all authoritarianism is bad, all hierarchies are bad. not sure how you plan to get anything accomplished being nice to capitalists but good luck! no hierarchies going to get you crushed by a semi modern army. so many anarchists want to skip the work and get right to utopia.
I mean I don't believe in the Marxist progression of history, it doesn't stand up with modern evidence. It's more of a practical matter: if you want something to be a certain way you've got to make it happen. You'll of course have to compromise at points, but don't start with the compromise
I forgot the comm this was in. Alright, the Paris Commune is an example of the manner in which prefigurative communism fails, as the communal society was not able to resist capitalist encirclement even remotely. It's the classic example of the problem with utopian projects.
The working class did not expect miracles from the Commune. They have no ready-made utopias to introduce par décret du peuple. They know that in order to work out their own emancipation, and along with it that higher form to which present society is irresistably tending by its own economical agencies, they will have to pass through long struggles, through a series of historic processes, transforming circumstances and men. They have no ideals to realize, but to set free the elements of the new society with which old collapsing bourgeois society itself is pregnant. In the full consciousness of their historic mission, and with the heroic resolve to act up to it, the working class can afford to smile at the coarse invective of the gentlemen’s gentlemen with pen and inkhorn, and at the didactic patronage of well-wishing bourgeois-doctrinaires, pouring forth their ignorant platitudes and sectarian crotchets in the oracular tone of scientific infallibility.
Frankly it's this kind of thinking from folks like garbageshoot that makes me not want to identify with Marxists, it's really common, especially in places where communists dominate the left for Marxists to lose sight of the radical nature of Marxism and just seek to set up a really thorough social democratic state.
It's less common on this site but I run into it a lot irl and it's why I usually say I'm an anarchist or an autonomist Marxist when I think you need both, and feminism, and 4th world nationalism, and he black radical tradition.
A prefigurative politics is essential. In parliamentary proceedings you always get less than you aim for; even in a revolutionary uprising there are counter-revolutionary forces pushing back against you.
You can't just say "relax, man, the contradictions will resolve themselves". You actually have to go out and agitate for them! It is not utopian to say that on the line from (x1, y1) to (x2, y2), there is going to be at least one point where the slope is (y2-y1 / x2-x1). What is utopian is thinking that we can engage with the world within the "acceptable" window (range of slope) of what currently exists, and expect to get somewhere new with it. The human brain has limitations to what it can imagine, that are tied to what the individual's full range of experience is! The wider and more groundbreaking the range of experience, the more we'll be able to imagine.
Actually run lots of different tests to see how things work. *Expand your empirical basis as well as your theoretical basis. There you go, some real "scientific socialism".
Raddle wrecker started the thread, youre continuing it, as am i. Why are you on Hexbear if its filled with "tankieeeeez". you came in with an agenda. you keep saying "tankies" so much its meaningless. im supposed to debate an asshole on the internet in good faith? how about fuck off?
So I interpret this as a threat to dox hexbear users?
In the spectrum of political action you could take outside of organizations (which I would suggest, go into some collectives) you decide to dox people creating and participating safe spaces for trans people online (since you label their brand of political action as authoritarian or as tolerant of authoritarianism you see in pretty much any ML form).
This means you are purging leftist elements instead of trying to broaden or create bases of power or free spaces for anti hierarchical ideologies. Sounds pretty authoritarian to me.
It's also pretty laughable that id ever be fired from my job for being a socialist tbh. It only works against fascists because they are so reprehensible and incapable of working on a team
i mean yeah, if you have a conservative nutjob as your boss even just being a hillary supporter will get you fired. most big corporations though, they dont care as long as they make money. in fact most people know that im a socialist at work already :shrug-outta-hecks:
If you’re not doing anything wrong, then you don’t have anything to worry about.
It’s very telling how much this site loves talking about “purges”. Authoritarians aren’t leftist. Removing them from the internet is a type of antifascist action and I will never apologize for being antifascist.
