▲ 488 ▼ Pluralism go brrr (media.piefed.zip) submitted 2 weeks ago by Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 61 comments fedilink hide all child comments cross-posted from: https://piefed.zip/c/leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com/p/1650861/pluralism-go-brrr
[+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -12 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Then the end stage of communism, is communism. What Stalin did, is the end of communism. What followed was the decline and lack of innovation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Yes, that's why anarchism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Thats just even more fucked up libertarianism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Ah I see, you are American. Sorry for your circumstances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us. permalink fedilink source parent [–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) i think you mistake anarchism with anarcho-capitalism permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Niche ideologies are like jokes: if you have to explain it it's not funny anymore My regards to you and all of your arachnid friends permalink fedilink source parent [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago No, anarchism is a libertarian/liberal type of philosophy. Obviously not the same. permalink fedilink source parent [–] rapchee@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) no it wasn't, at least according to marx, who they claimed to follow the stage BEFORE communism was the dictatorship of the proletariat, which they decided was extended, and they were representing the will of the people so it actually never got to communism permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* But it did... and that's the joke. There is no "end stage" communism or capitalism that fits their own purity tests; they are both ideals that we haven't managed to accomplish as a society, ever. So, as far as humanity is concerned, what results in the attempt to reach that ideal is communism/capitalism as we know it (not as we imagine it will be at some point in future). permalink fedilink source parent [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) All forms of larger scale attempts at communism ends with dictatorship. There is no other practical way to enforce the "correct way" of existing within the human species. Correct according to who? Religion is pretty similar to communism in that way. There is either a God/king that expresses what you are allowed to do, or a written text that is followed at the moral guideline. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] save_the_humans@leminal.space 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Aside from the deliberate efforts by the west to destabilize any socialist or communist movements, staged coups to overthrow democratically elected leaders, and rampant pro capitalist/anti communist propaganda, a much better large scale similarity would be to the wildly successful open source movement where the product/service is free to use (moneyless), contribute to (classless), and owned in commons (by and for the proletariat). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago There is no need to smear communistic movements. They manage so well on their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://www.levandehistoria.se/english/learn-and-teach/crimes-against-humanity-under-communist-regimes-research-review I do agree that web 1.0 and the 1960-80 computer science field was a great example of classless movements. But they didn't come from communistic societies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) And the US now is the height of democracy, yes? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) No? Not even a little bit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 week ago Absolutely not and you must be thick as a castle wall to believe it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago Ohh it's big brain time! permalink fedilink source parent [–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago The end stage of capitalism is mass extinction, a multi-national famine which is estimated to claim over 4 billion humans, and the potential to take down the earths biosphere if we reach self accelerating climate change. permalink fedilink source parent [–] flandish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago sure. so why not call it what it is? permalink fedilink source parent [+] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago* You are talking about capitalism, you mean... they are talking about communism. Nice attempt to control the conversation while admonishing another for attempting to control the conversation, that's funny, you win a cookie. p.s. this is not a one-topic-only discussion, even if you want it to be. permalink fedilink source parent [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago Thanks for your incredibly valuable input of nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Yes, that's why anarchism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Thats just even more fucked up libertarianism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Ah I see, you are American. Sorry for your circumstances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us. permalink fedilink source parent [–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) i think you mistake anarchism with anarcho-capitalism permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Niche ideologies are like jokes: if you have to explain it it's not funny anymore My regards to you and all of your arachnid friends permalink fedilink source parent [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago No, anarchism is a libertarian/liberal type of philosophy. Obviously not the same. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Thats just even more fucked up libertarianism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Ah I see, you are American. Sorry for your circumstances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us. permalink fedilink source parent [–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) i think you mistake anarchism with anarcho-capitalism permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Niche ideologies are like jokes: if you have to explain it it's not funny anymore My regards to you and all of your arachnid friends permalink fedilink source parent [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago No, anarchism is a libertarian/liberal type of philosophy. Obviously not the same. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Ah I see, you are American. Sorry for your circumstances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling. Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one. Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Mhm, sure you have, bubba. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children) Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling. I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit. You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child) I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read. Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child) Then you understood nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Or we have different perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 weeks ago https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) i think you mistake anarchism with anarcho-capitalism permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Niche ideologies are like jokes: if you have to explain it it's not funny anymore My regards to you and all of your arachnid friends permalink fedilink source parent [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago No, anarchism is a libertarian/liberal type of philosophy. Obviously not the same. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago Niche ideologies are like jokes: if you have to explain it it's not funny anymore My regards to you and all of your arachnid friends permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago No, anarchism is a libertarian/liberal type of philosophy. Obviously not the same. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rapchee@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) no it wasn't, at least according to marx, who they claimed to follow the stage BEFORE communism was the dictatorship of the proletariat, which they decided was extended, and they were representing the will of the people so it actually never got to communism permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* But it did... and that's the joke. There is no "end stage" communism or capitalism that fits their own purity tests; they are both ideals that we haven't managed to accomplish as a society, ever. So, as far as humanity is concerned, what results in the attempt to reach that ideal is communism/capitalism as we know it (not as we imagine it will be at some point in future). permalink fedilink source parent [+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) All forms of larger scale attempts at communism ends with dictatorship. There is no other practical way to enforce the "correct way" of existing within the human species. Correct according to who? Religion is pretty similar to communism in that way. There is either a God/king that expresses what you are allowed to do, or a written text that is followed at the moral guideline. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] save_the_humans@leminal.space 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Aside from the deliberate efforts by the west to destabilize any socialist or communist movements, staged coups to overthrow democratically elected leaders, and rampant pro capitalist/anti communist propaganda, a much better large scale similarity would be to the wildly successful open source movement where the product/service is free to use (moneyless), contribute to (classless), and owned in commons (by and for the proletariat). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago There is no need to smear communistic movements. They manage so well on their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://www.levandehistoria.se/english/learn-and-teach/crimes-against-humanity-under-communist-regimes-research-review I do agree that web 1.0 and the 1960-80 computer science field was a great example of classless movements. But they didn't come from communistic societies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) And the US now is the height of democracy, yes? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) No? Not even a little bit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 week ago Absolutely not and you must be thick as a castle wall to believe it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* But it did... and that's the joke. There is no "end stage" communism or capitalism that fits their own purity tests; they are both ideals that we haven't managed to accomplish as a society, ever. So, as far as humanity is concerned, what results in the attempt to reach that ideal is communism/capitalism as we know it (not as we imagine it will be at some point in future). permalink fedilink source parent
[+] teslasaur@lemmy.world -9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) All forms of larger scale attempts at communism ends with dictatorship. There is no other practical way to enforce the "correct way" of existing within the human species. Correct according to who? Religion is pretty similar to communism in that way. There is either a God/king that expresses what you are allowed to do, or a written text that is followed at the moral guideline. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] save_the_humans@leminal.space 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Aside from the deliberate efforts by the west to destabilize any socialist or communist movements, staged coups to overthrow democratically elected leaders, and rampant pro capitalist/anti communist propaganda, a much better large scale similarity would be to the wildly successful open source movement where the product/service is free to use (moneyless), contribute to (classless), and owned in commons (by and for the proletariat). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago There is no need to smear communistic movements. They manage so well on their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://www.levandehistoria.se/english/learn-and-teach/crimes-against-humanity-under-communist-regimes-research-review I do agree that web 1.0 and the 1960-80 computer science field was a great example of classless movements. But they didn't come from communistic societies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) And the US now is the height of democracy, yes? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) No? Not even a little bit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 week ago Absolutely not and you must be thick as a castle wall to believe it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] save_the_humans@leminal.space 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Aside from the deliberate efforts by the west to destabilize any socialist or communist movements, staged coups to overthrow democratically elected leaders, and rampant pro capitalist/anti communist propaganda, a much better large scale similarity would be to the wildly successful open source movement where the product/service is free to use (moneyless), contribute to (classless), and owned in commons (by and for the proletariat). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago There is no need to smear communistic movements. They manage so well on their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://www.levandehistoria.se/english/learn-and-teach/crimes-against-humanity-under-communist-regimes-research-review I do agree that web 1.0 and the 1960-80 computer science field was a great example of classless movements. But they didn't come from communistic societies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago There is no need to smear communistic movements. They manage so well on their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward https://www.levandehistoria.se/english/learn-and-teach/crimes-against-humanity-under-communist-regimes-research-review I do agree that web 1.0 and the 1960-80 computer science field was a great example of classless movements. But they didn't come from communistic societies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) And the US now is the height of democracy, yes? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) No? Not even a little bit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 week ago Absolutely not and you must be thick as a castle wall to believe it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) No? Not even a little bit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 week ago Absolutely not and you must be thick as a castle wall to believe it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 week ago Absolutely not and you must be thick as a castle wall to believe it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] djsiete@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago Ohh it's big brain time! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago The end stage of capitalism is mass extinction, a multi-national famine which is estimated to claim over 4 billion humans, and the potential to take down the earths biosphere if we reach self accelerating climate change. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] flandish@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago sure. so why not call it what it is? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago* You are talking about capitalism, you mean... they are talking about communism. Nice attempt to control the conversation while admonishing another for attempting to control the conversation, that's funny, you win a cookie. p.s. this is not a one-topic-only discussion, even if you want it to be. permalink fedilink source parent [–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago Thanks for your incredibly valuable input of nothing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago* You are talking about capitalism, you mean... they are talking about communism. Nice attempt to control the conversation while admonishing another for attempting to control the conversation, that's funny, you win a cookie. p.s. this is not a one-topic-only discussion, even if you want it to be. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago Thanks for your incredibly valuable input of nothing. permalink fedilink source parent