people. Institutions build power and power can be used for good or bad. Societies operations depends on good people getting into positions of power out of a sense of responsibility, rather than bad people getting into power out of a sense of ambition. Politics is largely an idea of how the game prisoners dilemma should be played. Libertarians and anarchists alike believe in an "always cooperate" strategy because "defection" is not a wildly different concept than domination. To defect against someone who cooperates is to dominate them. These ideologies take the stance that no one should be able to dominate, but fail to properly account for those who will choose to try to dominate anyway. These ideologies fail because no matter how much anyone wishes otherwise, might is the ultimate arbiter of disputes and participating in a hierarchy makes you, in the aggregate sense, stronger. This means it is a somewhat a fools errand to fight oppression because it assumes a position of less power. One must be able to oppress and then choose not to. Then you run into the greater problem of if there are no consequences for you because you are able to oppress, why should you be bound by an ideology that inhibits you? The biggest problem any anarchist faces is that they think they need to fight the police rather than become the police. An ideologically consistent anarchist should be on the police force exercising their individual power against those who try to dominate others and changing the culture of societies enforcers from within rather than thinking they can fight it from outside.
- tyfon 3y agoAnarchists are not really against rules pr se but against rulers if I have understood it correctly :)
- stepupmakeup 3y agoA lot of it seems like typical internet forum common sense, no spam, no extreme content (gore/porn), that sort of stuff. But the rest just reads off as "don't post stuff we don't like such as pepe frogs, alt right symbols, star wars spoilers, flat earthers, holocaust deniers" without directly naming it. Oh, I scrolled down and they do specifically mention nazi germany and covid19.
- DoItToMe81 3y agoThis is the sad norm. Leftist websites have been mostly seized by permanently online rules lawyers, who try to proactively block any slight against the moderation. Usually relating to mainstream identity politics, and to the point of suffocating discussion for those outside of their in-group. It was not always like this, and I hope one day these narcissistic weirdos leave, and people can once again discuss freely.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago> kolektiva.social was launched by "the anarchist video colletives subMedia and Antimidia". Which may be a front for the FBI. There is probably a really good chance that any social site that is catering to the groups outside of the mainstream has the FBI behind it.
- guerrilla 3y agoNo, subMedia is well known in the anarchist community and has a long and reputable history.
- DarkByte8 3y agoWhat other groups that are outside of the mainstream has the FBI behind them? Could you give me 3 examples?
- GloomyBoots 3y agoThe Proud Boys were heavily infiltrated up to and including Enrique Tarrio. Atomwaffen was entirely astroturfed. The libertarians entrapped in the Gretchen Whitmer case. The "right" has a long history of FBI infiltration--klan meetings being comprised entirely of feds trying to bust each other has been a running joke for decades. The "left" is similar, but it's not usually the the FBI these days AFAICT.
- FormerBandmate 3y agoThe Atomwaffen are legitimately a gang that has killed several people
- GloomyBoots 3y agoThey were legitimately a group of mentally ill losers sharing edgy memes. The FBI got involved (see Josh Sutter) and began producing those well-crafted propaganda materials, including videos featuring actors wearing identical clothes to actual members. A lot of them got spooked and jumped ship. Those who stayed were literally drugged as part of "occult initiation" rituals, and, yes, some were finally convinced to carry out murders.