wiki-user: unruffled
“In every State, the government is nothing but a permanent conspiracy on the part of the minority against the majority, which it enslaves and fleeces.”
- Mikhail Bakunin
Queer/trans gender abolitionist | anarchist | piracy enthusiast
aspe:keyoxide.org:LSZT4AL3BUPMJZGHIJAVZAJLHY
How do you see his critique? Do you think that anarchism cares less about wider social emancipation?
I don’t think it’s accurate. And yes, definitely. It seems like he is describing libertarians more than anarchists imo, as mutual aid and community building are core principles of anarchism.
I suspect for some folks Stalin is bad because […]
For most folks in the west, stalin is considered to be a brutal authoritarian dictator who made a deal with the nazis to carve up europe into spheres of influence. It should not be surprising to anyone that a lot of anarchists hold to that view, especially given stalin’s view of anarchists (see below).
We are not the kind of people who, when the word “anarchism” is mentioned, turn away contemptuously and say with a supercilious wave of the hand: “Why waste time on that, it’s not worth talking about!” We think that such cheap “criticism” is undignified and useless.
Nor are we the kind of people who console themselves with the thought that the Anarchists “have no masses behind them and, therefore, are not so dangerous.” It is not who has a larger or smaller “mass” following today, but the essence of the doctrine that matters. If the “doctrine” of the Anarchists expresses the truth, then it goes without saying that it will certainly hew a path for itself and will rally the masses around itself. If, however, it is unsound and built up on a false foundation, it will not last long and will remain suspended in mid-air. But the unsoundness of anarchism must be proved.
Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends.
This is a great mistake.
We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the “doctrine” of the Anarchists from beginning to end and weigh it up thoroughly from all aspects.
So if I may ask you a question - if marxism and anarchism are fundamentally enemies, as stalin himself argued, why would any anarchist support the modern day ML penchant for rehabilitating stalin’s reputation? It makes no sense. But sure, keep telling yourself anarchists hate stalin because of his virtues and not because of his other characteristics.
Yeah I have removed it. I just don’t understand where all the animosity is coming from in this case. It seems so misdirected. Can’t win 'em all over I guess.
Out of nowhere HE chose to respond with telling me I am “infamous” due to a meme. Learn to read, it was open hostility.
I accept you experienced it as misogyny. But it looks to me like he only replied to you because you replied to him first. It was hardly “out of nowhere”.
Last, no. It’s harassment or he wouldn’t say “infamous” about a post criticizing men and their inaction during fascist takeover (stop gaslighting).
Imo it’s your hyperbolic language that has made you rather infamous around Lemmy. Not the fact you are a woman. And I have no problem with the language you use - a bit of hyperbole often makes the point more impactful.
If he is going to treat women like shit and push the patriarchy, then it can be reflected back at him.
That’s a hypothetical. Yes, IF he did that then I’d completely agree with you. I just don’t agree with you that’s what happened.
You know immediately what wounds fascists by what they police and hate, and it’s fine to use that speech against them - so you can get them to agree that the patriarchy is bad and NO ONE should be enforcing gender roles on others. That’s the point.
The fact you are slinging words like ‘fascist’ around at _cryptagion tells me either you haven’t bothered to read his post/comment history before making the accusation. He’s one of those antifa types you libs love to hate on.
I get that this is your attempt to save face though. It doesn’t work to gaslight women who know your stupid lies and tricks. I noticed the lack of apology for the impact of what you did regardless of intent. https://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/
I do apologize for posting your comment as a tagline, and I have removed it since that’s what you asked me to do. Beyond that I don’t think there’s much to discuss.
Was never banned from here FYI.
This is the relevant link I think: https://lemmy.world/post/32343339/18042041
I totally get that Lemmy and the internet in general (and society in general) isn’t as welcoming for women as it is for men, so I can totally empathize with where you are coming from here.
You cant even acknowledge that he [Trump] may seize fascist control of Wikipedia lol. You’re weak mentally, you aren’t going to war against anything. We can all see that. The men in this country are the most shameful, disappointing, pathetic things I’ve ever witnessed.
First, if you want me to remove the site tagline with your quote, I’ll be happy to do so. Just let me know. Adding it really had nothing whatsoever to do with misogyny though - I added it because I [mostly] agree with the sentiment. I definitely enjoyed your hyperbolic turn of phrase. I also thought it would be a good fit with our other taglines. Did I also find it amusing? Yes, gotta admit, but a lot of our taglines get chosen because they are also funny in some way. In this case what was funny (to me) was the hyperbole, not the core message, and not the fact you are a woman. You can choose to believe that or not, of course, but I genuinely wasn’t coming from that place.
Having read through the original thread, I don’t think things went down quite as you have characterized it either. It looks like you accidentally replied to one of our users (@_cryptagion@anarchist.nexus) comments instead of replying to the OP. So that’s how you got into the conversation with him in the first place. Then, you got angry with him when he mentioned we had used one of your comments as a tagline, made a bunch of assumptions about the reason why, and then started misgendering him for some reason? The removed comment was “eat shit” btw.
I’m aware. But as stated:
The disengage rule only applies within our instance communities as we can’t enforce it outside. However we urge you to respect the disengage rule when you see it used outside our instance as a positive practice.
I can’t enforce it here but is there any harm in encouraging people to respect it?
Kindly respect the Disengage Rule
Honestly though taking Jimmy Kimmel off the air is probably the sole Trump action I can get on board with. 🤣
It just gives the right a much needed distraction and the illusion of having an excuse to crackdown hard on the left.
"Don’t fight back against Nazis or they’ll get angry and start a crackdown? "
What are you saying here?
Agree to disagree on that one. At least for a big proportion of folks who are snobby about having an iPhone.
I know right, how that twatwaffle ever got confirmed is beyond me.
Must’ve been a Luibee?
Like fuck they are.
As part of a plea agreement, the company has agreed to pay a maximum of $250,000 in fines to resolve a few months of pollution. It’s the first state penalty against the company despite nearly four years of violations flagged by DEQ.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, YES, YES, YESSSSS
This meme describes all lesbians I know in Atlantic Canada in a nutshell.
I appreciate the interesting read! Just been a bit hectic irl. Personally, I’m sympathetic to the fact that the West has collectively demonized the USSR with propaganda ever since 1917. Objectively, yes, the USSR achieved a lot in a very hostile environment, both military and economic, and they also did a lot of stuff I don’t agree with, but that’s not confined to the Soviets, of course.
I guess I just don’t see the point in the exercise though. You’re never gonna get much traction trying to rehabilitate Stalin, because anti-Soviet propaganda is so deeply ingrained. Like why even fight that fight? You’re gonna hit a brick wall every time, because it’s a “toxic brand” of sorts. Arguing over Stalin’s legacy feels genuinely counterproductive to me, compared to just advocating for community groups, socialism and direct action. I guess we are just coming at the same task from different angles. Thanks for sharing your perspective.