Five @ Five @beehaw.org

[Five@slrpnk.net](https://slrpnk.net/u/Five)

---

Read more

Posts

146

Comments

104

Joined

2 yr. ago

I saw him play, shook his hand. He had a natural charisma and a calm, reassuring presence. It was probably as impressive an experience as you imagine. Congrats on good taste :)

Thanks. A bit of reading, listening, and discussion with people wiser than me.

I feel like the saying "nothing to fear but fear itself" is appropriate here. In part because fascism is a mental illness triggered by an overabundance of fear, but also due to the fact that fascism if contained is self-defeating.

A fundamental feature of fascism is the continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, their enemies are simultaneously a powerful cabal that runs the world and genetically inferior untermensch. It's impossible to for the fascist to adequately assess the ability of their enemies; their propaganda demands an unreasonable uncertainty. The core of fascism is a profound lack of understanding, both of the world at large, and of accurate self-knowledge. It is not coincidence they are lead by narcissists and driven by an obsession with impossible conspiracies.

They have no solutions to the causes of the problems affecting the people, and rely on scapegoating to draw attention away from this. And as they begin to run out of scapegoats, they must create new ones from within their own body. A fascist regime can never ultimately win, it will always discover new enemies to further cannibalize itself. It is the ideology of self-destruction.

Success in fascism comes from the eager collaboration from liberals. Germany before Hitler had immense labor power and military expertise. As the war drew on, Hitler trusted his generals less and less, and took more and more control of the details of governing of the country. He made so many unforced errors that it was determined by the allies that further assassination attempts on him would be counter-productive to a swift end to the war.

Fascists can win just as much as cancer can win. If it reaches its natural conclusion, it dies with its host. We have much more experience dealing with fascism; we know how to defeat it. Tyranny doesn't succeed on the virtues of the totalitarians, but the failures of the liberals. Narcissistic leaders like Donald Trump will continue to waste their resources and undermine their movement. No matter how much they appear to succeed, they are bound to lose; but the damage they do with each success means we need to fight regardless.

No friends but the mountains -- I wish it weren't so true.

Leonard Cohen - Famous Blue Raincoat

Every accusation a confession. He wishes the United States was a third-world hellhole where he can rig the election. His efforts to politicize the justice department and stack the supreme court are means to that end.

President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho needs to fire an automatic weapon into the ceiling of congress to restore order to the chamber.

Their agenda seems to be more of a “whatever sticks” clickbait.

So the Joe Rogan agenda.

Yeah, Headbutt was the hook that got me on their line.

Fuck Rupert Murdoch

Let's be clear, Red Hat is no more. It is now a set of labels and brands on the marionette strings of IBM, the "let's sell jew-counting machines to the Nazis" people.

A good twitter thread on the subject.

Glenn Greenwald resigned as editor of the Intercept in 2020.

• Hell Socialstein, "Where the Infinite Scroll Ends"

Invidious link: The World is a Beautiful Place & I am No Longer Afraid to Die - "January 10th, 2014"

Stewart Lee's documentary King Rocker came out the same year as this collaboration. I think he was always into the British music scene, but he has made it a bigger part of his life recently.

Thanks for the transparency. You're a great admin!

Ziq seems to be primarily a prominent poster on raddle.me. I don't want to say he's not a significant anarchist thinker, but it makes me wonder if some of the posts the decade+ I've been posting about anarchism on internet forums maybe belong in the Anarchist Library also.

I'm not super familiar with his work, but he sounds like someone from the anti-civ branch of anarchism. It's very popular in this branch to represent themselves as the only true exemplars of anarchism, so a forum personality denying Chomsky his due is pretty on message. Franklin López of The Stimulator fame came up from this trend, but it also includes Deep Green Resistance and Derek Jensen; there's some troubling concordances with eco-fascism, 'bio-truth', and trans-exclusionary philosophies.

Unlike the C4SS article this looks like something worth analyzing, as they seem to have done some research. I don't have time now, but might come back to it later, especially if there's interest.

I do find the use of 'minarchist' here unusual also. Contrary to the C4SS article, minarchist is a bad thing in context. Ziq does seem to be using minarchist to mean a kind of authoritarian or capitalist, but it's strange language to use. It seems like a rhetorical trick in that calling Chomsky this very specific, underutilized word that usually means capitalist sounds less ridiculous on the face of it than saying plainly that Chomsky is an authoritarian or capitalist, actually.

Okay, in your own words, how would you summarize each of those articles? If you want to discuss them perhaps putting each in their own thread would be convenient.

Chomsky self-identifies as an 'libertarian socialist', which is widely regarded as a synonym for or category of anarchist, I don't know what authoritative source told you he's a minarchist. I've usually heard 'minarchism' used as a synonym for capitalists of the Libertarian Party persuasion. There's a lot of disagreement about where the ontological borders of anarchism are, and it sound like someone who disagrees with Chomsky is trying to metaphorically push him outside of those borders rather than engage with his ideas.