If you’re not doing anything wrong, then you don’t have anything to worry about.
Here's an easy one: closeted or passing people being outed and thereby being exposed to violence and harassment. Any communist in South Korea or other countries where it is illegal. Anyone even substantially adjacent to protest actions where a "frisky" PD has jurisdiction.
You are the absolute epitome of useful idiocy if you aren't just a fed -- which I don't say often but am forced to consider here with an anarchist who says US lawbreakers have a police raid coming.
Authoritarians aren’t leftist. Removing them from the internet is a type of antifascist action
So we all agree purging fascists is good. We just understand who fascists are and accept the idea that using force against them (i.e., purges) is good, while you don't have a fucking clue who fascists are and use some bullshit reasoning to say that your purges aren't really purges.
Jesus Christ that is a wall of unhinged screeds against muh red fash tankies with absolutely no analysis, just "here's something the makes me mad, watch me react to it with terminally online vocabulary". Theory implies I'll learn something from critical analysis, not a glimpse into the mind of a madman. What you linked is some weird manifesto about how you'd rather die under the boot of capitalism than ever work with others who have similar ideas of what is important but different ideas on how to reach them. Shows how serious you are about accomplishing those goals as some comfortable global north netizen posting their way to freedom apparently.
No wonder you can't define what you mean by authoritarian, I don't think you know.
Once the transition to their new religion is complete, almost immediately, any ideas that conflict with the writings of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Deng and Xi (never mind that they all contradict with each other) create desperate cognitive dissonance in their minds. So these pasty emotionally-stunted people angrily lash out at the unindoctrinated for being “radlibs”, “western chauvinists” and “imperialists” rather than risk parting with their new-found identity, community and belonging.
Once the majority in the newly minted left-unity community are comfortable joking about rounding up and killing “kulaks”, “anarchist bandits” or more recently “Uighur terrorists” and quoting Chinese state media to counter all the “imperialist western propaganda” from the mouths of the various minority groups being imprisoned and enslaved by the Chinese state (for their own good, they’ll insist), the shaming campaign begins.
Anyone in the space who breaks with the red fash party line is lambasted and ridiculed into submission. The remaining libertarians in the space now find themselves hopelessly outnumbered by scornful white settlers with daddy issues telling them they’re imperialist CIA stooges for thinking the Uighurs maybe shouldn’t be put in concentration camps or the Hong Kong and Tibetan people should get self-determination (watch tankies insist Tibetans who don’t want to be ruled by China are fascists and China is, in fact, saving them from themselves).
Most of it to be quite honest. Is it that we're just all hopelessly caught in an echo chamber unlike your enlightened self who is active on far right and far left forums to synthesize a truly correct take? Because if that's the case, I think you need to work on your presentation and sourcing, reading your writing is a slog ignoring the actual substance
p.s. still waiting to see what authoritarian means to you, was a simple question you have continued to avoid
The Tibetan theocratic aristocracy of old does not represent the peasantry they enslaved. That's like saying Emancipation was "freeing Southerners from themselves". There were slaves, slavers, and yeomen. It freed group one from group two.
There are Tibetans and Muslims in Xinjiang that didn't want to be ruled by the Chinese. For Tibet, those monarchists (because that is what they were and still are) took their shot at counter-revolution and failed, and when they failed they ran away to complain in luxury in the West like every comprador class before them. They sought to use their own authority to retain power and failed because, honestly, the peasantry was pretty sick of their shit.
Within Xinjiang, the popular sentiment was with joining with China, because the alternative was becoming a completely land-locked country at the mercy of it's neighbors, far better to ally with the regional power. In the light of multiple devastating terrorist attacks that primarily killed Xinjiang Muslims, mandatory education for adults was installed, and the facilities to bring about that policy was made, alongside checkpoint systems across the region (a system that would be re-used in order to combat COVID a decade later). There were no genocides in Xinjiang, no U.S. style door-to-door raids and mass arbitrary imprisonment of military age males. You either showed up to school or you were sent to jail, so most showed up. And it's been effective because there have been no terrorist attacks since these policies were implemented, even as they have been wound down by the state.
