/lit/ - Literature

>>13463069
It's the best.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1970/xx/state.html

>>13463069
>Also, what are your thoughts on that topic?
It's, just like all utopian ideologies, retarded and irrelevant.

>>13463069
Anarchism is the future. We may never live to see it achieved but we can organize ourselves to seek it as our Grail.

>>13464105
Not a very good rebuttal. It's a series of ideas to improve society. Fun part is you can apply all of them in various places to test how they work.
The revolution has always been about *improving* our lot in life. The liberals thought it would be capitalism. Plainly it's not! State centralized capitalism was supposed to lead to the fabled commune utopia, PLAINLY IT WAS NOT.
The need for this change is absolutely necessary. The status quo is unsustainable besides being murderous and bad for the majority. Fuck your elitism

Okay anarchists, Refute this
https://youtu.be/vu3Z7wqLao4

>>13463069
The abc of anarchism by Berkman

>>13464111
>anarchists
>organizing
you have already failed

>>13464229
?
Most anarchists are not against organising

>>13464229
durr anarchism means no organizing

>>13464285
Have you ever tried organizing in USA? a herculean task in most cases

T.A.Z- Hakim Bey is the best anarchist book but maybe not the best starter

>>13464146
>depiction of one confused youth who has only read the dictionary definition and follows other drug addicted occasional activists.
The young always need guidance. There’s nothing to refute.

>>13464229
t. Knows nothing about anarchism.
We are about challenging unjustifiable hierarchies, not descending into chaos. This mindset has been encouraged to keep people from organizing. Any groups that do organize are arrested or ridiculed.

>>13464301
Fuck him

>>13464137
But what anarchist idea do you actually deem viable?

>>13464510
A combination approach of the futurist and primitivist that sets aside at last half the earth for the non-human flora and fauna. Confine us to our artificial biomes in mountain sized cities. I call it egoist-syndicalist to indicate a realistic balance we all need.

>>13464550
Well that sounds all fine and dandy but I don't see how's that an anarchist concept. It sounds rather like an economic idea that could be attempted under pretty much any form of government, no?

>>13463069
Rest on a philosophical anthropology that’s fucked.

>>13464574
No. There’s no monitory profit in not consuming the resources of the earth till its a dry husk. Leaving a part of the natural world seems a waste to a capitalist.
I promote the use of Cockshott’s non accumulative currency, but as a way to transition into a straight up shared economy. These changes in our socioeconomic interactions would create real positive changes in human behavior.

>>13464588
What?

>>13463069
You made the thread without your trip and then you put your trip on didn't you

>>13464667
Nope. Wasn’t me. People are genuinely interested in an alternative to the madness going on. Anarchism is sensible believe it or not.

>>13464635
>Monitory
What? *monetary, duh.

>>13464468
Agreed but T.A.Z is still great

>>13464635
anarchists have a deeply flawed view on human nature. now stop tripfagging please.

>>13463069
Not an intro to anarchism per se, but this book will show you how anarchism is a worthless ideology if there isn't violence associated with its propagation.

>>13464826
We are raised in a world of lies. Overlords dictate how we are to live in their world, and the revolution was about toppling their illegitimate rule. You have been told a human is made up of 100% nature, when it is somewhere like 30/70 nurture/nature. We can fix our behavior. We’ve seen this in action before. There’s no flaw in this.

>>13464994
Meant to specify it’s more nurture than nature.
But even our “nature” is adjustable, and going to be moreso now that we have the human genome mapped

>>13464974
It's a good thing anarchism isn't the same as pacifism or the future would be a dark and horrid place

>>13463069
Anarchist is edgy teenage brainlet. The concept you're looking for is minarchist. You're welcome, now never post again.

>>13464735
>Anarchism is sensible
That's why it won't happen. People are too far gone

>>13465008
Are you single

>>13465396
>sad face

>>13465422
Singular

>>13464229
Anarchists want to organize, but the problem is that few of them agree on what kind of organization they should form, because there are many different reasons for why someone would become an anarchist. That's its #1 flaw. At the end of the day, anarchists are as tyrannical as the people already in power.

>>13465508
Agree with the first part, but the flaw isn't that they’re “tyrannical” and going in different directions, it’s that they aren’t allowed to get very far. Soon though.

>>13465530
But don't they try to impose on others?

>>13463069
i like anarchism but the implementation is tricky.
>>13464092
anything more accessible? i've read stirner

>>13465700
By taking capitalism down?
Yeah, like that damn Lincoln when he freed the slaves. Sic semper tyrannosaurus, man.

>>13466411
That’s very accessible. It’s got all the early thinkers, samples them so you can follow up with whoever strikes your fancy. There’s a volume 2, but I don’t have it. It is damn tricky alright.

>>13464092
>>13464111
Anarchism means you need survival skills which none of you have. You complain about the system but still benefit from it in your daily lives.

>>13466584
>this line AGAIN
Grow up and read something on it already

>>13464550
>A combination approach of the futurist and primitivist that sets aside at last half the earth for the non-human flora and fauna.

You're never going to achieve that by any means other than ruthless eco-fascism. If you think you'll voluntarily get half the world on board with that then you're fucked in the head.

>>13463069
If you're under 20, don't ruin your mind with idealist bullshit. If you're older than that or already adhere to a halfway realistic and relevant worldview then there really isn't a good reason to learn about it except to pull dyed-hair genderless dykes and the like on tinder.

>>13466497
Only way to take capitalism down is to kill, neuter, or deport all the people who thrive under capitalism because they alone perpetuate it.

>>13466663
Fascism is state authoritarian capitalism with nationalist bigotry and personality cult attached to it. Putting them in a green uniform doesn’t mean shit.

>>13466704
To replace it may very well convert millions, but yeah, the elite and their attack dogs are going to fight it. And then the carnage is likely to begin.
I hope for better.

>>13466606
What have you done to try to build up your own anarchist society?

>>13463069
>Also, what are your thoughts on that topic?
Interaction with the state is the only thing cable of redeeming human lives. Anarchists are opposed to any decent human existence, and state-oriented societies shouldn't tolerate them.

>>13466740
I won’t be here forever, anon

>>13466762
Please qualify this “redeeming”

>>13466764
Okay. But for you to have a belief that you want to see implemented you at least need to be involved in something, right?

>>13466796
Does evangelizing online not count as doing something?

>>13466796
I’m involved in designing my plans, and story.

But I divorce myself of responsibility for the coming crisis. It’s not any more mine than Ted Kaczynski’s

>>13466584
>Anarchism means you need survival skills which none of you have.
Why?

>>13466818
Nope. Every belief we have online has is pointless unless we actually do it.

>>13463069
>Anarchism and other Essays, Emma Goldman
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-anarchism-and-other-essays
This one was specifically written as an introduction to the topic.

>The Conquest of Bread, Peter Kropotkin
https://thebreadbook.org/conquestofbread.html
"The Bread Book" is a good dive into anarcho-communist thinking, which is further elaborated upon in his naturalistic studies and developments on Darwinism in "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution"

>we are anarchists!
>you want a total lack of government and no laws?
>n-no we just want less governing or something
make up your minds

>>13466833
Anarchy means free from all government. Which means no supply and demand. Stores would not be our source of food which means we need to become self sufficient. Self sufficienty needs to acquire lots of survival skills for food and such.

>>13466847
No, he has a point. Propaganda is doing something.

>>13466897
My point was that playing revolutionary online is pretty pointless unless you manage to organize something other than a honeypot. Sorry sweaty, you aren't emma goldman.

