Anarchy Is Gay and So Are You If You Believe In It

Law said:
Every anarchist meet-up and subreddit is an absolute sausage-fest so I can see it.
Click to expand...
Hm maybe because women intuitively know that under “anarchy” might makes right and they’re physically weaker, endure pregnancy & labor, and must cooperate with others to secure survival.

Government and police are actually cool when they keep your husband from beating you, the homeless from raping you, or the invading Non-anarchist armies from beating & raping you.

No wonder it’s a sausagefest.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Flaming Insignias and Caesare
The closest thing to 'anarchy' in the modern world was probably 90s Somalia (think Black Hawk Down), the lack of a centralized government just meant that power was devolved to the local and sub-local level. Think Somaliland or Puntland, provincial governments forced to pick up the slack of leadership with a smattering of city and towns running their own stuff. The time is really cool to read about if you ignore the gang violence and warfare, you get such gems as local businessmen/companies setting up private roads, telephone lines, and power lines in their communities, pretty decent quality ones too. Funny how the socialist notions of anarchy actually lead to the flourishing of an actual free market of goods and services in this instance.
The best and greatest said:
Oxymoronic and stupid. If you have to have a hierarchy anyway then what is the appeal of anarchism?
Click to expand...

"This time it'll be different because I'll be in charge!"
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Caesare and The Great Chandler
Stateless societies have existed and functioned well, but every one I know of was tribal (so, extended kinship groups, not nuclear families in a market society) and got yeeted when a state came along. Anarcho-capitalism is a pretty sound theoretical concept, but it doesn't matter, because it'll get ganked by the first state that comes along to conquer it.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, The Great Chandler, Grumpy Pickle Rick and 1 other person
Anarchy isn't anarchy, you are just using the anti-anrchists idea of anarchy. Anarchy is really just some hard-core communist ideology without the totalitarianism that blah blah blah it's boring and I'm not fag enough to read into anarchist theory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrpatapon
Osmosis Jones said:
Anarchy is more of an implicit imposition when centralized power fails. I cannot understand any group in history that desires anarchy other than that they want power and control for themselves, or the ability to be a degenerate and get away with it.
Click to expand...
The only group who actually desires anarchy is teenagers or perma-teens who think no government means nobody telling them what to do. They don't really process the concept beyond the fact that they want to break the law, so if there's no laws then there's nothing they can't do.

Somehow it never occurs to them that this also applies to everyone else, including rapists and murderers who are much, much bigger than they are.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Pentex, Flaming Insignias, Caesare and 2 others
Osmosis Jones said:
Anarchy is more of an implicit imposition when centralized power fails. I cannot understand any group in history that desires anarchy other than that they want power and control for themselves, or the ability to be a degenerate and get away with it.

Anarchy is a symptom of bad governance, not a system in and of itself and I think this is the distinction so-called anarchist supporters fail to make. Anarchy serves no real purpose in society other than to destabilize what is already there, and it's a stepping stone to whatever power is next.
Click to expand...
Dammit, I was about to say something similar.

The vast majority of the time, anarchists just envy those in power, nothing more nor less.

There's a really good article about how anarchist Spain fell into tyranny.


And similar things also happened in CHAZ/CHOP, what with black people being murdered, and stupid kids having no idea how to actually grow food.

I was once a lolbertarian too.
 
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Grumpy Pickle Rick and Gravityqueen4life
Depends on the 'brand' of anarchy you are into. I am into the more 'questioning authority' kind than complete destruction of government. I think we give too much power to certain people and we need to question why they get so much.

But I am also a giant gay betasoyboi cucklette so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrpatapon, Grumpy Pickle Rick and Gravityqueen4life
Anarchism which actually makes coherent sense is really the ultimate appeal to nature: that individuals are responsible for their own actions and that hierarchy flows naturally from this axiom. Cause and effect evidence this. No choice is free of consequence whether a state intervenes or not. The collective outsourcing of responsibility (the present paradigm of states) has some dire consequences. The personality which terminally eschews responsibility is the narcissistic personality, and narcissism is becoming more and more widespread. As we approach a Type I civilization, narcissism becomes ever more a hazard.

The claim which states human nature is irresponsible and thereby immutable is the kind of thing which flows from narcissism. It's pessimistic and derogatory, and it flies in the face of the ever-present reality of the immutability of change.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, mrpatapon, Sealbaby and 2 others
Michael Pemulis said:
I agree with the general conclusion but your post is autistic and silly. Anarchy isn't against all kinds of social structures (everything has some sort of structure, that wouldn't be possible even in theory), and being hierarchical doesn't contradict a lack of laws. An anarchist hierarchy could just mean that older and more experienced individuals of a group in free association are given more weight in the process of communal decision making.


This is not true at all. Don't even know how you got that idea.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that just be minarchy were the hierarchy is merely limited to a smaller set of communities?
 
