Libs thinking we’re on their side, until the point we reject electoralism and US imperialist propaganda. Then label as as “tankies”.
Campists thinking we’re on their side until the point we reject “AES” and “left unity”. Then label as a “liberals”.
Anarchists are clearly the rare species of “liberal tankie” 😆
Filtering Pugjesus’ posts was the greatest boost to my lemmy experience.
And any complaining about evil ml
Lol filtering ml was the biggest boost for me
Oh you already had .world blocked?
I took college courses on comparative politics. It wasn’t until I read The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin that I really understood what anarchy and communism are. I really love that book. It does a great job of portraying that world from both a biased, personal lens and then again from outsiders perspectives.
That being said - until we have a planet dedicated to it, I believe any attempt at anarchy will just get overrun by coordinated assholes with guns (read: states).
You act like coercion is inherently a better mechanism of coordination. As if suffering is strength. This is my least favorite fallacy.
Finding a way to defend yourself without reinventing the machinery of the state is certainly one of the larger practical problems facing anarchism.
Anarchists can defend themselves just fine. We just need to learn not to trust MLs and libs to do it with as they’ll backstab anarchists at the first opportunity they have to grab power. This sort of rhetoric is like claiming that democracy is a failed concept in the middle ages, because democracies “can’t defend themselves from monarchies” or some shit.
What are you talking about? The only currently extant anarchish communities are in places where states are weak. Anarchists in places with highly centralised states tend to get attacked by everyone, and that’s a serious problem you can’t just vibes away.
Wars, even ones you win, are a tremendous drain. States tend to suck at fighting non states, but that doesn’t mean it’s conducive to human flourishing for the non state people. States are also moronically optimistic about their ability to “productively” war.
This isn’t some fringe concern. There’s any number of proposals you can read on anarchists library about how to deal with this.
It has nothing to do with being failed. If you wanted to start a democratic collective in manorialist times then yes, figuring out how not to get invaded was very important.
You’re not saying anything new, anarchism can’t happen in times where the system is strong. It can happen when the system is in crisis if we set the relevant groundwork. And when it does, we can defend ourselves from the likewise weakened states.
I didn’t think I was saying anything new, just that it’s a practical problem that needs solving.
States tend to suck at fighting non states
What do you mean? Long drawn out Guerilla wars?
In part. States have a lot of trouble understanding anything that isn’t as centralised as a state. Consequently state militaries and intelligence agencies are highly specialised towards attacking these targets and going after the infrastructure they depend on.
When confronted by more horizontally organised structures they tend to get drawn into situations that become long drawn out guerrilla wars. Or playing whackamole with insurgency cells.
Afghanistan, and after we destabilized it, Iraq are good examples.
I wonder if that’s part of why the Taliban reportedly hate having to actually run Afghanistan?
It’s still a bunch of assholes with guns though, which sucks.
Its 5 pm i just woke up and im too tired to argue this shit again. You’re wrong. There are books about why you’re wrong and you’re wrong in most ways from the atomic level up to planetary scale shit. Every part of these ideas is wrong in a frustrating stubborn common way.
Honestly it makes me understand why tankies exist. I don’t agree with them, but I get it. Just like I get capitalism. They both suck but they’re both right for different reasons.
Lemmy has just ruined the word tankie but if you are referring to the more militant/dogmatic MLs then I would agree that I think a search for “realistic” solutions drives some of the more concerning/ardent believers.
hence why we need socialism first.
(please don’t kill me)
Most anarchists agree that there is need for some kind of transitional society. Just not what tankies call “socialism”.
how is your conception of socialism different from “tankies”? i’ll have to assume you mean “marxist-leninist” and is not a lib?
What do you mean exactly? Socialism or the transitional society?
For MLs, socialism is when the dictatorship of the proletariat is established and the state is run by “the proletariat” in order to lead to communism. Anarchists (ever since Bakunin) would point out that this would make them stop being the proletariat, but rather a class of bureaucrats. Also, means ends unity would dictate that this will not lead to a stateless society.
For me, “socialism” means worker control of the means of production.
The anarchist transitionary period is way harder to describe, since
- There are too many anarchist flavors for a consistent “prediction” or what have you
- The anarchist approach is generally less theleological. Therefore, they “predict” less and think that the people in the transitional period need to find out the rules of said society when they get the most feedback for it, i.e. when it’s happening.
- I haven’t put too much thought into how this would go about, to be honest.
However, the most important part is IMHO that the revolutionary cells working for communism are structured with horizontal hierarchies.
It really should be addressed: why are states assumed to be better at violence? The trend in doctrine over the past century, and among elite pro murderers, has always been to devolve authority, put decision making closer to the decision, create more autonomy. This is anarchism’s entire shit, i think similarly ewuipped, similarly trained forces, a state has the disadvantage.
And indeed when you see liberatory forces going up against oppressors, usually fascists (or something like them; daesh comes to mind) they tend to function better than a traditional assessmejt might assume. Not always enough for the odds they face, but beyter than you’d expect.
