Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

I am pretty sure the proposal is not banal "anarchism" (the complete absence of top-down governance), but instead anarcho-syndicalism, which is not the same thing at all. 


I would argue however, that any system that (through design or otherwise) prevents the formation of a majority (and thus, a ruling body of some form), is inherently impotent to assure or enforce anything.  A majority demographic is still a ruling demographic, especially if you are a member of the defacto suppressed minority demographic.


RE: Biden, The executive branch, and sending JackBooted Thugs to Portland

The timeline speaks for itself.  When the protestors were in charge of that scene, and before the agent provocateurs started causing trouble, it was surreally peaceful there. We are talking "We brought snacks!" levels of peaceful.  Then, plainclothes police started causing trouble and blaming it on the protestors, instigating the fed to send jackbooted thugs, who started shooting the place up, and shooting innocent bystanders with rubber bullets, not to mention actively shooting members of the press the same way.

This has been a demonstration of every possible way to NOT handle a protest, while clutching your pearls and shouting about how lawless those people are for the violence that you are causing. (you in the context of the government)  This is some shit straight out of some Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, or Ray Bradbury novel right here. (though mostly Orwelian)

[dragdeler]

-

[SalmonGod]

There's many schools of anarchist thought.  There are some individualist styles that lean towards what sluissa imagines, but they've always seemed to me to be an extreme minority among those who call themselves anarchists.  Anarcho-syndicalism is more prominent and developed than most, but definitely not the only one that exists in defiance of what sluissa is fearmongering about.  Point is, an individualist everyone-for-themselves chaos is not what most self-described anarchists are about, and it's definitely not intellectually honest or fair to try and make that the only association made in a discussion about anarchist politics.  Especially when discussing political persecution.

[dragdeler]

-

[misko27]

I feel like it's at least appropriate that we be at HAPPENING-CON 3, since we could indeed have prevented this.

Noted, but I prefer to remain on the side of less Happening over more Happening, having been chastised by LW in the past about that. Also note I'm specifically referring to the Donald "Do we actually need an election anyway?" Trump situation, since the general reaction of "I can't believe he actually said it despite trying not-so-subtly to tell him it's a terrible idea", which I feel is a firm subset of "You didn't listen." If it proves to be more than a week's passing distraction (which it easily could be, since it gives his supporters a reason to rally against "those fucking leftists, they don't even care enough about COVID to delay the election but they shut down the economy easily? They hate Donald so much they would rather vote and DIE." as opposed to playing defense because the economy is meltdown). and he brings it up again and again and you start hearing trumpers actively explain why this is totally a thing that needs to happen (or rather do that even when they're pretending to be reasonable anyway), escalation to HAPPENING-CON 3 will be necessary.

Also note that for the general situation I'd probably agree with you. For Coronavirus specifically? I feel like we're approaching the point where the crisis is so bad as to prevent us from even meaningfully measuring how bad it is, which is honestly a decent practical definition of HAPPENING.

Edit: Unrelated, but interesting, an article on Congressional aides and other workers who keep Congress physically afloat: The congressional underclass erupts in fury after Gohmert gets Covid-19. Probably won't surprise anyone but interesting given the Gohmert situation and the everpresent risks from a geriatric political class.

[dragdeler]

-

[feelotraveller]

Hate to sound ignorant here, but can you direct me to somewhere that explains what anarchist beliefs are? The only definition I know for the word 'Anarchy' is just 'the absence of government', but that's clearly not what you're talking about.

I'd suggest the wikipedia page as a portal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy then follow the links (probably first to the wikipedia 'Anarchism' page) or seach for particular authors and/or works online - unsurprisingly there is a 'wealth' of free sources maintained by a multitude of magnanimous entities.  [No, I won't be providing a curriculum.  ]

Again repeating (more or less) stuff already posted a good starting point for a definition of anarchism is the first line from the leading description section of the above page:

"Anarchism as a political philosophy advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions."  (Of course it goes on to elaborate.)

-------------

Separately
Funny logic to the response though:
It won't ever work, so we better violently repress any sign of it's emergence.'  Yeah, right.
Something, something, first they ignore us, then they fight us, then we win.  If only.

[Dostoevsky]

Edit: Unrelated, but interesting, an article on Congressional aides and other workers who keep Congress physically afloat: The congressional underclass erupts in fury after Gohmert gets Covid-19. Probably won't surprise anyone but interesting given the Gohmert situation and the everpresent risks from a geriatric political class.

The quotes from staff in that article are downright depressing, even moreso because they aren't really surprising at this point.

Masking has become a “political minefield” that creates awkward encounters on occasion, this person recounted: “<S>ome GOP offices ask why you are wearing a mask, which puts our staff in an awkward position — do you say because of the pandemic and risk the office taking that as a political stand? Do you take it off to make them feel better?”

[dragdeler]

-

[hector13]

Donald has floated delaying the election.

[dragdeler]

-

[nenjin]

Delaying the election will most definitely get me out on the streets and protesting.

[wierd]

Donnie's just afraid he wont get to play with the "Cool dictator kids" anymore.

Pretty much everything in his world boils down to being popular. See also, his recent meltdowns about how people like faucci more than they like him.

[Doomblade187]

Delaying the election requires an act of Congress.

[wierd]

Get enough Rethuglicans to do it, and it might happen.  Very contentious, but still possible. (Considering how they totally tanked the impeachment by not listening to any evidence except what they wanted to, and made no effort whatsoever to do it right, I am not hopeful for the future.)