Are Lemmy anarchists okay? How does this person have 24 upvotes? In what universe are anarchists NOT doing class analysis, (therefore) don’t want to abolish capitalism, and don’t want to fight archism?

Link to the comment

I suspect this is just because libs absolutely DESPISE comrade @Cowbee@hexbear.net and will upvote anything smart-sounding that supposedly addresses whatever is being discussed?

Also, gotta love the whole “I have this opinion and many anarchists will disagree and that’s what anarchism is about”. Like, buddy, you haven’t read one book or talked to one anarchist IRL, let alone organized in your entire life.

  • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    To be slightly fair to them, some anarchists do reject class analysis. They’re wrong, of course, and are fringe among anarchists, but they exist. Further, the rest of their comment isn’t nearly as bad as that line makes them seem, and they do admit to having an opinion other anarchists would disagree with. I disagree with them of course, and I’m probably being too generous. I just interact with far worse daily.

    That being said, the libs do seem to hate me, I agree lol

        • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          Of course anarchists “do class analysis” and want to abolish capitalism. But that’s just because those are examples of oppression in our everyday lives. What I mean is that it is secondary to the actual goal of creating anarchic spaces which will could eventually replace both class and capitalism. Class analysis really isn’t useful for that because the only thing it offers is a vague “The bourgeoisie are the enemy”. Until someone points a gun at me or punches me I don’t have any enemies.

          And like I said this is just my version of anarchism. A combination of Pluralism, Pacifism, Apolity and being sooo fucking tired of the endless discussions that lead nowhere.

          This is indefensible trash trying to paper over the immense absurdity of their nonsensical worldview, not in being an anarchist but in failing to understand anything about existing political systems. “Social murder? Is that the name of your new band?”

          The absolute audacity to call class analysis “vague” because they haven’t read a book in their fucking life.

          • miz [any, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            Until someone points a gun at me or punches me I don’t have any enemies.

            yeah sure, just like nobody’s racist unless and until they scream the N word in your face

          • Damarcusart [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            14 days ago

            The absolute audacity to call class analysis “vague” because they haven’t read a book in their fucking life.

            If there’s one thing liberals are good at, it’s taking their own severe ignorance and pretending it is actually wisdom.

          • Val@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            13 days ago

            I will admit that I don’t actually know that much about class analysis. The material I consume is more focused on critique of authority, decentralised organisation and production, things like that. Which is why I think class analysis is redundant as it is already covered under critique of authority. Except authority focuses on the actual actions that people take instead of their positions, and it covers representative democracy as well.

            But I still think it’s a valid framework, not just one that I would use.

            And if you think I haven’t read anything I’ve posted a list as a response in this thread.

            • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 days ago

              Class isn’t authority. There are inter-class authorities, and intra-class authorities. In my opinion, the latter aren’t bad and are often cases necessary and useful, but that’s more into Marxism. Anarchism needs class analysis because it informs anarchists on what the weak points and points of contention in capitalist society are. The working classes stand in opposition not to any vague concept of authority, but instead are a part of a complex system of circulation, production, and distribtution that is regularly centralizing.

              Anarchists that wish to decentralize society need to understand how to counteract this centralizing force. Marxists push it forward into collectivization and democratization, while anarchists instead typically go for prefiguration and community aid. In either case, though, these forces must be understood in order to act, and these forces are determined by class, as they aren’t simply abstractions but a real material system that functions in the material world.

          • Val@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            14 days ago

            It’s not vague because I haven’t read theory. It’s vague because the things I’ve read are contradictory and the only way to encompass all of them is to be vague.

            I understand existing political systems. I want to destroy them. I’m not focusing my time and energy into doing it because no-one is, so it seems pointless. You achieve nothing marching alone, and the moment others join they are going to have better idea what to do than I do.

      • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        Sus in a vacuum, as @Edie@hexbear.net said it’s more reasonable than you’d expect. I still have the usual Marxist disagreements, but this isn’t the same as what the other user was doing (and is why I gave them their fair credit).

        Their statements are wrong, as are their disparagements of class struggle and the vague hodge-podge of ideas, but it’s one of the least bad takes on that thread.

        Maybe my standards are too low.

      • Speaker [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 days ago

        Many anarchist currents characterize their theory and praxis as elements of an ongoing process rather than a political program with a well-defined end state. A lot of anarchist collective action is in the realm of prefigurative praxis. To create a world that aligns with your current starts with destroying/diminishing existing social structures and building new structures so that you and your comrades can live in that world now and demonstrate what is possible, with the aim to convince others that what is currently a tenuous possibility could be an enduring reality. This is definitely in conversation with Where Do Correct Ideas Come From?

        Developing theoretical foundations, material implementations, and replicable methods is as much a part of the anarchist model as the Marxist one, but the intellectual lineage is much clearer for Marxists. Most actually practicing anarchists I’ve worked with are functionally indistinguishable from very enthusiastic Maoists if you don’t dig too deeply into the abstract foundational principles that bring them to their positions.

    • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      That being said, the libs do seem to hate me, I agree lol

      Libs will support anarchist/leftcom or paleoconservative rhetoric with equal readiness just to contradict Marxism

      • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        It’s especially strange when people who are far more adventurist and bloodthirsty than I am call me a tankie. It’s pure reaction, like a call and response. I’ve seen liberals act like they are going to form Luigi guerilla squads and execute every single billionaire today and then call me a fascist for supporting Venezuela against the US Empire.

        Thank goodness for the Red Sails series on “brainwashing,” I’d be far more confused by their actions otherwise.

        Side-note: I’m aware that “tankie” is just a pejorative for Marxists and anti-imperialists and thus I am a “tankie,” I’m more pointing out that the radical liberals devoid of theory and devoid of meaningful organization end up lashing out at everyone.

      • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        13 days ago

        Aww, thanks! I do agree that my insistence on trying to answer the regular hostility and bad-faith I get daily with good-faith has earned some respect from otherwise liberal people, and some of these people have softened their views of leftists because of that. It’s what keeps me doing this, not because I’m sweet necessarily but because it works for people that outright confrontation doesn’t. I don’t disavow the outright confrontation style though, as it works for some people that my methods don’t.

  • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    14 days ago

    I mean I would say anarchism is about removing oppressive structures, to a point where all that is left is absolutely necessary hierarchies and even of those some of them are temporary and spontaneously arise to fill needs. But to each their own I guess. His point on anarchists cells isn’t really wrong though. Its just those aren’t permanent either.

    On the Cowbee thing I think people don’t like being shown they can’t keep up with the discussion. Cowbee actually knows theory of their favored system and is extremely adept at discussion and dissection. I myself have had that feeling before and its not really fair to them. They aren’t saying you have to agree or anything, they’re just informing you what communist theory says. Which since I’ve started reading some anarchist theory I realized they were right about me. I need to inform myself way more and read more theory. Can be a hard pill to swallow, but its required to normalize intellectual political discussions.

    • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      I think if my past self met my current self I’d feel the same. I used to be a big socdem quasi-Marxist quasi-anarchist guy, and at some point you have to confront the fact that you don’t know what you think you know and get to actually reading.

      It’s also why I don’t pretend to be some master-level Marxist-Leninist or anything, I’m still a baby ML in my eyes and have a long way to go. I just like to yap.

        • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          I think I’m at the point where I have a decent idea of just how deep Marxism goes, and can actually keep up with what the actual greatest Marxists talk about (as in, understand them), but I have a long way to go to get to that level. There’s a sort of false confidence you can get if you read, say, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific and Imperialism: The Current Highest Stage of Capitalism for the first time, that melds with the pre-existing liberalism that we are all molded by in English-dominated spaces. I’m beyond that point of false confidence, and far behind the actual level of serious competence.

          Don’t get me wrong, I greatly appreciate the compliment, but there are people that have a far deeper understanding than I do. I’ve just been pretty consistent with my studies and have been able to sharpen them by discussing it with others.

          • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            14 days ago

            That is probably the hardest part for most westerners is shedding that neoliberal shell we’ve all been boxed into at birth. Thats the part where I see most people who realize something is wrong with our way of life fail to come to a complete understanding of what is going on.

            • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              edit-2
              14 days ago

              Absolutely. Until people recognize that the system is genuinely failing them, they will endlessly license themselves to believing it works. Even people radicalized still have those intense layers of cultural hegemony subtly reinforcing how we think and how we view society. We all have these, still, even after we are aware of it, and have to do our best to kill the liberalism in ourselves.

    • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 days ago

      I mean I would say anarchism is about removing oppressive structures, to a point where all that is left is absolutely necessary hierarchies

      I think there is a much simpler answer (not that implementation is always simple) which is that “hierarchies,” delegations of authority, must be democratically decided, and therefore that there can be many or few of them and it should be decided based on what is most functional. There can be no other sort of authority except those decided in that manner.

      and even of those some of them are temporary and spontaneously arise to fill needs

      I guess “some” is doing a lot of work, but in general I think it’s better to try to have consistent systems so long as the public will remains the same so that we can be more resilient to various types of emergencies (which themselves require ad-hoc organizing, but should where possible by the government already have procedures in place for the creation of the ad-hoc groups).

  • Damarcusart [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    Anarchism has a much lower “barrier for entry” than communism. A communist is generally expected to have read communist theory and have a basic understanding of capitalism and its contradictions.

    A person can describe themselves as an anarchist without any sort of reading or understanding of class structure or hierarchy.

    So you get these “no vegetables, no bedtimes” anarchists (often called “anarkiddies”) who vaguely understand something is wrong with the system, but haven’t actually bothered to look into proper solutions, so they just declare “what if we get rid of the bad things I don’t like?” and act like that is somehow political analysis, and not just a substitute for political theory, but is actually a better outlook than it.