>>13466919
Stay mad

>>13466883
Incorrect. Free of rules, not of rules.
While the word literally meant "without rulers", since Proudhon the philosophy has focused into the idea of "without (unjustified) hierarchy".
And what does supply and demand have to do with any of it? People still have needs and the abilities and resources to fulfil them. The question is on whose terms they execute this work. Their own and by cooperating, or coerced on someone else's? The well-known "circle-a" is an A in an O, Anarchy is Order, Anarchy is Organization. You are sorely mistaken if you believe it to be an ideology of "every-man-for-himself". Not even Max Stirner, the brain behind literal Egoist anarchism advocated such things, but suggested loose "Unions of Egoists" to bond those who are willing to bond.

You should know all this.

>>13466930
>Free of rules, not of rules.
*Free of RULERS, not free of rules

>>13466883
>Anarchy means free from all government
Not really, alas. Ancoms, the bloody idiots they are, are all in favour of communal governance.
>which means no supply and demand
that leap doesn't make a lick of sense

>>13466930
>>13466936
This is exactly my point. Look at this faggot. Look at him. He thinks rules, divorced from a human face, are somehow preferable to rulers, who can at least be beheaded (or reasoned with). Any method of making me fall in line is disgusting, and I won't have it. I shall shitpost about it online until my keyboard wears out and my fingers fall off.

Look. Any large group of people are going to need ways of making decisions, and direct democracy is the way to go. Yes, direct democracy. Not a professional class of law makers, but the community itself, drawing lots, taking periodic rolls and sharing responsibilities in this place and that. Within a workplace, or within a larger community. This is how we’d organize our lives, best ensuring maximum freedoms for all. This isn’t government.

One commune may decide they’ve had enough of the non accumulative currency and want to implement a shared economy. They can put their heads together and see about doing this

>>13466971
And what camp do you represent. Really?

>>13467028
I don't give a damn about my community. You think I want my neighbours determining what I can and can't do? Fuck 'em, I know them well enough to know I don't want that. Why is an absolute monarchy any worse? At least I don't have to see the king every day.
>What camp do you represent
I don't represent anyone. I'm just me.

>>13463069

anarchism doesn't work

>mutual aid is retarded
>federations are retarded

leftism in any way that we know it won't pan out

>>13466929
I'm not an anarkiddie so why would I be mad at how completely irrelevant it is and was even at the height of its influence and popularity?

>>13467067
What do you want to do?
Well, education is free. There are single rooms available if you’d like to get one of those. Park service? Robotics?
>I know them
You don’t know them, you know the people of now that are around you. And we know what monarchism brings, dumbass.
>at least I don’t have to see the king everyday
At least he or someone in his court can have you killed without ever knowing why. Yeah, super cool.
>I don’t represent any camp
You just dropped that you prefer monarchism.

>>13467146
I want to shitpost on 4chan, watch anime, talk about books, and somehow carve my name into history. It's all pretty simple. Oh yes, and I want lots of sex.

Yeah, sure, an absolute monarchy probably would be harder to "just be myself" in, but that's a matter of pragmatics, not ideology. I'd pick the ideal society based on how easily it'd let me contradict its rules. I don't prefer monarchism, I just don't see any meaningful difference between being ruled by one person or being ruled by the thirty fucks I live with, alongside my past idiot self who voted stupidly in the last referendum.

I don't know how anyone can really be an anarchist unironically. It's so transparently pure evil that just wants to create chaos and destroy any law and anyone that opposes it.

>>13467188
Because I want to create chaos and destroy any law and anyone that opposes it. This isn't a mystery. Apply yourself.

>>13467186
So nanny state neetdom for you. Typical myopic liberal cop out life. You’re right where you belong.
Now deal with the world disintegrating around you

>>13467188
Laws aren’t there to protect you. They’re there to protect the elites. Read Stirner.

>>13467188
Most anarchists aren't The Joker types, just limp-wristed soigoyim who want to live in a world where everyone is domesticated to their personal taste and working in a factory suddenly stops sucking ass because IT BELONGS TO EVERYONE AND EVERYONE IS ME. Or something, who really gives a shit.

Any anarchist books which actually outline how a society could function on a global scale.

>>13467212
If the nanny state lets me do as I please best of all the options, then yes, I'll take it. What, am I to be ashamed of doing what I want? I want to blow raspberries at anyone who'd tell me so.
If ya haven't realised these are Stirner's arguments, then I think you need to take your own advice and "read Stirner".

>>13467146
And what if the direct democracy turns out to be totally trash because your average citizen has no idea how to govern a state. There's no king to usurp in this scenario.

>>13467146
Monarchy worked fine for a few millennia, why would it suddenly be bad? Because you read a bunch of pamphlets that were circulated when some foreign power wanted to induce national instability in their opponents? Because you have some retarded whig history-is-progress-is-good mental disorder?

>>13467239
Plenty. And i have been laying out the best for a while now

>>13467252
You go right ahead and fuck around doing nothing while your lifestyle saps the world and everything starts to fall apart. Glad you’re not a fascist, but you are hip to Stirner either

>>13467293
There is no state to govern and the bit they oversee will do well to have many hands steering since they’re able to correct any missteps. Also, these are not people of now but of then, of course they’ll have an adequate education for it. No king indeed

>>13467317
Read Thomas Paine

>>13466930
>>13466936
You live in a world divorced from reality. "Rules without rulers" would be something like "machines producing our food and dividing it up equally among everyone" — which would last a fucking day at most, because people aren't of equal size, and the bigger individuals will just start maiming the smaller individuals for their portions. From here, you can change it to "machines producing our food and dividing it up among everyone so that each receives the fitting portion relative to their size" — but that also won't last a day because the machines still need maintenance and the world still needs law enforcement and other civil servicemen and these individuals will not be happy just getting a "fitting" portion when they do more work than others, not to mention greed which is prevalent in low IQ people who will see the size difference of the portions but not the size difference of the individuals themselves. With each optimization of the machines and their algorithms you will continually run into these massive issues. You are talking about a utopia that will NEVER come into being because it would be such a Herculean effort with virtually no payoff for humanity at the end since all this is simply for "everyone's happiness" rather than increasing the ceiling cap for happiness that there will never be an organized group large and strong enough to pull it off.

>>13467327
>but you are hip to Stirner either
Oh nix that part anyway

>>13467327
Read a history book

I COULD recommend you to read the works of Kropotkin but let's be honest here, no anarchist wants to read what some old dead rusk wrote. Just read the Anarchist's Cookbook, throw some bombs and work move to Somalia, the world's first Anarchist state.

>>13467340
I’ve read several. Monarchism has always been a disease and it’s continuation through the elitist owner class is going to kill us all, you soppy eyed sheep-boy

>>13467346
The world’s first ayncap state.

>>13467364
You should move there butterdyke :)

>>13467374
And why would I settle for Somalia?

>>13467327
>Plenty. And i have been laying out the best for a while now
Can you name one? The one you would show to an economist who wants to see an actual implementable model.

>>13467406
Economically we need a series of steps. Introduce a system that pays people a non accumulative currency, IE labor voucher, on a card for use in select area of their town or city wherever. Most will be working at a capitalists outfit still, so they’re pulling in twin incomes, which is great insurance for the next economic crashes to come. I’m naming Towards a New Socialism here.
With the money saved, we in this neighborhood commune of sorts, grow our own food (supplementing at first of course. This gets us more off Monsanto food as much as saving some more money) hook up solar etc. generally “getting off the grid” and making the whole place “preppers”. Any businesses we can start up will be WSDE co-ops and directly serve the community further. With all that saved we can educate our own kids, implement our own infrastructure and etc.
We will be resisted in every way possible, I’m sure.

