45
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
45 points (94.1% liked)
Anarchism
2198 readers
69 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
Other anarchist comms
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Hi, I'm the one who started the new FAQ. I started it specifically because the old FAQ repeatedly claims anarchy is dedicated to majoritarianism i.e. direct democracy, and because of how readily it smears and dismisses green anarchy, while praising non-anarchists like Murray Bookchin. You can see some examples here: https://raddle.me/wiki/A_New_Anarchist_FAQ_Instructions
Wait, are you ziq?
Watch out for Ziq, the mods of anarchist subreddit had to ban them several times for stiring up shit.
And they use sock puppets on raddle.me to mod and comment as other users.
Lol you peeps don't realize I used to be a mod in /r/anarchism for more than a decade and was in that sub since 2009. That is to say, I'm familiar with ziq ๐
Maybe don't let them spread the lie that I'm banned from r/anarchism when you know first hand it's not true? You know, uphold your own rules about jacketing?
You did that yourself didn't you? And I honestly haven't kept track of whom they banned since I've been gone.
I mean you can easily look and see for yourself:
https://old.reddit.com/user/ChanceHappening/
Raddle being prominently linked in r/anarchism's sidebar is another indication they're spreading disinfo.
OK, then easy to point that out to them like you just did. And people getting their memory wrong on the internet (your anarchist subs did get banned on reddit, which is why you started raddle) is not badjacketing.
It absolutely is jacketing to fill a post about an anarchist project with smears and lies. Fuck this, I'm done here.
Bye bye Ziq, I'm sure we'll see the sockpuppets up soon.
Had no idea about that part. But glad to know you're aware of Ziq being weird.
Don't gender me.
I was not banned from r/anarchism.
Raddle's moderator log is completely transparent, you can look at it and see I openly moderate it everyday. I have no reason to use a 'sock puppet' to mod.
If I want to comment anywhere anonymously, I'll do so. I don't need to show you my passport to post on the internet.
I have amended the pronouns to be consistently they/them. My apologies on that front.
Yeah, I made an account because someone told me your site was being used to attack me and the FAQ I started.
I'm not against postmill joining the fediverse, I'm against lemmy.
By now both piefed and mbin also exist. Anyway why not add apub support to postmill then?
it's foss, go ahead and add it. i don't have the skills to.
Why don't you ask the developer to do so?
It's not important to me. Being here has reinforced that. It's as toxic as ever. Also these reasons: https://raddle.me/f/meta/127272/on-federation
OK so you're then reversing that statement because people outside your bubble might be rude to you?
I'm not reversing that statement. I'm not against it but I'm not enthusiastic about it either and not because people "might be rude to me", but because this technology comes with an ideological component that actively curtails freedom of association, regardless of whatever ceremonial safeguards you claim are in place.
Thanks. I'll check that out. That said, I happen to be in a lot of anarchist groups and read quite a bit in between.
Afaik, the afaq rightfully claims that both direct democracy and consent are legit ways of anarchist group decisionmaking. I'd agree if you said it doesnt shed light of things like qualified majorities which are used in anarcho syndicalism quite a bit.
Am I missing something?
It says "most anarchists are in favour of direct democracy" i.e. majoritarianism. We're in favour of reaching consensus, not forcing the will of the majority on minorities. That's Bookchin who insists we all obey the will of the majority.
Well. Consensus is great but especially in a world where forcing others is commonly taught from early age, at least qualified majority isnt worth completely throwing it out. It feels very harsh to delegitimize the work instead of just criticizing.
As an anarchist, I don't think it's harsh to throw out systems of domination. It's basically my whole reason for being.
Would you agree that systems of domination are a central but not the only opponent of a worthy life?
I think of lack of education for example, taught helplessness as another.
As a practicing anarchist, I see people use domination to fill a void left by former dominating systems and others being held back by learned helplessness. This can lead to the project failing. I dont see how that makes sense. How do the existing anarchist groups you know do it? The ones i know start with consensus but are willing to change it if necessary.
A free society does not just exist from tomorrow but there is a process. This process involves people who have only ever known slavery.
I'm not the type of anarchist who believes there can ever be such a thing as a 'free society'. I see anarchy as a constant fight against domination. I'm not an anarchist because I believe anarchy will create a perfect utopia, I'm an anarchist because when I see domination and oppression, it infuriates me into action. Here's my ode to anarchy: https://raddle.me/wiki/what_anarchy_means
Consensus has to come with freedom of association. When people don't agree on a course of action, they don't need to work together on the project. They can go their separate ways and come back together later on a project where their interests and needs better align. More here: https://raddle.me/wiki/friendship
Accepting structures of domination with the reasoning that compromising our ethics is justified in the service of "a better tomorrow" is how you get the USSR. Ethical compromises don't lead to freedom, they lead to tyranny. I don't have it in me to accept forced obedience in the name of collectivity.
On the other hand, I'm all for adapting methods to fit each unique situation. But I won't personally participate in methods that force conformity.
And thats the point. Everyone can have different opinions. I'm no type of anarchist at all. I'm just myself. I do believe in a world where everyone can be free and I'm willing to put effort into it.
I also dont care in general if we get the ussr back. It was the far superior system to today imo. But of course I would much prefer if we could do it from the bottom up like the many communes that exist today and have, historically.
yikes are we not on the same page or even in the same book..
And thats the attitude that keeps us from getting anywhere.
My goals are simple. Nobody starves, nobody goes homeless. Down the line i also dont want animals to be eaten either but thats absolutely nowhere as easy to get a majority on than the other two.
I think you and i differ somewhere on the breakline between social anarchists and individualist anarchists but not sure.