    I’m sure quite a few people here had a phase like that when they were younger, it does seem to be much more common to teens and young adults, people tend to grow out of it once they start to recognise how pointless it is (unfortunately most of them just grow into bog standard liberals, not actual leftists).

    Of course, since it works as a barrier to prevent people from actually seeking genuine leftist thought, it’s usually the only acceptable kind of “leftism” allowed in larger online spaces, since the feds who run them don’t want people getting any ideas. I don’t know if lemmy’s mod team is actually full of feds, but they are trying to be exactly like reddit, so that includes anti-communist temper tantrums disguised as leftist thought.

    • 10TH_OF_SEPTEMBER_CALL [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 days ago

      I never grew out of it. I am an anarchist and a communist. Opposing all illegitimate hierarchies means opposing capitalism first and foremost. Here anarchists and communists are pretty much indistinguishable from each other and they’re doing the work of organizing mutual aid and raising awareness of the class war and marxists ideas. What you’re describing exists in some point but to me it sounds is an online phenomenon.

      He’s using words wrong, but what he’s describing is simply organizing workers - in word, you know, unionize.

      • Damarcusart [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        13 days ago

        I probably should’ve been clearer that I was talking about pointless online squabbles and not IRL. You’re right that out there, where it actually matters, all this online infighting melts away, and anyone trying to act like a Twitter leftist is quickly chased away. I’ve worked plenty with anarchists as a communist, because we both want to abolish capitalism, it’s only online that you see this smug sort of “NATO anarchist” type actively declaring that all other forms of leftism aren’t “real leftists” because that would mean leftism involves going outside and actually helping people instead of just getting into fights on twitter.

        I should’ve clarified that this is an online phenomenon, mainly working as a way to keep people away from actually organising IRL and waste all their time falling deeper into a smug self-satisfied twitter coma.

  • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    I suspect this is just because libs absolutely DESPISE comrade @Cowbee@hexbear.net and will upvote anything smart-sounding that supposedly addresses whatever is being discussed?

    I had a comment the other day criticizing mainly Hexbear (because that’s what the conversation was about), but I think the criticism applies at least as much to many other nominally radical left spaces, and then in the replies comrade @Dirt_Possum@hexbear.net had her own thoughts along with linking to a comment that is sort of like mine but much, much better.

    Anyway, my main point there is to say yes, just use the right words to sound like you’re an enlightened radical and a lot of people who have no real understanding will get behind you.

    (btw sorry dirt_possum for not responding at the time, it was a good comment and I really appreciated the whole reply chain you linked to)

    Also, gotta love the whole “I have this opinion and many anarchists will disagree and that’s what anarchism is about”. Like, buddy, you haven’t read one book or talked to one anarchist IRL, let alone organized in your entire life.

    I love this lib line that disagreement is a virtue, because it shows their position is nonsensical and nihilistic. Freedom to disagree is a virtue, and it’s a primary virtue of science to be able to challenge things constantly, but science has rigor that allows for a consensus to be reached via that process of challenging. Merely sitting around in a state of everyone contradicting each other shows that there’s a serious problem preventing any sort of actual resolution being reached, which is detrimental to any sort of successful organizing by definition.

    If we are taking this person at their word, of course, but actually they are full of shit and almost any irl anarchist would have no respect for this view or identify it as genuinely anarchist.

    • towhee [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      14 days ago

      Freedom to disagree is a virtue, and it’s a primary virtue of science to be able to challenge things constantly, but science has rigor that allows for a consensus to be reached via that process of challenging.

      Excellent point, I do wonder whether NDT-style I Fucking Love Science shit is ultimately the germ of these approaches to politics. I suppose The Market is supposed to fulfill the role of objective Big Other here that is filled by the actual physical world in science, which is how this leads to basic liberalism.

      • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        14 days ago

        Ultimately I’m also just crassly speculating, but I’d say you’re probably right. In an environment where the only currency is speech and the only profits are clout and lifestyles, why would they produce something fundamentally hostile to liberalism and able to challenge it? Then they’d get more friction and for no benefit, because it’s not like changing things was on the table to start with. Performatively opposing liberalism can still be rhetorically beneficial, but fundamentally they are still frequently bound to very liberal sensibilities (see the “anarchist” in this thread who only believes no one can be made to do anything).

    • Val@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      Hmmm. delicious.

      Here’s a salad of different variety.

      people come together, make good things, happy feelings, share things, others see, join in, like things, have problems, make own things, others help despite differences, more people join, start making things, sharing things because it keep happy, repeat.

        • Val@anarchist.nexus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          This is what anarchisms (sometimes) about. Not everyone can do deep analyses. But sometimes there’s usefulness in worthless texts, maybe not to you, but to someone.

      • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        13 days ago

        That’s fine and well, but these things do not happen in a vacuum. You try to feed people vegetarian meals in a park, and the cops come after you. You host a block party, and city authorities come after you for a permit. You assist precarious people by harboring more than 3 of them (familially unrelated) in your apartment, and your landlord raises your rent or evicts you. You go into business as a self-employed maker, competitors sell their equivalent as a loss-leader to squeeze you out. You post anarchist content on a mainstream social network, and you get shadowbanned. You form a multiethnic federation of cooperatives and municipalities in a power vacuum, and the murderous theocratic faction in the region goes to war with you.

        Everywhere you go, you run into deep problems created by inequality, class, racism, patriarchy, imperialism, etc. Every day, you deal with resource constraints in a world of ecological overshoot.

        For over 5 years I was part of an anarchist collective that held down a social center, I was easily there more than 20 hours a week. We were having to navigate complex and difficult social situations all the time. If you don’t have a clearly understood set of norms and coordination, your collective will fall apart from infighting or people taking advantage of you.

        “Creating spaces and communities based on mutual aid and human connection in which people can safely exist as themselves” is something bourgeois people do all the time, there’s just a substantial cost barrier to it that excludes the lower classes. These spaces were the best part of my life until I realized the oppositions and structural privilege they were predicated on. And after that it became the anarchist milieu that was the best part of my life, but that is based on constant struggle. Asserting that you can just do all these good-person things without an understanding of struggle screams “baby leftist” to me.

        • Val@anarchist.nexus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          13 days ago

          Oh I’m very baby leftist. My country has no leftist orgs, and communism is banned. I have never had a chance to be part of an actually anarchic group, and all I’ve ever done is read theory. I did manage to hang out with a couple during trips and those were great but right now I’m stuck here.

          • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            13 days ago

            Best of luck to you!

            Slingshot has a list of anarchist-aligned places around the world. There’s an anarchist ecosystem of websites and blogs that also will refer to places IRL.

            Bookstores and gardens are good places to meet people who are more likely to be aligned. FOSS (and to a lesser extent, maker spaces) is full of comrades too. Any activism for human rights or animal rights is going to already be moving in a very similar direction. It may be the case that you have to try getting a group together with nondescript socialists, or even unaligned people who have the right values but no real interpretation of how the world works, with its dual apparatus of state power and corporate power.

            Anarchism is syncretic, almost by definition. There’s no perfect curriculum or party, there’s just us and our circumstances, and the efforts we make to overcome them and fit conceptual pieces together until the picture becomes clearer.

            • Val@anarchist.nexus
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              13 days ago

              Thank you! I have been trying, and there does seem to be an uptick in socialist thought, most likely due to the internet and USA collapsing. There’s an anarchist bookfair in may that I plan to go to and of course I will keep training my social and anarchist skills here.

  • Alaskaball [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    I’m sorry but val’s logic for an anarchist society just doesn’t function. No matter what starting point such society begins with - i.e a post-u.s state downfall, a world wide victory, getting in a time machine and telling the Akkadians in Uruk to overthrow Gilgamesh and to immediately construct an anarchist society in the cradle of humanity - that society will simply conduct a great leap backwards.

    Logistics networks? You’d go back to struggling to even have a post office.

    Infrastructure? Good luck trying to maintain anything more advanced than a dirt road.

    Electricity, water, plumbing, waste management? Most likely can’t maintain anything larger than a hamlet.

    Val, in concrete terms, isn’t arguing for anarchism, they’re arguing for primitivism.

    • john_brown [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      14 days ago

      Infrastructure? Good luck trying to maintain anything more advanced than a dirt road.

      Here’s a fun anecdote to that point. My friend lives at the end of a private dirt and sand road/driveway with a gate at the front, there are five or six other houses along the road. It’s difficult to impossible to get a normal car down it when the sand gets dry and deep, and also when it’s wet and muddy. It’s downright frightening to ride a motorcycle with road tires down it even in the best of times. My friend has been trying to get the neighbors to agree to chip in a little bit of money for an improvement, even as simple as gravel. His neighbors are all wealthy, wealthier than him as well. They absolutely will not agree, and some of them do stuff to actively make the road worse. The only resolutions are either he spends the money and puts in the time to do it himself, or he does some legal bullshit to try to force the county to take the road (and remove the access gate) so they will maintain it.

        • john_brown [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          14 days ago

          The net result is I get the thumbs up to throw rooster tails and get nice with it when I ride up and down his street because if they like the road shitty that’s how shitty roads get used

          • Alaskaball [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            14 days ago

            Lmao going full hog wild and just stomping the pedal is definitely the funnest solution to the issue no doubt. It’s like you almost get to go mudding but within the comfort of your friend’s neighborhood. Only downside is that if it freezes during winter wherever this is at, those ridges and ruts are gonna be absolute hell on your vehicle.