>>13467364
Every system that "succeeded" monarchism has produced worse outcomes but go off chopdick

>>13467446
>This gets us more off Monsanto food as much as saving some more money) hook up solar etc. generally “getting off the grid” and making the whole place “preppers”. A
How are you going to convince an entire country to give up everything and become "preppers". People would laugh in your face. Unless you are talking about 12 people in some commune on a farm somewhere but that's not going to help the revolution.

>>13463069
Childishness writ large. "Wah! I don't wanna! You're not the boss of me! I'll hold my breath!" You all will grow out of it, anyway those of you who aren't complete idiots.

>>13464092
butt hurt fly
LOL

>>13467627
terrible take.

>>13464301
Hakim "boi raep" Bey, the Pedo. Yeah, do away with laws so we can raep the small bois...

>>13467627
Clearly you don’t know what we’re talking about here. Shoo.

>>13467605
You need every step spelled out?

>>13467668
>when the working class person reads one too many books on their spare time and thinks they're intelligent and more righteous than the pampered children of the wealthy elite
They are physically incompetent but they were bred to be socially competent in a world that isn't all about physical survival anymore due to technological progress. Just because you are more physically competent than they are doesn't mean you're more socially competent either.

>>13467646
Yes. Anarchists never seem to want to do that part.

Anarchism only works when paired heavily with traditionalism. Junger got it. Tolstoy sort of got it. Gandhi absolutely got it. Jacques Ellul was a genius.

>>13467746
This guy >>13464146 isn’t actually an anarchist

>>13467764
Just like you, you aren't an anarchist either.

>>13463069
the state is bigger than the tribe. anarchy is a charity where you're permitted to exist until someone finds your land sufficiently valuable

>>13467809
Funny picture. I understand and will be teaching more.

>>13467831
Everything you'll teach will be false, that's for sure.

>>13467755
I'm interested in this take; explain further

Lot of people still don't know but anarchist fought a lot for civil and social rights during the industrial era. The childish representation and association with chaos is pure capitalism propaganda.

>>13468552
also please ignore all the times that our anarchist communes failed miserably and were brought to ruin by the first army to come along with an actually functioning hierarchy

>>13464137
>State centralized capitalism was supposed to lead to the fabled commune utopia, PLAINLY IT WAS NOT.
Plainly it was, that’s why it had to be squashed

>>13467831
What you taught me in this thread is that anarchists aren’t actually sociopaths that want ochlocracy but actually brainlet idealists that don’t even know they’re bringing about ochlocracy.

>>13467330

>Go on /lit/
>Go to an anarchist board
>somehow anarchy cant just be voluntaryism but its immediately communism

>>13467327
>You go right ahead and fuck around doing nothing while your lifestyle saps the world and everything starts to fall apart
I am doing what I want to do, and it's what I shall continue to do, and nobody can stop me. You're misreading your own ancommie moralising into Stirner if you think he'd act otherwise.
For sure, I'll take part in free meal kitchens which use supermarket waste, and I don't eat much meat, but that's no different ideologically to me rubbing one off to an anime girl (or to the thought of all tripfags posting their feet).

Read de Maistre and understand that anarchism is retardation inevitably leading to terror.

>>13467387
Somalia is what you get without a central authority. This is the state of nature.

>>13468585
Cult.
Why can’t tankies just learn from their failures?

>>13468594
By advocating direct democracy. Very funny.

>>13469023
Its what you get with the CIA running things

>>13469618
lmao scapegoats and whataboutisms is all you'll get from an ideologue.

>>13469634
So I’ve noticed, liberalfly.

>>13464137
quit trying to capitalize on uncle Ted's meme cred you fuckin lefty tranny. He literally opposes almost everything you stand for

>>13469618
Op here.

I don't get it. You seem to have put in a good amount of time and thought into the topic. Yet, if I had to summarize what you said so far, it would come down to something like "Anarchists do not actually want to get rid of government at all. They want to establish a direct democracy."

So what is it? Anarchism or democracy?

Also, I don't get how law (or call it rule) enforcement ought to take place without authority and if it's through authority, then it's not non-hierarchical, no?

I am confused.

>>13469824
And Ted is a numbers guy who can’t relate to people. I sympathize with him greatly, though he has no place talking about sociopolitical topics he doesn’t understand.

Conversely, Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and can talk to the unnecessary and impossible topic gods.

>>13469836
A direct democracy looking after businesses and utilities, seeing to the general things contemporary government does, isn’t a government of career politicians sent by an elite. It’s people organizing their lives, as they need to. Anarchism is not chaos. Read the book >>13464092

A murderer is caught in a town. There are no laws. Lots are drawn up to place the jury. They decide what if any punishment is needed. One day string em up, another send him to treatment, another is deemed self defense and let go. Law ought to be set free to local custom
Who am I to judge?

>>13469890
>A murderer is caught in a town. There are no laws. Lots are drawn up to place the jury. They decide what if any punishment is needed.

Holy shit. How can you actually advocate such primitive ways. If we still had jurisdiction like that, witches would be burning.

In general, my values align with anarchism. But as a movement, at least today, it seems all too ineffectual, all too self righteous, all too much like a LARP. What am I supposed to do as an "anarchist"? I believe what I believe because of my disgust with politics. I don't want to have to insert myself into the local unions or activist groups. I've read the anarchists and I'm not sure I've gotten anything out of them, save Chomsky, who has given me plenty scholarly reason to further hate the world that I live in.

As an anarchist I must apologize for a certain individual who is ruining this thread and making its ideologues look bad.

>>13470742
Well, would you care to elucidate matters?

I don't know where fit in with anarchism/anarchists
I'm Christian and culturally right wing so I don't fit in with a lot of them but I still don't see the state as good or necessary (though a state will always exist in some places)

>>13471036
Read Jacques Ellul
>>13469824 this Gentlemen was very much inspired by Ellul's thought.

Charles Taylor and Wendell Berry are more modern examples of this type of thought.

Liberal promotion of pluralism, tolerance and egalitarianism, etc, are at odds with real community because they disregard the importance of place and local culture.
Any "smoothing out" of culture is a caricature of the living tissue of life, and is necessarily totalitarian. That does not mean that these ideas themselves are a problem, just the that obsession with their promotion is.
If a community is egalitarian, pluralistic, etc., that is fine. If a community is not egalitarian, pluralistic, etc., then that is fine as well.

I consider the Amish and other groups like them to be the closest possible human societies can get to "Anarchism":
Larger families and stronger community ties can very easily decrease dependency on the state and the market.
Such a community may grow food in a family farm, hunt for food, and, depending on the interdependence of the community, their daily needs from cooking oils, to plates, to pottery, to soap are often made at home as well. There is still "an economy" but often one that is barter based or socialist in the pre-socialist (or in a certain anarchist) sense of the word: mediated by direct face-to-face social tit-for-tat between neighbors and friends, none of this mediated by currency

Christian Anarchism is the only form of Anarchism that isn't ephemeral; all other forms of Anarchism (if they have existed at all) were short lived.
An economically self-sufficient village with close social relationships and a barter economy doesn't have to be Christian, it's just that this is the prevailing religion in the West. I don't think Anarchism can last very long at all without a religious component.

>>13471036
Read Jacques Ellul
>>13469824 this Gentlemen was very much inspired by Ellul's thought.

Charles Taylor and Wendell Berry are more modern examples of this type of thought.

Liberal promotion of pluralism, tolerance and egalitarianism, etc, are at odds with real community because they disregard the importance of place and local culture.
Any "smoothing out" of culture is a caricature of the living tissue of life, and is necessarily totalitarian. That does not mean that these ideas themselves are a problem, just the that obsession with their promotion is.
If a community is egalitarian, pluralistic, etc., that is fine. If a community is not egalitarian, pluralistic, etc., then that is fine as well.

