▲ 856 ▼ surely (lemmy.blahaj.zone) submitted 1 year ago by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 173 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children) Can you point to any example of this happening in any major anarchist society? The fact there are none is proof that's exactly what happens. Yeah but why? Not because of any of the arguments you’re posing, but because anarchist societies have severeral disadvantages to start with, not because of anarchist philosophy, but because there’s people in power that desperately want anarchism to fail. Because if anarchism succeeded, their need for power would be in question. The bourgeois want anarchism to fail, the political elites want anarchism to fail, because if it doesn’t, they will have no reason to exist anymore, so, they will stop at nothing to destroy it. Anarchist societies are usually destroyed through militaristic means externally, not because of internal politics. Exactly. This doesn’t make your case against anarchism better, it makes it worse, if humans are given absolute power over a region, they’ll cause even more disasters than a democratic average of their wants and needs. I think there's been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case. I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize. We are a species dictated by game theory. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) The fact there are none is proof that’s exactly what happens. No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you're describing, proof the thing you're describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Exactly. That means none of the problems with anarchism are internal, which is a significant blow to the notion that we shouldn't be doing anarchism. I think there’s been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case. It doesn't, considering the only thing that stops anarchism is external forces destroying it, it's completely possible. I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize. This premise has nothing to do with anything, it doesn't matter how violent or greedy people are, anarchist philosophy has no bearing on these ideas. Anarchism is not disorganized, it's actually HIGHLY organized, because it's democratically managed. We are a species dictated by game theory. I don't see what that has to do with anything. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? anarchism is fundamentally flawed. No, the world is setup in a way that destroys peoples movements in general, this isn't a flaw with anarchist ideology, this just means it's difficult to create an anarchist society while the US is a world superpower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Dude stop wasting all this effort on a willing idiot, save the energy for something useful. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 1 year ago when you can type at 160wpm it's not much effort, and if it helps even one person (not the idiot) it'll have been worth it for me! permalink fedilink source parent [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (1 child) No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you’re describing, proof the thing you’re describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? As long as people are involved, there's the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn't as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. I do appreciate how much hope you have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 point 1 year ago* Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. By this logic, if you were a feudalist, you'd say "capitalism could never work" simply because the conditions haven't been historically right. As long as people are involved, there’s the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn’t as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. Right, so, anarchism has a reduced chance of internal strife and failure... I do appreciate how much hope you have. It has nothing to do with hope, and everything to do with reading and understanding theory and history. permalink fedilink source parent [+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) There are millions of Jimmys. Self-serving, power hungry people end up in positions of power because they are willing to do whatever it takes to get there. It's ok if you think I'm an ignorant asshole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago You'll find it difficult to convince people of your ideology if your first move is to call someone an asshole when they disagree with you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children) Can you point to any example of this happening in any major anarchist society? The fact there are none is proof that's exactly what happens. Yeah but why? Not because of any of the arguments you’re posing, but because anarchist societies have severeral disadvantages to start with, not because of anarchist philosophy, but because there’s people in power that desperately want anarchism to fail. Because if anarchism succeeded, their need for power would be in question. The bourgeois want anarchism to fail, the political elites want anarchism to fail, because if it doesn’t, they will have no reason to exist anymore, so, they will stop at nothing to destroy it. Anarchist societies are usually destroyed through militaristic means externally, not because of internal politics. Exactly. This doesn’t make your case against anarchism better, it makes it worse, if humans are given absolute power over a region, they’ll cause even more disasters than a democratic average of their wants and needs. I think there's been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case. I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize. We are a species dictated by game theory. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) The fact there are none is proof that’s exactly what happens. No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you're describing, proof the thing you're describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Exactly. That means none of the problems with anarchism are internal, which is a significant blow to the notion that we shouldn't be doing anarchism. I think there’s been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case. It doesn't, considering the only thing that stops anarchism is external forces destroying it, it's completely possible. I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize. This premise has nothing to do with anything, it doesn't matter how violent or greedy people are, anarchist philosophy has no bearing on these ideas. Anarchism is not disorganized, it's actually HIGHLY organized, because it's democratically managed. We are a species dictated by game theory. I don't see what that has to do with anything. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? anarchism is fundamentally flawed. No, the world is setup in a way that destroys peoples movements in general, this isn't a flaw with anarchist ideology, this just means it's difficult to create an anarchist society while the US is a world superpower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Dude stop wasting all this effort on a willing idiot, save the energy for something useful. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 1 year ago when you can type at 160wpm it's not much effort, and if it helps even one person (not the idiot) it'll have been worth it for me! permalink fedilink source parent [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (1 child) No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you’re describing, proof the thing you’re describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? As long as people are involved, there's the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn't as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. I do appreciate how much hope you have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 point 1 year ago* Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. By this logic, if you were a feudalist, you'd say "capitalism could never work" simply because the conditions haven't been historically right. As long as people are involved, there’s the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn’t as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. Right, so, anarchism has a reduced chance of internal strife and failure... I do appreciate how much hope you have. It has nothing to do with hope, and everything to do with reading and understanding theory and history. permalink fedilink source parent [+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) There are millions of Jimmys. Self-serving, power hungry people end up in positions of power because they are willing to do whatever it takes to get there. It's ok if you think I'm an ignorant asshole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago You'll find it difficult to convince people of your ideology if your first move is to call someone an asshole when they disagree with you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) The fact there are none is proof that’s exactly what happens. No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you're describing, proof the thing you're describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Exactly. That means none of the problems with anarchism are internal, which is a significant blow to the notion that we shouldn't be doing anarchism. I think there’s been a bit of a misunderstanding. I should clarify that I do not wish that centralized government has to be the case. It doesn't, considering the only thing that stops anarchism is external forces destroying it, it's completely possible. I wish human nature was not inherently violent and greedy. If anarchism could work, I would be happy to partake. However, I do not believe that it is possible for a sustained community to exist as an anarchy because human nature eventually pushes us to organize. This premise has nothing to do with anything, it doesn't matter how violent or greedy people are, anarchist philosophy has no bearing on these ideas. Anarchism is not disorganized, it's actually HIGHLY organized, because it's democratically managed. We are a species dictated by game theory. I don't see what that has to do with anything. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? anarchism is fundamentally flawed. No, the world is setup in a way that destroys peoples movements in general, this isn't a flaw with anarchist ideology, this just means it's difficult to create an anarchist society while the US is a world superpower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Dude stop wasting all this effort on a willing idiot, save the energy for something useful. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 1 year ago when you can type at 160wpm it's not much effort, and if it helps even one person (not the idiot) it'll have been worth it for me! permalink fedilink source parent [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (1 child) No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you’re describing, proof the thing you’re describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? As long as people are involved, there's the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn't as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. I do appreciate how much hope you have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 point 1 year ago* Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. By this logic, if you were a feudalist, you'd say "capitalism could never work" simply because the conditions haven't been historically right. As long as people are involved, there’s the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn’t as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. Right, so, anarchism has a reduced chance of internal strife and failure... I do appreciate how much hope you have. It has nothing to do with hope, and everything to do with reading and understanding theory and history. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) Dude stop wasting all this effort on a willing idiot, save the energy for something useful. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 1 year ago when you can type at 160wpm it's not much effort, and if it helps even one person (not the idiot) it'll have been worth it for me! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 1 year ago when you can type at 160wpm it's not much effort, and if it helps even one person (not the idiot) it'll have been worth it for me! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (1 child) No, that is proof SOMETHING prevents them, not at all the thing you’re describing, proof the thing you’re describing would be a primary source saying that happened. Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. So, first, you acknowledge that the only reason anarchism is destroyed is due to external forces, not internal politics, then, you say, see? As long as people are involved, there's the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn't as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. I do appreciate how much hope you have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 point 1 year ago* Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. By this logic, if you were a feudalist, you'd say "capitalism could never work" simply because the conditions haven't been historically right. As long as people are involved, there’s the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn’t as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. Right, so, anarchism has a reduced chance of internal strife and failure... I do appreciate how much hope you have. It has nothing to do with hope, and everything to do with reading and understanding theory and history. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 point 1 year ago* Thousands of years of human history is enough for me. By this logic, if you were a feudalist, you'd say "capitalism could never work" simply because the conditions haven't been historically right. As long as people are involved, there’s the possibility for something to wrong. Although, when there is no central government, there isn’t as much potential for severe internal political turmoil. The stakes are much lower because the communities would be much smaller. Right, so, anarchism has a reduced chance of internal strife and failure... I do appreciate how much hope you have. It has nothing to do with hope, and everything to do with reading and understanding theory and history. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) There are millions of Jimmys. Self-serving, power hungry people end up in positions of power because they are willing to do whatever it takes to get there. It's ok if you think I'm an ignorant asshole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago You'll find it difficult to convince people of your ideology if your first move is to call someone an asshole when they disagree with you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) There are millions of Jimmys. Self-serving, power hungry people end up in positions of power because they are willing to do whatever it takes to get there. It's ok if you think I'm an ignorant asshole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago You'll find it difficult to convince people of your ideology if your first move is to call someone an asshole when they disagree with you. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago You'll find it difficult to convince people of your ideology if your first move is to call someone an asshole when they disagree with you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago You'll find it difficult to convince people of your ideology if your first move is to call someone an asshole when they disagree with you. permalink fedilink source parent