            • john_brown [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              14 days ago

              My favorite version of this is hooning my v-twin motorcycle with my ass hanging off the back making a lot of noise bouncing off the limiter

              THIS IS WHAT YOU WANTED skeleton-motorcycle

        • john_brown [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          Most ambulances here are on truck chassis, so unless it’s particularly wet they’d probably be fine. Otherwise, they’d need to be pulled out with a truck or tractor

      • Alaskaball [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        14 days ago

        It makes me wonder if there is an anarchism of the 21st century. Something that actually logically works in theory and could be materially implemented. So at least if I come across another dork that wants anarchism-in-form-primitivism-in-action ism, I could at least point them in a direction for them to learn the most realistically up-to-date materials of their own worldview.

        Then again that’s just too far into the weeds even for me, and I’ll just stick with saying “who’s gonna build and maintain the roads”

        • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          14 days ago

          What I tend to point to is anarchist orgs doing mutual aid and community building within the confines of existing societies and trying to fill in the gaps with mutual community defense. The zapatistas reject the anarchist label, but I do support the mutual aid groups and whatnot that meaningfully improve the lives of their communities. I’m not aware of any broader systems that outright exist outside of the context of an existing society though, outside of small communes.

          • Alaskaball [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            14 days ago

            I can’t think of anything either. Every scattered bit of info on actually-existing anarchist projects that I’ve read about have been mentions of experiments conducted in the Soviet Union by anarchists. Insofar as the closest I’ve heard of in the PRC has been the maoist communes.

        • RedSturgeon [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          14 days ago

          Isn’t Anarchism all about there being no project? For instance I am aware of a group who self-describe as anarchist and seem to follow an anarchist principle. I’m sorry I don’t want to fedpost about them so I won’t go into details.

          You generally won’t find them on the internet. Their core principles seem to be all about independence and struggle against authority, they will ally themselves with you or they might become your enemy, depending on how you treat them. They seem like good people at heart and have principles, they will never sell you out. They just won’t budge from their position.

          From what I’ve talked to them, they believe that another group is going to show up and build those roads, why? I don’t know, honestly it’s like a human nature argument. I try to put myself in their shoes, these are the people who chose to put themselves in a detrimental position, for whatever reason, sometimes for the sake of those like me who need help society won’t provide.

          I think Anarchism is something that happens when a state fails to integrate people. If a socialist project integrated the group of anarchists why would they choose to be separate? Capitalists exploit people and the anarchists are aware of it, therefore they keep themselves away, but they want to live their life right now and aren’t interested in building a socialist project, they could help you with the fight against Capitalism however.

          • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            14 days ago

            Isn’t Anarchism all about there being no project?

            I think that’s nihilism. Most anarchists that I’ve ever heard of believe in some kind of project, including OOP.

            • RedSturgeon [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              14 days ago

              That’s just me being mis-spoken because I was tired. Sorry. They don’t believe in hierarchical order is what I meant to say. Which is where our main disagreements are.

              I found their lack of interest for a more centralized form of governance rather nihilistic myself, but they say that I am naive and my attempts at establishing a proletarian government would fail to corruption.

        • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          It makes me wonder if there is an anarchism of the 21st century. Something that actually logically works in theory and could be materially implemented.

          Working on it. The task of redesigning a society in a way that is stable in the long term* and does not have class contention is tricky, you end up needing to have a prototype for an entirely new civilization from the ground up.

          *On just the scale of the scale of the 21st century, resource and ecological collapse is going to utterly topple virtually every existing society. Even had the USSR not undergone degeneration and even prevailed against the capitalist world, they would be imminently struggling with overshoot and resource scarcity.

          A caveat, though, is that anarchism is never pure, it always has its peculiarities, and “rejecting the label of anarchist” like @Cowbee@hexbear.net mentions is one of the most common things anarchists do.

          Interestingly enough, the projects I’m involved in could fit the bill of “as close as you can get to an-prim while still being serious and having continuity”. We like to emphasize permaculture, appropriate technology, and technological transparency, “permaculture communism” is something we often like to call it.

          For some examples of basic needs, you can build wildly efficient and comfortable buildings (timber structure, strawbale insulation, masonry/rocket-mass heater) with Neolithic technology, in non-tropical climates you’ll need glass too. In a wet-enough climate (Köppen-types A, C, and D) you can cut out almost all need for the plumbing grid with rainwater collection, slow sand filters, and composting toilets, all 100% pre-Classical tech. For electricity we’re used to using maybe 5-10% of what normal people use, rocket stoves and heaters displace a lot of that need; we’re still very reliant on solar panels and LEDs. We could plausibly have CHP stoves that require blacksmithing and a minimalist supply chain for electrical parts; those probably wouldn’t be as good at power generation as PV solar.

          Building networks and standards for collective self-defense and preservation is difficult; unsurprisingly it’s the human side of things that’s far more challenging than the material one.

      • Val@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Yep. vibes all the way. baby. anything more structured will inevitably fall apart when other people have differing opinions, this way I remain compatible.