What theyve got is already being established, and being able to reach deep into our lives to fuck us from thr start. Its all the labor and loot they’ve stolen and hoarded, which would at least equalize over time. It sounds like the problem in conflict here is just the usual problems of revolution-any revolution, with any politics.
And literally every ideology has won at least one of those.
It boils down to cooperation vs coordination.
A cooperative force has fewer week points. A single point of failure would be unlikely to cause the rest of the cooperatives to quit. Contrast that to a coordinated war machine where a coup d’etat could quite literally cause them to lay down arms.
Cooperatives by their nature are volunteers whereas state solders are frequently conscripted or coerced in other ways.
A state has hierarchical structures which allows a few leaders near the top to organize a large portion of the state’s workforce and economy into a war machine. We have seen examples of that many times through history. Have we seen a counter example of an anarchist cooperative building a war machine to protect itself? Bonus: Has that ever happened without then turning into a state because of the systems it built took on a life of their own birthing regime soaked in the blood of its own? I digress.
conscripted or otherwise coerced
In a defensive war the attacker does that.
war machine
Kind of. Ukraine. They didnt lose because red vs black, they kind of lost because look-at-a-fucking-map, and did win against the white army. Remember what happened when republican armies (even napolean’s republican-built one) started going up against monarchist armies?
I feel like people just give authoritarianism a ton of points that… I dont get where they’re getting them?
allows a few leaders near the top to organize
How near the top? Lets say youre fighting america right now, lets say you’re in that position, trying to use that power. The nature of your power dwtermines so much of whqt you can and cannot do. In fact they’re trying to do exactly what youve said and have been failing for months. You could give whatever orders you like, of course, but what actually gets done and what damages your authority or gets you fired in the attempt is a serious stumbling block-a king does not have freedom, only power, and that binds him.
Like, you’re believing all the hype here.
The main advantage they have is that there’s lots of people who buy their shit and lots of shit they’ve stolen. It’s that they’re established. Break that and i genuinely dont think they have much on more liberated forms of society. I think the rest is various degrees of bullshit.
The dispossessed had the same affect on me as well, though i only recently read it, about a year ago.
Even with our own planet, I fear someone would chuck an asteroid our way, à la “it’s free real estate!” once the dust settles…
never heard of that book, I’ll add it to my reading list;
++ recommend. Dont expect that there isnt criticism of the anarchist state
anarchist state? how can a state be anarchist?
Read the book…
I will.
I mean its pugjesus man, no one that dedicated to criticizing leftists isn’t a cryptofash
He punches left, then wonders why leftists don’t like him.
Impossible, his other favorite things are the Roman Empire (specifically not the Republic) and the universe of 40k!
As we all know, normal liberals like Rome and Warhammer, and not fascists on Twitter.
Tbf there’s plenty of lefties that love both Roman history and 40k.
They just don’t also spend the rest of their time attacking left.
Also they tend to include the republic at-least-equally.
Fair, it’s just very odd that he hates socialists more than fascists, and posts about Rome and space Rome.
Oh so you can’t hate socialists more than fascists and still be a good person? What about winston churchill and ronald reagan, huh?
Yeah but sometimes they… Okay it’s still punching left but at totally imaginary people so its different i think.
Buddy it’s lemmy, there are no conservatives here. Punching left when the only place to punch is left hardy makes someone a “crypto-fascist” lmao
Yeah but its like
nearly all they doa core part of their identity. It’s not that they punch left its how often they do it, how they do it, and the rhetoric they have shown themselves to be comfortable with.The whole Nazis Lives Matter thread a while back with the Nuremberg Trial critics I figured would’ve been enough for people.
I didn’t even now that existed but it sounds awful
The what now?
Threads back during the German elections.
One spillover into this community:
https://lemmy.world/post/25608764
A number of users there have since changed accounts and/or instances, in some cases multiple times.
Point being: all the dedicated tankie bashing is put into stark context when the opportunity to bash Nazis is met with a kind of resistance they’d permaban a tankie over.
Holy shit do I hate German liberals. Tell me none of your family had to die because the oppressor rapist, pillagers, murderers and genociders dressed in uniform thought of them as dirt to be “cleansed” for their own “Lebensraum”; tell me without telling me.
Half of Eastern Europe wasn’t wiped out, 6 million Jews were not gassed and 27 million Soviet citizens (only 9 million of which were from the Red Army) didn’t die, just so you can whine about how your great grandparents “didn’t have a choice” and how fascists deserve(d) “human rights”; no, the only good fascist is a dead one.
Fascist deserve only one right: the choice between the mineshaft and the bullet.
And what infuriates me most: There are few things the liberals will defend as ferociously as the political/“human” rights of the fascists. I’m not even gonna start about how liberals and thus capitalism are the reason fascism gets to exist in the first place…
A good video of Parenti on this topic (timestamped, but you are welcome to watch the whole 4 minutes, very good video)
I’m gonna leave you with two quotes by Brecht:
Those who are against Fascism without being against capitalism, who lament over the barbarism that comes out of barbarism, are like people who wish to eat their veal without slaughtering the calf.