I consider the Amish and other groups like them to be the closest possible human societies can get to "Anarchism":
Larger families and stronger community ties can very easily decrease dependency on the state and the market.
Such a community may grow food in a family farm, hunt for food, and, depending on the interdependence of the community, their daily needs from cooking oils, to plates, to pottery, to soap are often made at home as well. There is still "an economy" but often one that is barter based or socialist in the pre-socialist (or in a certain anarchist) sense of the word: mediated by direct face-to-face social tit-for-tat between neighbors and friends, none of this mediated by currency

Christian Anarchism is the only form of Anarchism that isn't ephemeral; all other forms of Anarchism (if they have existed at all) were short lived.
An economically self-sufficient village with close social relationships and a barter economy doesn't have to be Christian, it's just that this is the prevailing religion in the West. I don't think Anarchism can last very long at all without a religious component.

>>13463069
If you want just a straight up intro then >>13464092 or Guerin's Anarchism are the best.
>The Zapatista Reader
>Bookchin's The Spanish Anarchists
>Imperialism: The Monster of the Twentieth Century
>The Many-Headed Hydra
Those are the best Anarchist books I've read. Chomsky, Graeber, Tolstoy are worth reading in general, but their Anarchist stuff isn't really necessary.

But, I'd argue if you want Leftist theory then go to Marx, Engels and Lenin, as unsexy as it sounds.

>>13469890
Do you actually think that example paints a favorable picture of Anarchism? Holy fuck dude

direct democracy can never work because most people are retarded and uninformed about 95% of issues

>>13472338
what is Christian Anarchy? seems counter intuitive given everyone is "subjugated" before God.
>>13472426
seems like you've explored the topic a fair amount, how have your views on anarchism changed as you've read through those works?

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/

>>13463069
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anarchism/
Also might be of interest:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/max-stirner/
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/godwin/
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/autonomy-moral/

>>13470579
>>13472764
You prefer a legal system based on capitalism, where the affluent can buy their way to “justice”? Where, for those without so much ready cash, the law is set in stone and unbreakable, punishing the same way for dissimilar crimes generations later?
Your way is primitive and very unjust.

>>13470742
>>13470885
Yes, please do come back and tell us all about your interpretation. I am interested to hear it, even if you are needlessly rude.

>Read Lenin READ LENIN, QUICK!
It’s such a personality cult. The thing about anarchism is, it's still being worked out. Sensible practitioners and theorists are self critical and we look for what works free of dogma. MLists are sure we need some more Leninism. Well, read what you like, just be weary of the cult.

>>13463069
Even if one achieved a worldwide state of anarchy, new leaders and groups would inevitably emerge from the chaos. Humans are inherently social animals so anarchy is unsustainable

>>13463069
I like Alfredo Bonanno, Bob Black and Fredy Perlman. Not an anarchist anymore but those fellas are good reads. Also Emma Goldman's autobiography is worth a gander.
Anarchism is silly, though, just so you know.

>>13473796
>The 14 year olds argument
Read a book on it.

>>13474053
Why “silly”? What are you into now?

>>13466883
Nigger you're stupid as hell

>>13472338
Do you know about any works specifically pertaining to Christian Anarchism? I get the feeling that's roughly where I stand politically, but I'm not sure of any specific texts about it.
>>13472976
>counter intuitive
Anarchism is not about the abolition of authority. It's about the abolition of unjust/oppressive hierarchies. In this sense, we can view such hierarchies as the product of human hubris and established under a false pretence that they are masters of God's creation. I don't view God as a mere authority figure in a sense, I view him as the fundamental laws of nature itself. To assert authority over God is to assert authority over nature. To do either is ridiculous.

>>13468840
What about that post was hard to follow?

>>13475576
>unjust/oppressive hierarchies.
seems kind of subjective innit

>>13473796
Why would you argue with uropianists?
Obviously none of their Utopias will ever happen, and every time they try it ends up working exactly as any sane person would expect.

You can't argue against anarchism, just like you can't argue against someone who believes 2+2=5. What could you possibly have as an argument? Show him the definitions? Explain why and how he is wrong? Do you think any of that will sway him from his position that 2+2=5?

>>13472779
thats why you tighten the scope of influence to what actually matters to people and so what they actually have reason to know.

FUCK butterfly WHORE and
FUCK TRIPFAGS

>>13476283
Seems like an invitation for informal power centers to quietly guide society as they see fit.

are there more people on the left like kevin carson who take some influence from the right?
are there people on the right who take some influence from non marxist anarchists?

>>13473631
>You prefer a legal system based on capitalism, where the affluent can buy their way to “justice”? Where, for those without so much ready cash, the law is set in stone and unbreakable, punishing the same way for dissimilar crimes generations later?
>Your way is primitive and very unjust.

By golly you sure are on it, aren't you?
Our jurisdiction has flaws, no doubt.

But at least it is not vigilantism. At least we let people defend themselves before clubbing them on the street.

I'll speak from experience.

Anarchists, I mean true anarchists (not jobless, useless lazy punk rockers or teenagers) are some of the most /lit/ people I've meet. During my college years I went to many rallies and manifestations, amongts some I went maybe to two anarchists rallies.
Trying to talk with them is a nightmare, some could talk about any political system, with unbiased pros and cons, quite a few of them had read The Kapital by Marx, on it's full volumes. They don't have "un"reads, they have "to" reads. I couldn't fit in their groups for the very reason that I'm too ignorant to handle a conversation with some of them about Hobbes, Rosseau, Hegel, and so on.

how did one manlet lead an army that created a free territory with 7 million people?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory

Anarchists are pseuds

>Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

Why are Americans such fascists that can't even begin to fathom anything but the current fascism they live under?

>>13478415
ive had multiple conversations with other americans who tell me that universal healthcare leads to stalin. they arnt very bright

>>13478496
Sometimes I want to say burgoids aren't the stupidest and that it's all propaganda but 99% of them are less intelligent than stones so I don't know anymore.

>>13463069
Man, Economy, and State by Rothbard

>>13476205
Not at all

>>13476383
Why? Check some videos by Cockshott on Democracy (I don’t know a decent book to explain all the ways direct democracy works, maybe someone else does) it makes the citizenry more responsible and doesn’t allow for any elite to take over.

>>13476729
Sure, I guess. Depends on what “influence” you’re talking about of course

>>13476756
No state sanctioned the people to defend themselves, so you call it vigilantism. Hahah. Okay man.

>>13476765
Neat. I’ve gotta find me some.

>>13478415
There’s a sea-change happening. Their are fascists in the faux left emerging and even some former rightwingers are going progressive

>>13478871
But he must conclude he is not an anarchist

>>13479075
I call it vigilantism because your example implies there is no trial and immediate pu nishment executed by people who entitle themselves. How would you name that?

>>13478517
The best universities in the world and a huge amount of technological innovation are in America, you guys are just butthurt provincials

>>13479535
Does it? I was just rushing the response. True, some areas may not like pedophiles so much and skip a trial, but that could lead to ill feelings... on someone’s part. No, I tried to imply a selection of jurors that will hear out the situation and they will judge not from a book of laws about past crimes, but to judge the situation at hand.
I present how it can be done with set laws, but I cannot predict the temperament of the townships from place to place or time. I can only hope they choose to treat the sick minded, and forgive the accident. Most crime would vanish in an anarchist world, but not from neglect of justice, rather from razor sharp attention to it.
Sorry for the misunderstanding

>>13479559
*can be done without set laws

>>13476205
Not just subjective. Those terms can be applied to anything, and they are applied to almost everything, because that's how frauds get their way.

>>13479559
>pedophile

>>13479603
FORGERIES

>>13473509
Leftcoms aren't anarchists, though. Unless you're someone like Chomsky who somehow thinks that Pannekoek was a left communist.
And both communists and anarchists are retarded.