    • Alaskaball [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Ah for the case of Val going back in time to try and overthrow the first hero of humanity, assuming somehow that happened, - assuming best cases happened through out their life - anything they accomplished within their lifetime would be quickly swept away after their death and whatever remnants that remained would too be swept into the dustbin of history as the Akkadians begin their conquest of the region.

      • 10TH_OF_SEPTEMBER_CALL [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        13 days ago

        I don’t usually use forums or Reddit, I usually just post comments on Ancap blogs like Molyneux or Cantwell’s blog, but they didn’t seem appropriate places to post my story. So here goes, I just wanted to share this with all of you.

        Nov 3 I flew to Europe for a Eurotrip type tour. Not a guide or packaged deal, just going around by myself. I paid for half of the trip with the wages I earned over the last two years, my dad paid for the other half. I am 19, I guess that is normal starting college and all. (Before that I worked for my dad’s company part time, so I guess you could say he paid for all of it, lol).

        I did France and then Italy and then Greece next. I am an Ancap so I wanted to see anarchists in these places. Yes, I know they are different kinds of “anarchists” and not really full anarchists like us. I went to an anarchist book store in Italy and it had a lot of English books, but no Rothbard or Ancap. Like I said, I expected that, not a surprise.

        I went to Greece, which everyone knows is famous for its revolutionary anarchism, its economic crisis and everything going on right now. Here I found directions for a local anarchist center. I went and didn’t see anybody, but it was covered in graffiti, mostly in Greek so I couldn’t read it. Whatever, I started taking pictures. Then some people came out and confronted me.

        This should have been my first warning sign something was not right, because photography is not a crime. They were not violent, but they were not friendly, like asking who I was, what I wanted. They all spoke good English actually. Not uncommon in Greece. I said I was a tourist and an anarchist and I just wanted to take pictures. Then they got friendly and told me I should have asked first (but pictures are no NAP violation so I don’t know why, but I didn’t say anything) and they invited me inside.

        We hung out for a while and smoked hash (there is no good dank in Europe as you might find out like in Cali, everyone smokes hash with tobacco which isn’t as cool as it sounds). We started talking about politics and anarchism. I was trying to talk about the state, they were like yeah no doubt the state was bad. But they wanted to talk about capitalism, capitalism this and that. This is when we started to get into a debate.

        I told them that what they called capitalism is different from the free market. They said capitalism is free markets. And I said I agreed. That is what I am saying. Real capitalism is free markets. And they said yes, that is what we are trying to get rid of. And I said no, but we don’t even have that right now. We need more free markets. And everyone at the same time was like “nooo” we are anarchists, we are against capitalism. Anarchists oppose capitalism.

        And I said but not anarcho-capitalists. Anarcho-capitalists are the anarchists who support capitalism. I had a fanny pack (yeah, lame I know) for my camera and in that I had this yellow and black bowtie (also super lame, it was a joke but I wasnt wearing it). And I said look, these are the Ancap colors, yellow and black, like versus the communist red and black. Well, these guys had a lot of red and black in the building already so I thought they would get it.

        I think that is when it started to get a really bad vibe, really tense in the air. The free market thing was funny, we disagreed but I think they thought I was just confused. Everyone was uncomfortable now. Then someone said markets wont work with democracy. And I said exactly, that’s it, democracy is against anarchism. And they kind of agreed, and said yes, we don’t have real democracy, just governments, and we needed more democracy. I said no, we need less democracy, democracy is the enemy. And we need to end democracy to have anarchy. Then they were all like “noooo” again. You know that thing people do in groups when everyone all says “nooo” or expresses some disapproval at the same time.

        And one of them said “but we do want to stop democracy” and then they kind of spoke back and forth in Greek. I didn’t really understand it. And they asked me what I meant.

        So I said okay, I had the floor, I was going to tell them about ancapism. And I tried to explain to them some Rothbard and Hoppe. I said the natural order in anarchy is that the best rise to the top, the market picks who is the best. They compete and are peaceful. They said what do we want instead of anarchy. I said we want private owners to own their own land and businesses, and to employ people. They said that is what we have now. I said no, it would be even better. One of the guys said it was like feudalism. And I said it is not feudalism.

        Eventually one of the guys spoke up and I thought he was Greek, but he spoke English perfectly so he may have not been. He said he knew what anarcho-capitalism was and that we were basically fascists. He asked me if I thought everything should be private. And I said yes. And he asked me if I thought people were unequal. And I told him yes. And that not everyone would have equal rights. I said everyone has the right to own property and not be done aggression against. But that not everyone had to be treated equally by the owners. He said what about immigrants and racism. And I said that would not happen in a free market, but yes property owners could be racist if they wanted to. They had to respect property.