If Hong Kong gets self-determination, it might surprise you to learn that the majority would probably vote to join China. We can guess that because the majority faction within the Hong-Kong government is the pro-CPC faction, unless you are meaning to imply that Hong-Kong might not be a bastion of freedom and democracy (which is where my money is honestly).
I think polling shows that most people in HK support the mainland anyway, though of course this is due to support from the poorer population and not the mostly wealthy ones who made up the HK rioters.
hahahahahahahahahaahah oh fuck, you think youre breaking the mold. anarchy can't progress with shit contributions like that. what a long and thought out rant you have against anti capitalists, :LIB:
I'mma let you know this. Your writing is shit. Get someone else to edit this and use normal people words. If you're trying to make theoretical contributions don't write like a redditor
they seem to genuinely think that everyone on this site wants to genocide trans people even though over half the admin and mod team are trans and so is much of the userbase 🙄
those evil fascist trans people, so scary! indistinguishable from a random chud in a swamp
They're not doing a very good job of "keeping track of us" then lmao
They really gotta step up their game. Gotta hustlegrind for some real actionable threats of violence to report to the FBI if they wanna get that sweet sweet wooden medal.
yes, which is why anyone calling for “left unity” makes us suspicious.
all authoritarianism is bad, all hierarchies are bad. not sure how you plan to get anything accomplished being nice to capitalists but good luck! no hierarchies going to get you crushed by a semi modern army. so many anarchists want to skip the work and get right to utopia.
I mean they're right about that though, the institutions we build in struggle need to prefigure the institutions we want to have when we win.
I don't think prefigurative politics really makes sense, it's utopian almost by definition. A DotP is not prefigurative in any meaningful sense.
I mean I don't believe in the Marxist progression of history, it doesn't stand up with modern evidence. It's more of a practical matter: if you want something to be a certain way you've got to make it happen. You'll of course have to compromise at points, but don't start with the compromise
Paris Commune
What about it
I forgot the comm this was in. Alright, the Paris Commune is an example of the manner in which prefigurative communism fails, as the communal society was not able to resist capitalist encirclement even remotely. It's the classic example of the problem with utopian projects.
Marx literally said that the Paris Commune was a thorough example of the DotP, but go off king
Frankly it's this kind of thinking from folks like garbageshoot that makes me not want to identify with Marxists, it's really common, especially in places where communists dominate the left for Marxists to lose sight of the radical nature of Marxism and just seek to set up a really thorough social democratic state.
It's less common on this site but I run into it a lot irl and it's why I usually say I'm an anarchist or an autonomist Marxist when I think you need both, and feminism, and 4th world nationalism, and he black radical tradition.
A prefigurative politics is essential. In parliamentary proceedings you always get less than you aim for; even in a revolutionary uprising there are counter-revolutionary forces pushing back against you.
You can't just say "relax, man, the contradictions will resolve themselves". You actually have to go out and agitate for them! It is not utopian to say that on the line from (x1, y1) to (x2, y2), there is going to be at least one point where the slope is (y2-y1 / x2-x1). What is utopian is thinking that we can engage with the world within the "acceptable" window (range of slope) of what currently exists, and expect to get somewhere new with it. The human brain has limitations to what it can imagine, that are tied to what the individual's full range of experience is! The wider and more groundbreaking the range of experience, the more we'll be able to imagine.
Actually run lots of different tests to see how things work. *Expand your empirical basis as well as your theoretical basis. There you go, some real "scientific socialism".
Calling oneself "person's name"ist is offputting to me regardless of tendency.
why are you insulting anarchism in the anarchy forum?