>>13479558
That doesn't negate fascism and its support at all, though.

>>13472338
>I consider the Amish and other groups like them to be the closest possible human societies can get to "Anarchism".
Based.

>>13467346

>He thinks Somalia is anarchistic
>"Anarchist state"

Christ almighty

>>13470742
Cmon Icy, come back and tell us all about your brand of real anarchism

>>13463069
Fascism is the epitome of anarchism
prove me wrong
I'm talking about the leader, not the followers

>>13483307
He's an American. Don't bully him. He must be treated like a mentally disabled child.

>>13483629
>I'm talking about the leader, not the followers
Btfo year own premise right from the start.

Just started reading The Freedom of Ecology by Murray Bookchin. I really like the early examples of Native America societies and their emphasis on non-hierarchical relationships. How their language was essentially devoid of terms like property and "having".

I don't like Bookchin's emphasis on democracy and assemblies (I believe more in free association), but Post-Scarcity Anarchism and his other early works are great in themselves and to get into anarchism in general.

>>13484243
Is there a theorist that goes i to this free association?

>>13484519
Joseph Déjacque, Malatesta, Marx, and Bakunin are the ones that come to mind.

>>13484749
specifically for déjacque, this is a good source for most of his works: https://libcom.org/files/Le%20Humanisphere.pdf

kropotkin also goes into detail about it in the conquest of bread

I am very skeptical about romanticizing some 'native' or 'indigenous' peoples who supposedly had no notion of property, who had no hierarchies and so on. The question becomes, ok, let's say it's true, what are the restrictions posed to individuals through social pressure? What kind of collectivist or individualist ideology reigns? What are the sexual divisions of labor and so on. Especially these ideas where capitalism is seen as the source of everything just because phenomena take on a certain form and dynamic within capitalist societies. Headless societies =/= everyone is equal in harmony with nature and others. Have a look at the Souroudougou region in the 19th C for example.


Even worse are these determinist views on language where nature/culture binaries supposedly are absent because there isn't a word for this or that. For example the Bantu languages work with a noun class system so no distinction is made between female and male pronouns or nouns. Doesn't mean Bantu speakers don't have male/female binaries running throughout their cultures and institutions, sexual divisions of labor, patriarchy etc.

>>13484749
Thanks.
I see it getting that way, but only after a while of direct democracy. We have to organize somehow, but with increased technological and social developments I think maybe some would drift more toward free association, as I think they might drift more away from labor vouchers and towards a shared economy. They can operate side by side in patches

>>13484781
Thanks again. Must get the bread book down this year

>>13484814
There is no romanticizing. What Bookchin goes over specifically is that certain native societies were able to grow organically with as little coercion as possible within their people. There was no dominant ideology as there weren't any dominant institutions. Guidance, coordination, and wisdom were ideas that permeated their way of living as opposed to obedience, command, and power.

The remark on their language is an additional note in how they lived their roles within the natural world, as opposed to seeing nature as something that must be controlled. He also goes more into detail how their language was reflective of "usufruct", how individuals of the community had the freedom to use the resources they need and that this was okay merely by virtue of the fact they are using them.

The primary idea of The Ecology of Freedom is that the domination of nature by man developed from the domination of human by humans. Hierarchy and domination are at the root of our issues today.

28. Buddhists, Christians, democrats, socialists, communists, anarchists: Precisely because none of them already have the utopia that they are all so desperately seeking, it'd be ridiculous to take their absurd, incoherent ravings seriously, as ridiculous, indeed, as taking business advice from a homeless person.

327. The anarchist's opposition to the state comes from communism, even if they pretend to fully repudiate it (much like the democrat's theory of equal beings comes from Christianity, even if they pretend to distance themselves from it and vilify it). But despotism comes before both of them. Despotism is the start of everything — what allowed us to part ways from the animals and forge our own future. It was strong human beings who took control of the herd and turned it into a tribe, the tribe into a city, the city into a nation, the nation into an empire, the empire into a culture, and finally the culture... into an Overman. And it is the strong (no-longer-so-)human being who, once more, will lead the way by lighting the match that will send up the entire world in flames.

645. Lichtenberg: "Actual aristocracy cannot be abolished by any law: all the law can do is decree how it is to be imparted and who is to acquire it." — Which is to say that inequality cannot be abolished by laws, since a law is merely a different means of inequality production. That's why the anarchists are clamoring for the death of all laws, which is to say for the return to jungle conditions, which are certainly no more egalitarian than those of any other space or period in the history of the universe. The anarchist is merely a socialist who badly needs to travel or read a book.

657. "But at least we should understand the age we live in. And that is — again — the primacy of free-floating global capital and borderless labor markets. Enabled by fractional reserve banking, it destroys religion, nation, community, all traditional forms of human society in favor of profits for usurers and owners of capital. All people must be reduced to atoms floating in the ether of capitalism — equal and free, under the greater yoke of the system." — Typical anarchist propaganda. Note that the demand for them to contribute something back to the society that feeds, clothes, houses, and (evidently fails) to educate them is considered a "yoke". — Anti-capitalist philosophy is disgusting parasite propaganda.

From orgyofthewill.net

>>13485186
>From orgyofthewill.net
Who cares?

>>13485196
Anyone interested in reading further. This is the literature board, where people like to read, after all.

>>13463069
Max Stirner and Ayn Rand

>>13466827
Go into detail buttershit. You seem to love to tripfagging on other imageboards besides 5chin.

>>13485186
The history of the world is a series of developments. The history of the human, especially, can be seen through a number of "periods." How people live, the conditions they're in, have changed dramatically several times. Of course, if you don't even understand this really basic idea of human living, you would think that the long struggle to change how we manage ourselves still not in fruition is reason enough to stop wanting it.

Most anarchists will say they are also communists. You are right, it was man and the social institutions that tried to separate the human race from nature, but to think you could actually do this is why we are having so many problems today. No matter what we do, nature is all-encompassing and we will always have our part in the overall flow of Earth.

i'll reply to the other garbage later if i feel like it

>>13485243
(also i am aware you are using quotations, but you are using them for your own ideas so i reply in the according fashion)

>>13485186
>orgyofthewill

icycalm is a swindling faggot

Anarchism fails because a monopoly on the use of force is necessary
(1) For common law
(2) For preventing civil war between power hungry factions
(3) For defense against external forces
Anarchies always get btfod because violence is an attractive way to get what you want when there's no police or military.

>>13463069
Veganarchism, Total Liberation.

I've now moved on to Stirner, though.
You can't save humanity and yet expect it to improve.

>Anarcho-Capitalism
>Mutualism
>Social Anarchism
>Collective Anarchism
>Anarcho-Communism
>Libertarian Socialism
>Anarcho-Syndicalism
>Social Ecology
>Philosophical Anarchism
>Egoist Anarchism
>Individualist Anarchism
>Insurrectionary Anarchism
>Green Anarchism
>Anarcho-Primitivism
>Anarcho-naturism
>Anarcha*-Feminism
>Anarcho-Pacifism
>Christian-Anarchism
>Anarchism without adjectives
What makes you think you narcissistic snowflakes can agree on anything enough to actually create a anarchist utopia of any kind?

>>13486357
It's just another form of edgy teenage larping, having the coolest name for your dumb ideas is all that matters

>>13463069
The Conquest of Breadth and The Anarchist FAQ are the two best.

>>13486357
there are different strains of thinking in many ideologies, what's your point? also """anarcho"""-capitalism isn't anarchy

>>13486357
Your list is full of redundancy and liberalism. Are you trying to convince yourself that multiple opinions is bad thing? Or even unexpected?
>utopia utopia utopia
A better world is possible. Stop defending your jailers

>>13487542
I'm thinking "liberalism" just means anything that isn't socialism or fascism that you don't like to you leftists.
Also nothing wrong with plurality of opinion.
Unless you're trying to organize a society on common ideas without coercion.
If anarchists took over a country and branched off whenever there was a disagreement then there would be as many anarchists territories there as there are anarchists there.

