I always hope that talking about something good will cause people to read it but if I could make you read on thing it would be this.
"Kill Six Billion Demons" by @Orbitaldropkick
'Reach heaven trough violence'
https://t.co/GG7GAmaxoM
@vrijomslachtig There is no deep theoretical reasoning here, it's just the "common sense" idea that society requires rulers who "make hard choices with no perfect answer" and assumes that the status quo of suffering as the default that can't be overcome.
“far left” and it’s just me saying we should abolish the state and seize the means of production and organize a classless society of freely associated producers
@Gattungswesen25 Is there anything I could read that gets more into the 'freely associating' aspect of this idea? It's a phrase I've mostly heard anarchists use so not fully getting what Marx means by it.
At the première you invite some irl streamer for "exclusive publicity" and after the 7/11 CCTV section put them into a live acted scene with Johnny Truant, then possibly splice that segment into later editions of the film. Or plant a fake camripper in the audience.
making a House of Leaves movie adaptation and half way through the first act the film stops and informs audiences to walk down the street to the 7/11 in order to keep watching on the CCTV feed.
That probably doesn't mean violent dispossession of every tiny smallholder, those will probably just become irrelevant as larger parts of the economy are collectivised but it is a difference in objectives between ancoms and mutualists that can't be overcome with calls to unity.
Sorry to say this but that was a bad thing and would have led to a conflict later down the line anyway because the ban on hiring wouldn't work.
Support for commodity exchange (and the kind of private possession it relies on) isn't something we can compromise on.
—were present and were able to keep their tools, land, & livestock without joining the communes under the pretense of not hiring people as wage-labor. They had to tend it themselves. So, in practice, the mutualist principle of usufruct. During it, individualists actively joined—
None of that takes away the impressive gains that collectivisation was able to make but in the interest of future success we must recognise that:
1. Anti-fascist alliance with bourgeois forces was a disaster
2. Eliminating commodity exchange from society is imperative
Is a man not allowed to read both thinkers on political economy and conclude that exploitation of collective force is not a sufficient explanation? When you strip away the fat that is what their disagreement comes down to.
I'd tell any anarchist who's still doing the "informal group of friends" thing to get serious, but pure majority democracy isn't a perfect solution either for multiple reasons. What's most important is a formal procedure that creates a result everyone can stand behind.
This is a very true critique but I think the conclusion often reached isn't always the right one. The fact that informal groups and decision-making leads to small tyrants isn't a reason to abandon the critique of hierarchy but to properly organise horizontal alternatives.
C'est surtout beaucoup plus opaque. La hiérarchie existe tout autant, elle est juste informelle et donc plus difficile à connaitre et à controler.
Les groupes affinitaires anars/totos sont bien plus autoritaires et tyranniques que nimporte quelle orga stalinienne.
In france they get really mad when you point out that the unions and leftist parties have become the left-wing of capital, these anarchists may not have the best idea on how to move forward but this description of the situation is entirely correct.
Scènes de tension (avec échanges de coup) entre la cgt et des individus qui trouvaient que cette banderole égayait la manif. Les conditions objectives n’étaient peut être par réunies au départ mais la banderole est toujours en place... Haut les coeurs!
Genuinely why? What part of anarchist theory means you're against factories in the abstract? I don't get this idea that the process of making things is bad in and off itself.
@MLMpMCUVCG Anarcists are Anit-human and anti-civilisation
One of the most Dangerous people who write manifestos and plot how will they rape kids when there are no laws
@dwarfmarx60969 I know what all the things in this post are referring to on a basic level but the way they are put together is simply nonsense to me. (Except the last part about rights "existing" in some objective sense beyond social enforcement being wrong)
actually the ethical core of socialism is a mechanistic unfeeling universe under the relentless tyranny of dialectical materialism which will sublate all in its path until we all experience complete ego death and become pure synthesis
I love when marxist go: the concept of making decisions is bourgeois actually or start talking about doing nge irl because it reveals how fantastical some of them are.
Now is this model if freedom through analogy with commodity ownership flawed, obviously. That doesn't mean that 'who gets to make which decisions?' isn't a relevant issue and that's ultimately what property is meant to adress,