Some large percent of people only interact with politics on an aesthetic level, and anarchist aesthetics are cooler than Mao suits (fite me), so we get more of those folks.
get really mad when you point out that putting “opposing states” before “opposing imperialism” means you’re siding with the Great Satan against the global south
I think it's okay to put opposing states higher on your priority list than opposing imperialism, but supporting a more powerful state intervening against another state in the name of opposing states is a particularly confused stance. And unfortunately common.
I think it’s okay to put opposing states higher on your priority list than opposing imperialism
Out of curiosity, why? Imperialism operates at a larger and more destructive scale than individual states, and states cannot be dismantled while the machinery of imperialism exists. Imperialistic hierarchy encompasses the hierarchy of the state.
Some large percent of people only interact with politics on an aesthetic level, and anarchist aesthetics are cooler than Mao suits (fite me), so we get more of those folks.
I think it's okay to put opposing states higher on your priority list than opposing imperialism, but supporting a more powerful state intervening against another state in the name of opposing states is a particularly confused stance. And unfortunately common.
Out of curiosity, why? Imperialism operates at a larger and more destructive scale than individual states, and states cannot be dismantled while the machinery of imperialism exists. Imperialistic hierarchy encompasses the hierarchy of the state.
States are a precondition for imperialism. Dismantling imperialist states means an end to both imperialism and the state.
Why? I legitimately can't think of any reason for this.
deleted by creator
Objectively false