        Then he called me a fascist again, and someone else said I was a fascist. And then they basically all started shouting fascist at me, and one of them grabbed me by the wrists. They pulled me out the door, it was up three floors, and basically drug me down the stairs on my back. It hurt really bad and I remember yelling “you’re breaking the NAP” and things like that. “Stop initiating force against me.” Then they kicked me around on the ground in the hallway, before they took my camera and threw me outside. I was crying and stuff, I just sat there. I was in shock because it was so sudden. Looking back there were warning signs though.

        I think they felt bad for me and gave the camera back, but when I looked later they stole the memory card with all of my Greek photos.

        So they initiated force and theft. They broke the NAP. I knew the left anarchists were not real anarchists, but I never knew they would do something that bad.

        I wasnt seriously hurt, just kicked around a little, lots of bruises and little cuts. I am fine guys so don’t worry. Just needed to share.

      • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 days ago

        They aren’t talking about “human nature”, they are talking about the fundamental issue with valuing decentralization over democracy, which is that it is definitionally vulnerable to insurgency because if every locality is merely doing their own thing in a completely autonomous fashion without federal law and accompanying oversight to keep people on the same page, literally what is stopping them from recreating capitalism or building a fascist militia or anything else?

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    I don’t know how anyone can come to the conclusion that anarchy doesn’t involve fighting against archy when it is the literal antithesis of archy.

    • Val@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      It’s wild that people seem so hung up on that sentence. Of course anarchists oppose class and archists, and need to worry about resources. The point is that it’s not something that should be the focus. By focusing only on the things you are against you feed antagonism and tribalism. I find it much more productive to focus on the constructive things.

      That is the point of the sentence: “Anarchy isn’t about all of these things that are defined in opposition. But this thing that is constructive”

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        If opposing archy isn’t the focus then there is literally never going to be anarchy. All you’re doing is making community under archy more pleasant and therefore reducing the conditions that make people more likely to support revolution. It is exactly the same trap that democratic-socialists fall into as they pursue better conditions for workers under capitalism and ultimately never pursue revolution.

        Do you actually want anarchy? Or do you just want healthcare and slightly better working conditions?

        Serious question. I’ve said the same to so-called communists before too so don’t think I’m calling you out, I was an anarchist myself for several decades. Communists make the same god damn mistake too, many forget that they’re supposed to be achieving socialism, which ultimately requires revolution, not just making things under capitalism slightly better.

        The primary goal of an anarchist should be to end archy. That requires direct conflict with the state and it requires convincing others of the need to destroy the state as well.

        • Val@anarchist.nexus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          It’s not my focus, because I don’t like conflict. It will be the focus of other anarchists. I’ll let them deal with it. Not everyone needs (or should) be on the front-lines. The anarchy that I describe is mine. It doesn’t work on it’s own. It requires other peoples anarchies to compliment it. I don’t need to have all the answers. I don’t need to fight all the fights. This I consider the primary privilege of anarchism “I don’t need to care about everyone” and “I don’t need to have all the answers”. I have hope that someone else will. I am just a small cog in a machine not the overseer of an entire society.

          That’s what makes it anarchy. It’s that despite not being that oppositional to archy myself I still believe that it can be destroyed, and will help others to do it. I seek anarchist spaces and other anarchists to begin building my own community. That’s what makes me an anarchist.

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            14 days ago

            Strongly disagree. I think this is a mindset that leads to a huge quantity of people that would be revolutionaries if given a social push, but instead choose to say it’s someone else’s job.

            It’s all of our job. Every single last one of us. Unwillingness to die for it is just a sign of not really actually wanting it. Sympathisers they may well be, but they’re not revolutionaries unless they take that step. They hold within themselves deep fears, lack of commitment and ultimately a deeply rooted and unexamined element of liberalism that they have not yet examined or excised from within themselves. The deep yearning they have to go back to brunch. To have things just be comfortable.

            If not us. Who. When.

            The can gets kicked to another generation each time a generation is too cowardly to commit to what must ultimately be done.

            Nobody is coming to free the working class. We must do it ourselves.

            • Val@anarchist.nexus
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              14 days ago

              So give me that social push. I’m all for it. Give me a group of people that make me want to fight and I will. I’m stuck in a country with so little revolutionary potential. I would absolutely love to find some movement and I hope in time I will.

              I’m not saying I won’t fight. I’m saying my fighting will not be direct. I will play support. It’s a role that suits me more. I’ll clean, I’ll cook, I’ll help setting up tables or tents. I’ll write programs. I will do what I’m comfortable with. Otherwise it isn’t a revolution I want to support. Anarchy is about finding your own place and having others accept it. Anarchy is about being comfortable if that’s what you want to be.

              You call not wanting to fight a lack of commitment and cowardice. I call it being sensible and not putting myself in a situation where I’m leasts efficient and will probably contribute nothing, and in worst case scenario cause damage. I will not fight on the front-lines. It’s not what I’m good at.

