cacheson @ cacheson @kbin.social

Posts

15

Comments

164

Joined

2 yr. ago

Well, I’ve never heard of a well-informed anarchist either, so there you go.

They just don’t understand any of the basics of organisation.

It sounds like you haven't had much interaction with anarchists beyond maybe high-school, and haven't read anything that we've written.

Also, police organizations complain that anarchist activist groups are too hard to infiltrate because there's too much reading to do:

Infiltration is made more difficult by the communal nature of the lifestyle (under constant observation and scrutiny) and the extensive knowledge held by many anarchists, which require a considerable amount of study and time to acquire.

Literally "I can't blend in with these fucking nerds because they read too much".

They just base their whole ideology on the delusion that everybody’s just gonna play nice, nobody will want to do anything for their advantage and, cucially, that crime just doesn’t exist.

Our philosophy is centered around dealing with the organized crime of the state and the exploitation of the capitalists. If you generally can't trust people to play nice, putting a few of them in positions of power tends to make the problem worse, not better.

I wanna see how any anarchist society deals with a murder.

Which aspect of it? Basic security is pretty simple, and there's a number of ways to provision it. Forensics would be handled by contracting professional specialists. Trials would be handled by a polycentric legal system (as opposed to the monocentric one that we currently have. Punishment would generally be in the form of either restitution paid by the perpetrator to the victim (or next of kin), or exile.

But that’s already much too high for anarchists, who barely understand basic human incentives.

C'mon now, this is just confidentlyincorrect material.

Nobody wants to organize horizontally.

Yet you're posting this on a rapidly growing horizontally-organized social media system, running on top of a wildly successful, half-century old, horizontally-organized global computer network governed by "rough consensus and running code". Curious.

Obligatory "I am very smart"

It doesn't mean that people can't coordinate, just that the coordination needs to be voluntary. Think networks rather than hierarchies.

It's similar to how the fediverse is organized. Any instance can defederate from any other for any reason, but we all try to mostly stick together, because there's benefits to doing so. Those that are dissatisfied with the policies of the instance that they're on can break off and form their own (ideally we'd have account migration too, but that'll take time). No one is forced to connect, but the whole thing works regardless.

Well, it's not infinite. The individual can't be divided, by definition. But also I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that more land would be required? It doesn't mean no more high-density housing. You just shouldn't be forced into an undesirable political association with your neighbors, beyond the practical minimum coordination involved in living in the same building.

Perhaps you'd like to build an 8-bit computer?

The people who generally want to destroy a system and rebuild anew are usually clueless or have an ulterior motive.

It's worth noting that "destroy and rebuild anew" is a point of contention among anarchists. Some of us favor a revolutionary approach, but some (myself included) favor an "evolutionary" approach instead. Same end goal, just achieved through steady incremental change, rather than a big upheaval.

In practice though, success likely wouldn't fall cleanly into either category. There'd be incremental change punctuated by occasional (smaller) upheavals. But I guess all social change happens like that, really.

The difference is than in an ideal anarchist polity, the minority can secede, even down to the individual. "Majority rule" only happens to the extent that the minority doesn't find secession to be a worthwhile option. Whereas under democracy, the land and resources of the minority, and even the people themselves are considered to rightfully belong to the state. Any serious attempt at secession is met with violence.

Actually-existing "anarchistic" societies may not completely live up to this ideal, but it is what we strive for. Anarchists consider freedom of association and freedom of disassociation to be paramount.

In this thread: Programmers disassembling the joke to try and figure out why it's funny.

In case you haven't seen it yet, I've compiled a fairly sizeable list of focused instances. More would be cool, but there's a fair number to check out already.

You're perhaps not wrong about the choice of community, especially after the hexbear fiasco. OP isn't an ML though, they're an anarchist.

A big problem i see liberals having when trying to change the minds of both leftists and conservatives, is an inability to even consider any aspect of another’s perspective, and a belief in one’s own perceptions as objective reality. In doing so, they will argue against their perception of others beliefs, rather than actually discussing and finding what those beliefs are, or where those beliefs come from.

I've noticed this a lot, but mainly on the internet, especially with people that I have either a more distant social connection with or none whatsoever. It's especially visible when talking about guns, since that's a subject where the average conservative is significantly more well-informed than the average liberal (I say this as a leftist, not a conservative). The liberals that engage in these arguments seem to be fully convinced that they are in fact more informed, even though they tend to have an active aversion to guns, rather than an interest that would motivate them to learn more.

In-person results are better. There's a level of politeness that comes with interacting face to face, plus some level of mutual respect and trust that comes with social connections. I've managed to significantly shift the opinions of a number of my friends on the subject. I could be in a bit of a left libertarian-leaning bubble, though. The current cultural climate is probably also significant. The threat of an active fascist movement in the US is a pretty decent motivator. A very large portion of liberal internet commentators seem to be unmoved, though.

Yep, or at the very least it's highly attractive to bigots. Let's just not, ya know?

That one poster the other day was right: unpopularopinion is cancer and needs to be nuked.

POST BEF

Nah, that's not how it went down. Cats are such weirdos because they domesticated themselves instead of being domesticated by humans, and because they're descended from a small species of wild cat that was both a predator species and a prey species.

Dogs and other domestic animals we molded to suit our purposes, but cats just kind of... showed up. The only selection pressure on them was "tolerate humans just enough to get at the rats in the humans' granaries". If anything, they domesticated us. Their meowing behavior is an attempt to mimic the cries of human babies.

Hmm, yeah, I see what you mean. Wasn't thinking about having to convert the IDs. Plus the actual local copy of the post needs to be available, not just a connection to the remote instance.

Should be able to just compare against the list of known instances. It'll miss the ones that aren't connected yet, but that should fix itself once someone subscribes to a remote community on the missing instance.

Sympathy lost for this attention seeker.

She was an attention seeker back on reddit

So you never had any sympathy to begin with, because aTtEnShUn SeEkEr, which is the lamest cop-out ever. Just say you hate women and get it over with.

Sounds like you're just proving her point.

• Doom Roguelike if you want a roguelike with simple, action-oriented gameplay.
• Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead (lemmy instance) if you want one with complex, simulation-oriented gameplay.