Raddle wrecker started the thread, youre continuing it, as am i. Why are you on Hexbear if its filled with "tankieeeeez". you came in with an agenda. you keep saying "tankies" so much its meaningless. im supposed to debate an asshole on the internet in good faith? how about fuck off?
I keep accounts on a lot of other right wing extremist websites too. It lets me keep track of dangerous groups.
For instance, I was active on kiwifarms for years. That obviously doesn’t mean I support them.
oh youre so vigilant, the world thanks you for your brave service of being on the internet. o7
I’ve helped take a lot of authoritarians off of the internet and I will keep doing that. You all eventually self-doxx.
wow youre anarchist Chris Hansen! should i take a seat?
So I interpret this as a threat to dox hexbear users?
In the spectrum of political action you could take outside of organizations (which I would suggest, go into some collectives) you decide to dox people creating and participating safe spaces for trans people online (since you label their brand of political action as authoritarian or as tolerant of authoritarianism you see in pretty much any ML form).
This means you are purging leftist elements instead of trying to broaden or create bases of power or free spaces for anti hierarchical ideologies. Sounds pretty authoritarian to me.
It's also pretty laughable that id ever be fired from my job for being a socialist tbh. It only works against fascists because they are so reprehensible and incapable of working on a team
It is good that you got a good job, but I know plenty of places were people would be fired from for participating or even visiting hexbear regularly.
i mean yeah, if you have a conservative nutjob as your boss even just being a hillary supporter will get you fired. most big corporations though, they dont care as long as they make money. in fact most people know that im a socialist at work already :shrug-outta-hecks:
Don't reveal this information if you don't want to, but what job do you do that your employer wouldn't care you're socialist.
sorry not a good idea, just to avoid someone sending a bomb to my house or some shit lol :shrug-outta-hecks:
will say that its a large group and i make them so much money that itd be stupid for them to fire me even if i murdered someone in broad daylight
If you’re not doing anything wrong, then you don’t have anything to worry about.
It’s very telling how much this site loves talking about “purges”. Authoritarians aren’t leftist. Removing them from the internet is a type of antifascist action and I will never apologize for being antifascist.
:the-pigs:
I have literally no idea what this is supposed to mean.
https://www.azquotes.com/quote/705002 Love to have the same rhetorical argument as based antifacist Joseph Goebbels :LIB::unity::frothingfash:
Here's an easy one: closeted or passing people being outed and thereby being exposed to violence and harassment. Any communist in South Korea or other countries where it is illegal. Anyone even substantially adjacent to protest actions where a "frisky" PD has jurisdiction.
You are the absolute epitome of useful idiocy if you aren't just a fed -- which I don't say often but am forced to consider here with an anarchist who says US lawbreakers have a police raid coming.
hahahah omfg, from the king of anti-authoritarians. youre a fucking liar and hypocrite who needs to brush up on some basic word definitions.
you admit to your own "purges" and claim to not be authoritarian. stop being an edgy teen.
So we all agree purging fascists is good. We just understand who fascists are and accept the idea that using force against them (i.e., purges) is good, while you don't have a fucking clue who fascists are and use some bullshit reasoning to say that your purges aren't really purges.
Lmao you're telling me you're an "anarchist" who volunteers as an internet cop?
Go outside. Find a hobby. Meet people in real life
I attend plenty of meetings offline. No-one who has ever done anything in real life would call me a cop.
Do they know about you doxing MLs and even anarchists over sectarian disagreement?
You're a cop.
If you're not a cop, you're doing a cop's job
Could you explain what you mean by authoritarian?
Look up what the three arrows represent. Legitimate antifascism is fighting against all of the arrows.
I'm asking what you, specifically, mean by "authoritarian"
You’re always telling people to read theory, so go read some of my work:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ziq-eradicate-left-unity
Jesus Christ that is a wall of unhinged screeds against muh red fash tankies with absolutely no analysis, just "here's something the makes me mad, watch me react to it with terminally online vocabulary". Theory implies I'll learn something from critical analysis, not a glimpse into the mind of a madman. What you linked is some weird manifesto about how you'd rather die under the boot of capitalism than ever work with others who have similar ideas of what is important but different ideas on how to reach them. Shows how serious you are about accomplishing those goals as some comfortable global north netizen posting their way to freedom apparently.