>>13486357
many of these overlap and are not mutually exclusive

>>13463069
Right wingers are too weak willed to insult eachother, but Anarchists can insult eachother however we like you fucking faggot

>>13466606
There's literally nothing wrong with this comic; you only try to turn the criticisms against you into a joke because you're scared of admitting how much of an idealistic hypocrite you are
Also, neck yourself tripfag

>>13487592
Liberals are the original utopians. They’re capitalists cheerleaders.
Nothing wrong with plurality in a stateless world where “branching off” means a dude goes his separate way

>>13488071
I see the subtlety of this gag is too sophisticated for you would you like us to explain it?

>>13489056
Anarchy is just liberalism taken one step further

>>13487511
1. It is
2. It actually distinguishes itself enough in practicality to be a separate ideological position. Many flavors of anarchism are just ones own preferences in addition to anarchism. They would be better off saying "I'm an anarchist. Also, ...". Basically, subdivisions of anarchism that can exist together simultaneously are not actual subdivisions. This is like saying I'm an Anarcho-bicyclist, or an Anarcho-vegan. Anarcho-capitalism is at least distinct enough to bear acknowledgement. Most of these are just pseudo-anarchisms devised by people who want to use the clout of anarchism to push their SEPERATE ideologies.

Not an ancap btw

>>13489180
Anarchy is the abolishment of hierarchy and authority. Anarcho-capitalism is the maintenance of hierarchy and authority through private property

>>13489056
>Liberals are the original utopians. They’re capitalists cheerleaders.
Had nothing to do with that remark but okay.
>Nothing wrong with plurality in a stateless world where “branching off” means a dude goes his separate way
Right. So all of you snowflakes go your own way, everyone hopefully having enough useful land to sustain themselves.
Then the Chad statists unite themselves and steam roll the anarchists, claiming their territories for themselves.

>>13466606
Improv society by adapting red ideals which always ends up making things worse.

>>13489113
One step completely away from it. As in it’s statist, property owners, class structured, poverty supporting, war mongering, capitalism.
Anarchism being pretty much the opposite.

>>13489180
It is not. Not only that, but it cannot exist. It is a contradiction in terms.

>>13466736
And yet, facism is the only way you are going to get what you want. Accept your fellow white man, accept tribalism.

>be stateless commune of faggots
>get your shit kicked in by any state that feels like it
Genius

>>13467028
Why the fuck would I want literal retards having a say in my life? If you are not a land owning male with a record of civil or military service, you don't get a say.

>>13489056
>They’re capitalists cheerleaders.
Everyone, but the "far" "right" are capitalist cheerleaders, even most Marxists I know support the labour suppression scheme of immigration.

>>13489242
>had nothing to do with...
Oh, imagine that. Anonymous is confused again. You are a part of a hivemind and present yourself as one person. Get used to it.
>sustain themselves
Which is why absolutist individualism is dingy. Don’t worry, we’ll have to band together or die trying. We don’t need “management” oligarchy, liberal prick

>>13489246
>People are alway mindless. You can’t leave them alone to just do their work. You need a supervisor, a policeman, a dictator
Fuck out of this thread liberal scumbo

>>13489256
Fascists are authoritarian capitalism, IE liberals on crack. Fuck off.

>>13489265
We outnumber you

>>13489276
Move to a cabin. No FBI gonna hunt you down.
>but i am the boot on your neck!
Yeah, sure sure. Timestamp your badge and revolver, officer

>>13489222
Whatever. The point I was making is that whether or not, via your conception of what anarchy is, you believe anarcho-capitalism to be truly anarchistic, or not, it is an actual thing, unlike other Anarcho-[insert whatever you like here]isms.

>>13489286
Read a fucking book before posting about this.

>>13467212
So traffic laws and laws that punish child molesters are bad to you?

>>13489298
What book do I need to read to learn what the Marxists at my University, who are explicitly pro open borders, aren't for open borders?

Inb4 "read Marx"
I do not give a fuck about what Marx thinks, I care about what Marxists think, and I get that informations from what they say and write.

>>13489294
Words mean things. What anarcho-capitalists refer to as anarchy is just the absence of the state (or rather, the introduction of a free market that provides all of the functions of the state). So it isn't even anarchy. It's a bastardization of it.

>>13467212
>They’re there to protect the elites.
The elites are quite literally a superior breed of humans, them replacing the human garbage in Europe through mass execution of criminal scum made Europe very peaceful and raised it's qualities to what it is today.

>>13489292
>Which is why absolutist individualism is dingy. Don’t worry, we’ll have to band together or die trying. We don’t need “management” oligarchy, liberal prick
Right... And you'll organize while everyone goes off on their own to do their own version of anarchism. Your image of how anarchism works is that everyone won't be as vain as you and will agree with your version of doing it.
Good luck with that lol.
Meanwhile statists will have no problem organizing into populations of tens or hundreds of millions.
You hippies will just get steam rolled and some country will get more land out of it.

>>13489292
>we outnumber you
There is no "we", you're just some delusional internet tranny

>>13489292
>We outnumber you
Lol, what level of delusion are you on?
The International NazBol community is a bigger "We" than you have.

Why do I get a ticket for driving without a seat-belt, on my way to legally base jump after smoking a pack of cigarettes?

>>13489335
>>13489335
Because you're legally required to have car insurance (because if people are in an accident they want guarantee they'll get financial retribution) and if people are constantly getting heavier injuries because they won't get a seat belt, premiums will go up, which will effect everyone.

>>13468885
Because most anarchists are not anarchists but statists without a state.

>>13489317
Dude, this isn't even a reply to my post. I conceded your right to think that in the post that you are replying to!

I
Do
Not
Care
To
Argue
Whether
Or
Not
Anarcho-capitalism
Is
Anarchism
.

I am saying that because it contradicts your version of anarchism is why it is meaningful as an ideology.

>>13489292
People are mindless ya dumb fuck, and the current system works with that and unlike what you want, it actually does work.

>>13489292
Facists are more like reds like yourself, except they actually get things done :3

I believe that all other political states are in fact variations or outgrowths of a basic state of anarchy; after all, when you mention the idea of anarchy to most people they will tell you what a bad idea it is because the biggest gang would just take over.
Which is pretty much how I see contemporary society.
We live in a badly developed anarchist situation in which the biggest gang has taken over and have declared that it is not an anarchist situation – that it is a capitalist or a communist situation. But I tend to think that anarchy is the most natural form of politics for a human being to actually practice.

>>13489351
>which will effect everyone
how does that not apply to society as a whole when you have prime workforce killing themselves with overtly risky activities
such a waste to bring a child through school and all that, only for it to smash into a mountain wall at age 20

>>13463069

A history book

any history book

States will always consume or destroy an anarchist society.. probably not before the society destroys itself though lmao

>>13489382
You have the choice to be a coal miner or a cashier at McDonalds. No one else's decision to be a cashier or a coal miner effects you personally.
Someone's choice to not wear a seatbelt does affect you personally.

Freedom with restrictions isn't freedom

>>13489356
But this is a thread on anarchism, not on ideology.

>>13489416

Freedom doesn't exist, you are bounded to the chain of cause and effect. It's about building social structures that doesn't have us preying on each other like scared apes.

>>13489302
People obey traffic rules for obvious safety reasons.
A child molester will either be killed at the First possible moment or sent to a correctional facility. Depending on where he preys. We don’t need your masa’s legal system, we don’t need your stinking lawyers.