              • supdawg813 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                13 days ago

                Join a marxist organization, there is plenty of that work to do. I can’t speak to anarchist organization simply because I can only speak from my own experience. Part of Marxist practice, though, is movement building. We aren’t plotting to have revolution tomorrow or to push anyone into things they aren’t yet ready for. Be assured, we will get you ready for those things (if and when the moment calls for them), but we also understand that revolution is both not something that can be planned on a specifc date, nor can it be successful without a critical mass of the working class being organized and understanding the necessity of organization. We cannot wield our collective power or bring new people into our movement without actively engaging with other members of our class. That means we take on the mass work of training, social investigation, political education and interventions (i.e. programs, tables, and tents), as well as engaging with theory and being students of history in order to inform and develop that practice.

                And to be clear, we study history because it teaches us in concrete terms how the Vietnamese, Cubans, Russians, Chinese, etc, won their struggles for independence despite even worse conditions than what we experience today. Peasant societies that went from being 90% illiterate and living in abject poverty to, yes, being trained under both marxist theory and practice, and leading a coordinated fight against the some of the most powerful armies in the world. Standing even to this day to develop their projects against those same powers that seek to undermine what they’ve worked so hard to build. In American context, it teaches us how a completely enslaved people broke their chains, went on to elected office, championed massive advancements of society (without reconstruction we would not have public schools), only to be overcome by the racist structures that, naturally, were not abolished when their emancipation was conceded. A critical analysis of history teaches us in every way that disorganization is the antithesis to a successful and lasting revolution.

                All that to say, everyone has a starting point and everyone can contribute something. Nobody wakes up as a fully trained revolutionary, nor did any revolutionary come to their understandings simply through osmosis or material conditions. Yeah you can get a pretty good, if shallow, foundation from those things, but it’s certainly not a given nor can it ever be expected. We only expect a willingness to learn and engage with our ideas. We have to be students before we can be teachers.

              • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                13 days ago

                You call not wanting to fight a lack of commitment and cowardice. I call it being sensible and not putting myself in a situation where I’m leasts efficient and will probably contribute nothing, and in worst case scenario cause damage. I will not fight on the front-lines. It’s not what I’m good at.

                I’m calling it an open invitation to everyone else with any kind of hesitations to use the same excuse to never fight. It’s a social contagion that reduces people that otherwise would become fighters. It’s a position that reduces revolutionary energy rather than increases it.

                Given a choice between fighting and not fighting almost everyone will choose not fighting. The choice must be taken away before revolution actually occurs, both in material conditions and socially. The working class must realise that they have no choice.

              • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                . I will do what I’m comfortable with. Otherwise it isn’t a revolution I want to support. Anarchy is about finding your own place and having others accept it. Anarchy is about being comfortable if that’s what you want to be

                Alright, reading this honestly is pushing me more toward what Awoo said. Later you make a more valid point about what your skills are (while seemingly ignoring that you can get new skills), but if a demand for comfort is truly a guiding axiom, you would sooner betray us for the liberals, because revolution is not a dinner party.

                • Val@anarchist.nexus
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  13 days ago

                  Considering the liberals expect me to pay for my existence, making money a constant source of anxiety. I will never be comfortable under capitalism, not to mention patriarchy and NeuroTypArchy causing me to be trapped in norms and expectations I don’t want to conform to, making the aforementioned moneymaking even more difficult.

                  Don’t worry, I’ll take communists over liberals, no hesitation. Although obviously I would prefer anarchists.

          • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            13 days ago

            I mildly disagree with Awoo here (though I respect her opinion both in general and here specifically), but I have a different criticism: I think this focus on decentralized everything leading to an idea of decentralized, modular political theory is unhelpful. I think that it’s fine to not personally be much of a fighter, at least so long as you recognize that there are circumstances where that might need to change. What I think is not okay is not having an understanding of why and how to fight (because it’s not “my anarchy”). That’s not political theory, that’s a lifestyle brand.

            There is no “your anarchy” in the sense of a modular truth, there is only “what you currently understand about anarchy,” where what you don’t understand isn’t marked as merely someone else’s business, or a soup of definitional contradictions that are all still true, but merely things that you do not understand yet, and typically should be concerned with learning the answers for.

  • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    Liberal lifestylism masquerading as radical politics, these types love this kind of vague utopian worldbuilding that’s disconnected from reality or even a basic analysis of reality

    The Socratic method is the antidote for these people, two simple questions are enough; “Do you want to abolish class and capitalism?” ---- “And if so, How?

    Then watch as they precede to tumble down the hill at mach speed and then step on every political rake in existence

    • Val@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Ok. Here I go:

      Yes, but I don’t know how. Right now I’m focusing on building a community I can belong to, since that seems achievable and as my views will definitely change as a result, having any idea about how will also definitely change.

      No reason to cement ideas that are destined to get destroyed in an earthquake.

      How many rakes did I hit? It’s hard to count while tumbling.

      Oh wait it’s you. feel free to ignore this as we have gone over this already.