The Great Chandler said:
Wouldn't thar just be minarchy were the hierarchy is merely limited to a smaller set of communities?
Click to expand...
Only if you have some ridiculously pedantic definitions of these things. A group of 5 friends where one of them is 'the cool one' constitutes a hierarchy. If that would contradict your definition of anarchism, it's really not even worth talking about as a concept.
 
If you described a primitive tribesman in the Neolithic age the sheer scale and complexity of human co-operation that goes on in the world today, he would not believe it. He would likely think that it must only be possible to get billions of people to co-operate through mass everyday use of whips, chains, starvation, and torture.

What we have today would seem to him humanly impossible because he can't understand or imagine the role of iterating technological developments: the the plow, wheel, the book, the printing press, and so forth...

That's us right now. We're still like the tribesman. There is still so much yet to discover about what humans and other intelligent lifeforms are capable of and how we can organise ourselves.

It seems especially shortsighted to make a big deal about 'human nature' when we now have technologies (CRISPR, nanotech, precisely-used drugs) that can sustantially alter or broaden the range of possible human traits and behaviours.
 
Anarchy is a temporary state of being when the normal state of human order has been disrupted for one reason or another. In that way, anarchists are sort of like the people who see muh democracy as some holy divine virtue that must be bukkaked all over the world rather than just a means to an end
 
I wish all these anarcho larpers would stop with their BS and actually just go and move to a commune.
 
I revive this thread because I give this:
tumblr_02a8bbe8cda27d976a117f2bce3ae3a3_96d805eb_1280.jpg

This post can sum up a new source of anarchists: conservatives. After all, one big par that keeps coming up with conservative thought is that government is bad: 'Governments only care about getting more power and keeping power.' 'Governments only care about getting elected and getting reelected.' 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.' 'Taxation is theft.' 'I never signed a social contrac that says that I have to pay the government at gunpoint.' 'Government-run anything always makes thing slower, costlier, less efficient, and all around pathetic.' 'Nationalising anything, even our money supply, always has the government manipulate the nationalised industry in doing what government does.' 'The government does not produce, but rather takes from those who do.' 'Government regulations are the bane of the economy.' 'Monopolies only form because they get backed by the government, who messes up wi th economy.' 'Government is a mafia who always uses force.' 'The government stifles innovation.'

Ultimately, if government is the root of all evil, and if right-wingers work in reducin governmen, then getting rid of ALL government would be the ultimate good, since the individual would have ultimate freedom.

Shut up about Haiti's poverty rate and standards of living if you're blatantly going to ignore the foreign influence and direct intervention that lead to corrupt officials being handed the keys to the castle and immediately destroying it with foreign protection.
Nothing makes me furious quicker than Americans having the audacity to look down on struggling states while happily supporting the politicians that destroy those same countries and massacre the people. Of course those states governments have a hand in what's been underdeveloped, but you're a willfull fool if you'll shame them for struggling while never actually condemning your own rulers that use these foreign states as pawns to mess with and abuse.
It's absolutely infuriating.
Click to expand...
Remember that France forced Haití nto debt. Moreover, when a Haitian president said that Frace should pay repatriations, both France and the United States taged a coup until he relented. The same can be said wi The Dominican Republic once Juan Bosch ran his reforms... or Project Condor.

Of course, the blog hates both Democrats and Republicans, calling them both bootlickers. Instead, the philosophy the blog holds is this:
The reason I am Anarchist is simple.
I've always abhorred and condemned violence. The vast majority of people are peaceful and happy living their lives not enforcing their will or opinions on others. The people are good, the state is not.
Everything the state does is not through peace or mutual agreement it is through violence or the threat of it. Regardless of what statists say the state does, you are not given a choice, you are told to simply comply and do as it demands.
"muh roads" are maintained through taxes that are stolen from hard earned paychecks the people work for. The fruits of their labor is not theirs it is the state's. But take a look outside and tell me how maintained those roads really are.
The police keep you safe by enforcing these taxes and are even paid from them. They have a direct incentive to enforce the system in place. If police truly cared about keeping you safe, they'd accept an end to qualified immunity and rid their departments of the ones abusing the system.
Elected officials are bought by corporations and lobbying firms that do not care about your interests. The people certainly vote for theirs, but who you elect are only paid to vote and pass legislation that further emboldens the cronyism we're stuck under.
Schools are funded through these taxes and they see less funding for achieving higher test scores while underperforming schools receive more which has created an incentive for schools to perform worse every year. We have thrown more money at the problem for years expecting better results yet get the exact opposite regardless of what we provide.
Once again, I loathe violence. When nothing is voluntary it is a direct violation of the people's rights. That's not a hard or irrational mindset, demanding unquestionable compliance with the violence innocent people face is not in any way rational or civil.
Click to expand...

You can tell tha the blog also has a tag dedicated to 'ACAB', showing many cases of cops being bad, which the blog claims is the default state of cops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back