No wonder you can't define what you mean by authoritarian, I don't think you know.
What part of this do you not understand?
It's honestly embarrassing that people like you are running around acting like you are any kind of authority on anarchism.
Most of it to be quite honest. Is it that we're just all hopelessly caught in an echo chamber unlike your enlightened self who is active on far right and far left forums to synthesize a truly correct take? Because if that's the case, I think you need to work on your presentation and sourcing, reading your writing is a slog ignoring the actual substance
p.s. still waiting to see what authoritarian means to you, was a simple question you have continued to avoid
The Tibetan theocratic aristocracy of old does not represent the peasantry they enslaved. That's like saying Emancipation was "freeing Southerners from themselves". There were slaves, slavers, and yeomen. It freed group one from group two.
Regarding genocide: https://sci-hub.se/10.2307/3182072
There are Tibetans and Muslims in Xinjiang that didn't want to be ruled by the Chinese. For Tibet, those monarchists (because that is what they were and still are) took their shot at counter-revolution and failed, and when they failed they ran away to complain in luxury in the West like every comprador class before them. They sought to use their own authority to retain power and failed because, honestly, the peasantry was pretty sick of their shit.
Within Xinjiang, the popular sentiment was with joining with China, because the alternative was becoming a completely land-locked country at the mercy of it's neighbors, far better to ally with the regional power. In the light of multiple devastating terrorist attacks that primarily killed Xinjiang Muslims, mandatory education for adults was installed, and the facilities to bring about that policy was made, alongside checkpoint systems across the region (a system that would be re-used in order to combat COVID a decade later). There were no genocides in Xinjiang, no U.S. style door-to-door raids and mass arbitrary imprisonment of military age males. You either showed up to school or you were sent to jail, so most showed up. And it's been effective because there have been no terrorist attacks since these policies were implemented, even as they have been wound down by the state.
If Hong Kong gets self-determination, it might surprise you to learn that the majority would probably vote to join China. We can guess that because the majority faction within the Hong-Kong government is the pro-CPC faction, unless you are meaning to imply that Hong-Kong might not be a bastion of freedom and democracy (which is where my money is honestly).
I think polling shows that most people in HK support the mainland anyway, though of course this is due to support from the poorer population and not the mostly wealthy ones who made up the HK rioters.
Truly, one the great theorists of our age :very-smart:
nerd :farquaad-point:
hahahahahahahahahaahah oh fuck, you think youre breaking the mold. anarchy can't progress with shit contributions like that. what a long and thought out rant you have against anti capitalists, :LIB:
I'mma let you know this. Your writing is shit. Get someone else to edit this and use normal people words. If you're trying to make theoretical contributions don't write like a redditor
"Read theory, and by theory I mean my shitty blog post".
Ron DeSantis and Jeff Bezos thank you for your vigilance. Cops and landlords too.
I'd love to hear who or what group you imagine we're a danger to that you consider in need of your protection.
they seem to genuinely think that everyone on this site wants to genocide trans people even though over half the admin and mod team are trans and so is much of the userbase 🙄
those evil fascist trans people, so scary! indistinguishable from a random chud in a swamp
They're not doing a very good job of "keeping track of us" then lmao
They really gotta step up their game. Gotta hustlegrind for some real actionable threats of violence to report to the FBI if they wanna get that sweet sweet wooden medal.
least reactionary "anarchist" wrecker
hero of socialist labor :hero-of-socialist-labor:
Ah, active, not lurking. Doesn't surprise me that an anticommunist also shares other fascist views.
:pigpoop:
Your anarchism is just :us-foreign-policy: with radical aesthetic.
Your presence in the anarchy forum insults anarchy