Hatred of oppression still distorts the features, Anger at injustice still makes voices raised and ugly. Oh we, who wished to lay for the foundations for peace and friendliness, Could never be friendly ourselves.
Nothing makes me despise someone’s piss poor views on ethics more than trying to defend the humanity of someone who chooses to betray humanity.
Yes, they’re still humans, but people deserve to get what they choose, too. What does someone deserve when they choose to betray humanity?
shocking that turbolib pugjesus would be totally ignorant of what anarchism is.
Old mate puggy is like the embodiment of the ?mark fischer? quote “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism”.
Then again, apparently I’m a tankie and racist who’s going to move to the usa to inform on people with the wrong paperwork according to one user here.
Omg can you inform on me when you get here?
My favorite definition comes from an anarchist woodworker.
Yes. Anarchist woodworker.
You can buy the book or download the PDF for free:
Anarchist’s Tool Chest:
https://lostartpress.com/products/the-anarchists-tool-chest
"For me, it’s quickest to explain what anarchy isn’t. It’s not about violence, the overthrow of governments, the dismantling of corporations or even the smoking of a mild hallucinogen made from boiling banana peels (actually, I tried this. I don’t recommend it or the searing headache it brings). Instead, anarchism is the realization that all large institutions – governments, corporations, churches – have divided up the tasks we do in our jobs to the point where these institutions do wasteful, dehumanizing and stupid things.
Eunice Minette Schuster states in the book “Native American Anarchism” that American aesthetic anarchy is “the isolation of the individual – his right to his own tools, his mind, his body, and to the products of his labor.”
It’s a desire to work for yourself and to run in social and economic circles made up of other individual artisans."
2 other books in the series, same deal, PDFs are free.
Anarchist’s Workbench:
https://lostartpress.com/products/the-anarchists-workbench
Anarchist’s Design Book:
https://lostartpress.com/products/the-anarchists-design-book
Also worth reading:
Ingenious Mechanicks:
Eunice Minette Schuster states in the book “Native American Anarchism” that American aesthetic anarchy is “the isolation of the individual – his right to his own tools, his mind, his body, and to the products of his labor.”
It’s a desire to work for yourself and to run in social and economic circles made up of other individual artisans."
And when EVERYONE’s petty bourgeoisie, no one will be.
Thank you for this post. This is gold praxis.
this whole thing has been salami tactics, but applied to instances.
like they just make up shit, but as long as it’s about ‘tankies’ it just goes around getting repeated unverified. they then expand the definition of ‘tankie’ as they see fit.
So what you’re saying is, first they came for the “authoritarian” communists.
Speaking of: you seldom come across the original version these days. “Communist” is almost always replaced with “socialist,” because fuck tankies.
Wasn’t this under the post about someone denying Uyghur genocide?
“Denying” is a strong hyperbole to “overblowning.” Pugjesus is literally tankiejacketing instance administrators in an attempt to coagulate enforcement with his fash dynamics.
Instead of collaborating means of liberation, he’s not ending American DeathCamps in his own yard. Something about an a log stuck on your eye and all that.
@rockerface@lemmy.cafe downvote me all you like. Pugjesus is comfortable sending Palestine genocide protestors to deathcamps, and he’s doing shit about it.
Talk about denying Gaza genocide. Fucking ameko.
What are you on about? I have not downvoted your comment. You’re not making the best defense of your point by making stuff up.
deleted by creator
Good job taking a screenshot of my downvote from another comment
We all make mistakes sometimes. Apologies.
Understandable, apology accepted
The current Palestine Genocide, Pugjesus praxis, or the downvoter 🧵?
The downvoter part, specifically
Then I apologize if it wasn’t you. I just have little patience for Americans sitting all day on a screen while their neighbors get abducted for simply saying “Maybe we should end genocide.”
This was posted in MeanwhileOnGrad. There’s a level of dedicated anti-socialism there that’s a bit beyond using even the most pejorative use of ‘lib’.
/c/MeanwhileOnFash™
thanks I’m stealing this for !libjerk@anarchist.nexus for a bit
🔥
we reject “AES” and “left unity”
Real Spanish Republican Hours. Who is ready for the next Franco Dictatorship?
anarchists being called tankies made me shit my pants laughing
i mean tankies are just a slur they made up for leftists at this point
It really fucks up my mind trying to say who’s the worst anarchist between the ones defending america’s propaganda and the ones defending china’s genocide. And it’s not like they’re really that much disagreeing, it’s just relatively minor differences in their analysis, they all could probably agree that China is genociding Uyghurs and that Western right wings are amplifying it.
Clueless right wingers.
Dude is a joker at best. Not worth taking seriously.
But what libs don’t realize is that they’re just western tankies. Same ideology, different empires.
It’s the other way around. Tankjesus has to be taken seriously as a fascist saboteur, instead of a jokester.
Let me know first hand when he liberated 🇺🇲. He seems to be enjoying deathcamps too much.
Solidarity.