>>13489310
First post, anon.

>>13489320
>>13489357
Here we have two sides of the same coin. You expect me to believe that the normal human mind isn’t capable of developing into a reasonable and intelligent being, and that the mass majority actually are properly born into the right circumstances because they will be inferior as some sort of genetic or racial thing?
Read Thomas Paine. You have some catching up to do/10

>>13489317
Agreed. Words have meanings. And what you say when you mention anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. You cannot abolish the state and maintain property rights. What results will literally be feudalism by way of Mad Max. Think harder.

>>13490896
>A child molester will either be killed at the First possible moment or sent to a correctional facility.
You don't even NEED to be a child molester for this to happen, just for people to act like or think you are
Much like a legal system, except nobody is even trying to enforcing any scrutiny
debased

>>13490918
Are you drinking? You do time or something?

>>13490896
>>13490933
What happens when there are nobody that cares you anymore, when there exists no independent retaliatory force to carry out vengeance after your death (as a deterrent to your demise)?

>>13490972
What are you talking about?

>>13490993
If you are a maybe an elderly person, no family to speak of. Or for any reason you become an isolated individual.
What's to stop people from killing you and taking all your stuff, in an anarchist world

You said, criminals would be killed or sent to a correctional facility. But who is sending them there, if nobody is looking after you?

>>13491023
Ah. Well they’re raised better to begin with, they have their own stuff. But lets say we get a loony psychopath. Do I not have security protection in the old isolated cabin? No friends or automations checking up on me, and at least being able to trace who was wandering around in the area so they can catch him? If not, I guess we’ll have the temporary unsolved murder. Much like now, only considerably less of them.
Sounds like a good deal to me

>>13491074
>Ah. Well they’re raised better to begin with, they have their own stuff
Why?

Why do you think everyone having to make and maintain a personal security system at all times, as a deterrent, are more efficient than one that exists independent of you, even if you want to or not.

>>13491108
Laws are to protect the wealthy’s property and keep the wage slaves from taking it away. Police are to keep them in line. Prisons are to torment and breed more criminal behavior.

Doing away with it all and providing a decent and actually civilized world to raise kids in, you would have significantly less crime, but at the same time more diligent citizens, watchful parents, savvy bright children. This would increase one generation after the next. I don’t know how far it can go, but we’d either have a decent system for dealing with psychotic crimes or we’d exact revenge rather quickly.
It is more efficient. All of it.

>>13491162
>we’d either have a decent system for dealing with psychotic crimes or we’d exact revenge rather quickly.
So like is this system going to operate on a commonly agreed code or something?

>>13491175
Naw. Depends on the region. If you have a tanky state or a Christian walled commune, you’d probably experience some rigidity

whats stopping anarchists from living in the wild right now?

>>13491210
The wealthy and their police

>>13491162
Never seen any that drunk the anarchist kool-aid like this.

You sound like a middle aged drug addict that just found his Jesus.

>>13491210
It’s the Anthropocene and it’s completely dominated by capitalism

>>13491269
I’m making best guesses at the after effects. Will you nitwits find your way to this much improved world? Highly doubtful. But I will try

>>13491199
How do you resolve large-scale conflicts where who's in the right is truly ambiguous, and enforce that resolution?

>>13491310
They’d have to get together and work it out. This all grows from a planned economy and a very necessary increase in ecological preservationism. The borders will still seem there but in the process of trying to save our collective asses, the lines fade and the animosity’s fade with the dying older generation. Conflicts that could arise will be minor and can be worked out easily enough

>>13491335
>there would even be conflict in my perfect anarchist world

>>13491355
I can’t be sure of a utopia, anon. Can you? The “scientism” liberals of the Anthropocene think capitalism will bring it.
But it will look like this movie >>13491210

>>13491366
I don't expect you write out a step by step guide to archive utopia.
But it would be interesting to see if your ideal system had some sort of "realistic" internal coherence.
A lot of what you are preaching, is relying on the goodness of people (quickly, almost magically seems to me) growing out of places where it didn't exist before, from taking away their tax law and property rights(?)

I don't see myself as a person changing that much, which is a bit presumptuous, as I can't truly imagine how it would be to live as me with a drastically different upbringing very well, if at all

>>13491398
Taking away most of the ill of the world and replacing it with personal responsibility and freedom will produce a healthier relaxed environment, encouraging communal bonds and higher education (debt free obviously). It would produce a better society. The negatives are positives in disguise. It will be like putting on new boots, taking some breaking into at first.

>>13491422
I'm with you anon, but the problem is summed up best by Morpheus in the Matrix, "You have to understand. Most people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured and so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."

>>13491585
It is a heroes quest we’re on.
And a ripening time is coming.

>>13466930
I'm still confused. Did you never play Minecraft multiplayer? It would be mayhem

>>13491600
These anarchists are either like ultra lefties, just children spouting stupid ideas that everyone past teenagehood should recognize the flaws of, or they’re like those industrial society and its future types who just want a reset. Either way a brainlet.

When are anarchists going to realize that the people who are strong enough to build and shape civilizations prefer dystopias over utopias (because the "dystopias" of the masses are what the utopias of the strong are)? Read Nietzsche ffs.

>>13491678
Which is what I encourage!
We outnumber the fools driving us to extinction and you, the followers, the defenders of those fools. We still outnumber you

>>13491693
>Which is what I encourage!
Except you're calling the "strong" "fools" and still referring to their utopia as a dystopia. They want to drive the masses to extinction. No, that's not what you encourage. You're misusing Nietzsche there for your own agenda.

>>13491693
Yeah I'm sure most people actually want to give up their creature comforts and live in third world-level conditions for all of a month before China rolls in and takes over.

>>13491693
You’re such an unbelieveable retard.

>>13491714
>>13491717
>>13491754
^non-readers, ladies and gentlemen. Round of applause

>>13491777
^full of yourself, out of touch, and unliked

>>13491777
When you don't understand modern supply chain structures, people, technology or geopolitics but still gotta make dumb posts. Maybe go read isaif instead of pretending like a retard.

>>13491835
Read

>>13491777
I have read Nietzsche. In Human, All Too Human, he writes:

>When a scholar of the old culture swears to have nothing more to do with people who believe in progress he is right. For the old culture has its goods and greatness behind it and history compels one to admit that it can never be fresh again; one needs to be intolerably stupid or fanatical to deny this.

>Progress in the sense and along the paths of the old culture is not even thinkable. If romantic fantasizings still do designate their goals (e.g. self-contained original national cultures) as “progress”, they nonetheless borrow their image of it from the past: in this domain their thinking and imagining lacks all originality.

And in The Antichrist, he writes:

>"The world is perfect"—thus says the instinct of the most spiritual, the Yes-saying instinct; "imperfection, whatever is beneath us, distance, the pathos of distance—even the chandala still belongs to this perfection." The most spiritual men, as the strongest, find their happiness where others would find their destruction: in the labyrinth, in hardness against themselves and others, in experiments; their joy is self-conquest; asceticism becomes in them nature, need, and instinct. Difficult tasks are a privilege to them; to play with burdens which crush others, a recreation.

>The Christian and the anarchist: both decadents, both incapable of having any effect other than disintegrating, poisoning, withering, bloodsucking; both the instinct of mortal hatred against everything that stands, that stands in greatness, that has duration, that promises life a future. Christianity was the vampire of the imperium Romanum: overnight it undid the tremendous deed of the Romans—who had won the ground for a great culture that would have time.

Which, to me, says that all of the anarcho-primitivist chest-thumping by Ted's advocates is folly, and that your description of our current society's future as a "dystopia" is an indication that you lack this profound spirit. Napoleon saw civilization as his natural enemy, according to Nietzsche, but was he an anarchist for it? No, because he had a profound spirit, and understood and was capable of seizing control of society THROUGH society. That is the proper task. Your anarcho-primitivist conspiritard bullshit that wipes your hands clean of your immense inequality by bleating "it's been rigged!" and does nothing but attribute all of the planet's problems to the system you resent for the purpose of motivating its collapse is NOT the proper task.

>>13463069
There is absolute truth in anarchism and it is to be seen in its attitude to the sovereignty of the state and to every form of state absolutism. … The religious truth of anarchism consists in this, that power over man is bound up with sin and evil, that a state of perfection is a state where there is no power of man over man, that is to say, anarchy. The Kingdom of God is freedom and the absence of such power... the Kingdom of God is anarchy.

>>13492950
Can you eli5 this book

>>13491422
You fail to account for female hypergamy, which would decimate society.

>be left-leaning intellectual too smart for religion
>employ the same sophistry and us-vs-them mentality of religious leaders
>blame everything on free market capitalism despite clearly living in an oligarchy where a handful of corporations dominate policy-making
>call all those who are remotely statist/nationalistic "facists"
>oh also caring about the environment is an anarchist position

That's about what I've gleaned from this thread. It's hard to argue against something that means so many different things at once, so why bother?

>>13493708
You're not intelligent enough to contribute to the conversation. Please read some form of anarchist literature before you attempt to characterize their positions. Attempting to make a value judgement on something you have no understanding of is a characteristic of troglodytes.

>>13467668
lmao what the hell? Fuck Antifa, but whoever wrote that has no idea of what anarchy is. Literally all those questions would be answered if he read one (1) small piece of anarchist literature. Anarchism is not everyone for themselves. Read a fucking book for once in your life.

>>13486357
> Anglo-Saxon Authoritarian Corporate Dirigist Free-market Humanistic Laissez-faire Liberal Libertarian Market Mercantilist Mixed Monopoly National Neoliberal Nordic Private Raw Regulated market Regulatory Rhine Social State State-sponsored Welfare
These are literally all different types of capitalism you dumb fuck. There are many more. It didn't stop us from trying it.

>>13463069
The Road, unironically.

>>13493420
>our current society's future as a "dystopia"
No no, I describe this s the dystopia and there is no future.

>>13493488
Eli5?

>>13493517
You fail to get a spine, but there ought not be any incels, neets, hikkimori, or vidya idiocy in the future, since consumerism for its on sake would be gone. Unless you’re determined to be a shut-in, in which case you’d be a “volcel” and ought keep your pie-hole shut concerning other people’s sex lives

>>13493420
dont reply to the omnipresent in all threads namefag, if they were listening theyd be less insufferable by now

>>13495047
>Eli5
Le Reddit lingo. Explain like im five

>>13463069
Sons of anarchy

>>13493420
>If romantic fantasizings still do designate their goals (e.g. self-contained original national cultures) as “progress”, they nonetheless borrow their image of it from the past: in this domain their thinking and imagining lacks all originality.
Nazis btfo. You go, Nietzsche
>Difficult tasks are a privilege to them; to play with burdens which crush others, a recreation.
Nothing more arduous than the task of slaying this beast-system.
>The Christian and the anarchist: both decadents, both incapable of having any effect other than disintegrating, poisoning, withering
The Proudhon anarchists did not impress Friedrich or Max either. But Nietzsche later says (and I really should learn which passage this is from. Pardon) that what he’s driving at (for the übermensch) is a cross between an aristocrat and an anarchist.
!

>>13496577
Ah. Well, I hope he found his way.

>>13496922
>Ah. Well, I hope he found his way.
That was me who wrote ELI5. I want you to explain it to me.

>>13496977
In the sticky. Go to pdf archive site and punch in the title and author to DL

Anarchism isn't ontologically real; behind the facade there's always an authority directing our attention. There's no escape from this, as it's a constraint imposed on us by language itself. All we can do is make that self-effacing authority conscious and formal.

>>13492950
>>13493488
>Can you eli5 this book
Sure. The author suggests computing labour costs with a new high tech solution; Excel + Teletext.
It's quite amusing.

>>13497076
Bizarre attempt to discredit it.
What do you mean “behind the façade”? Our language validates rulers and we’re unable to do any better? Despite the first principle; to challenge all unjustifiable hierarchies.

>>13497135
Why amusing? He wrote it in the early 90s

>>13497154
>Why amusing? He wrote it in the early 90s
I'm not sure. I just find it funny that it's called "Towards a New Socialism" and the best he could come up with is an Excel spreadsheet + Teletext, and as far as I know, socialists have not even managed to develop that. Keep in mind, over the same period time the Austrians have theorised and developed decentralised, proof of work, and cryptographically secure private property (currencies, and stores of values), with embedded contract law.
You have to admit it is a little funny.

>>13497219
Keep reading.
He does mention (Hayek, I believe) in the chapters on democracy

>>13495047
Everything you understand about N is backwards, hence why you always post that dumb little brat and think she artistically represents his overman in the slightest. She represents the overman's opposite.

>>13497348
>She represents the overman's opposite
Ha! No. Have you read that essay explaining it yet?
And besides, Nietzsche isn’t my guru. He can be wrong, he’s just a man. And Pippi is a fiction

>>13497372
>Have you read that essay explaining it yet?
Nothing is further from the concept than an arrogant little girl who thinks she's the world, artistically speaking, so I see no point in reading what is obviously drivel.

>>13497384
You don’t understand what she is. I see where you’re mistaken.

>>13497399
I understand that the final expression doesn't line up with what the man wrote and probably with nothing that essay says either.

Just heard tonight that Paul Krassner has gone into hospice. One of the original Yippies (he claimed to have invented the name) with Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Stew Albert, Ed Sanders, and the rest of that 60s Lower East Side bunch who provided the bridge between the beats and the hippies, Krassner was the first to suggest that LBJ fucked JFK's throat wound on Air Force One on the trip back to Washington from Dallas in The Realist, the magazine he published, wrote and edited which, I mean, if you haven't read it, you just don't know anarchy, man.

>>13464137
>Be a Marxist
>See reactionary element
>Use judicial power to deal with reactionary element
>Due to re-education they integrate back into society over time as comrades
>In other scenario they just get life working hard labor for the good of the masses
Great succes

>Be you, anarchist
>See reactionary element
>Pwease sir, can you stop being so mean to people and just give up your private property?
>get either shot or arrested/tortured by private fash militia.

I wonder which side didn't get run over by fascists at every oppertunity.

>>13497635
Not to even mention that anarchists are unable to think outside of systems defined by bourgeois property relations.
Kropotkin wasn't the worst and Chomsky has some decent work on media manipulation though, I'll give you guys that.

>>13463069

>>13497635
Mind pointing out these great successes? How do you reconcile the fact that the most reactionary class always is the working class with the proposition that you're supposedly a system for the workers?

>>13464092
Fuck off

>>13497718
Here's what I don't get about the bolo thing.

What happens if a bunch of paedophiles form the paedobolo. And they are having kids in there for the purposes of abuse, and that's okay by their laws.

Do people just let them carry on? Or, if you say the other bolos have power to invade and stop them, what makes that more legitimate than the veganbolo attacking meat eating bolos that they consider equally abusive?

>>13466584
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_anarchism

>>13467330
>the machines still need maintenance
they would be self-maintaining or maintained by other machines stupid

>>13497972
He wont. “Communist” comrades did the killing, not fascists

>>13465700

Nope. In the 1800's Bakunin wrote a great deal on how taking over the state and enforcing marxist ideals "downward" would just end up with a fresh tyranny.

Just like libertarianism, anarchism shies away from coercion.

How wet do anarchists get from reading Donna Haraway's Staying with the trouble?