Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ziq wrote

And I'd also like to point out that you're attempting to legitimize spokescouncils as anarchist constructs by associating them with CNT-FAI, so me pointing out how absolutely shitty and authoritarian those people were is completely within the bounds of the discourse you've set. If they thought institutional slavery and rounding up and murdering unarmed women was a-ok, why should anarchists entertain their representative democracy? The point is they're not worth emulating.

2

ziq wrote

And no, slavery isn't a "justified hierarchy" because it's done in the name of democracy in the workplace. I can't believe how ridiculous red anarchists are if slavery is now considered righteous and worthy.

1

Esperaux OP wrote

When did I justify slavery as a "justified hierarchy" now you're leaping to assumptions. Let me remind you this was surrounding the organization of a community fridge. Though I'm curious in what useful capacity you plan to fight for your own freedom if those who seek to suppress your freedom are either people you will choose to just set free at your own detriment or outright execute with no respect for their autonomy to life.

1

ziq wrote

When did I justify slavery as a "justified hierarchy"

How about the end of this paragraph, for instance:

Though I'm curious in what useful capacity you plan to fight for your own freedom if those who seek to suppress your freedom are either people you will choose to just set free at your own detriment or outright execute with no respect for their autonomy to life.

Let me dedoublespeak that for you.

Killing people who try to kill you isn't respectful to their autonomy so you should enslave them instead.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

i.e. "slavery is justified, killing isn't". You've justified slavery; a hierarchy, and attacked the force of self defense; which is not a hierarchy.

2

Esperaux OP wrote

Why would your mind jump directly towards making someone your slave? You do realize it's possible to resolve a situation without 1. taking it upon yourself to just murder an individual 2. letting them loose to overall harm both your own individual autonomy and that of others 3. turning them into only a slave with no ability to actually reintegrate in a society if they so desire

0

ziq wrote

If you're going to keep moving the goalposts, then I'm done. Killing a fascist who is trying to kill you is self defense, not murder. I didn't promote slavery, you did.

1

Esperaux OP wrote (edited )

I never promoted slavery and it's hypocritical of you to claim you denounce slavery but not see the issues of putting the entire lives and autonomy of others into the hands of other individuals. At that point it's just a rule of might makes right. Arguing from the position that you are opposed to the imprisonment of POWs in the name of freedom just to then claim you support killing them anyways is completely contradictory.

0

ziq wrote (edited )

What don't you understand about my position? I don't believe in assembling an army to fight a civil war to assert an ideology on a country, so I'm incapable of taking POWs. If I'm in a position where someone is trying to kill me, I'm going to defend myself, by killing them if necessary. That doesn't contradict with my ethical stance against taking slaves. Using the force of self defense against people who are trying to kill you does not violate their freedom. Forcing them to be your slaves after the fact, does violate their freedom.

I never promoted slavery

You quite literally justified slavery by saying killing fascists who are trying to kill you is a violation of their freedom, so taking them as slaves is more (moral).

My ethics are pretty easy to understand. If someone violates my autonomy, freedom and survival, I get to fight back in any way I need to in order to preserve my life. Taking them as slaves has nothing to do with preserving my life and is thus unethical.

1

Esperaux OP wrote (edited )

Your position is nonsensical and contradictory. People don't live in bubbles. They're inherently social creatures. You as an individual inherently rely on other individuals. We are not talking about a single individual trying to kill you. We are talking about a full blown fascist army. It's not up to you as an individual to decide if there's a conflict or not. Conflicts have existed even before the state. Individuals survive and protect their autonomy best when working with other individuals.

This is practically a liberal take to focus on this issue from a purely individualist perspective with no regards for other outside systemic factors.

Also again with the slave argument. No one is defending slavery. I'm simply pointing out that in a conflict it's unreasonable to either execute all your POWs or just set them loose.

1

ziq wrote

You are not the general of a socialist military force trying to establish a new world order. I refuse to buy into your fantasy. I'm not a general in a war. I'm a nobody on an internet forum.

Justifying slavery is justifying slavery, your reasons for justifying it ("My ideology is better than my slaves' ideology") don't change the fact that you're justifying it. Someone is defending slavery: you.

0

Esperaux OP wrote (edited )

Again you're deflecting from the actual point. We are discussing history right now not hypotheticals. A war occurred where a fascist military was sweeping across the country. In response anarchist militias organized against this military. The anarchists were not perfect but that is what happened. Now how exactly does this liberal view of yourself as an isolated individual fit into this? Do you think that people shouldn't have come together to fight the fascists at all? What do you think should've happened to the POWs?

As an anarchist you of all people should be aware generals are often not the ones to actually fight and die in these wars.

Also I'm done with the slavery nonsense you keep trying to accuse me of supporting slavery because you have no actual response.

1

ziq wrote

I'd kill a nun-killing democrat just as soon as I'd kill a democrat-killing fascist if either of them violated my autonomy or tried to involve me in their war to control the factories.

The mistake you keep making is assuming I'm on the side of syndies just because they support an alternative mode of production. I support no mode of production. I'm an off-grid remote mountain recluse who has no interest in participating in society beyond what I'm forced to do to survive.

If you're not the general in your fantasy then you don't need to keep justifying taking slaves. Let the fantasy general do that so you can just blindly follow orders and sacrifice your life for the great struggle and not have to think so hard about the ethics of your actions.

0

Esperaux OP wrote

Nun killing democrat? What do American liberals have to do with nun killing?

Social anarchists don't mind people being reclusive. Funny enough I live off in the woods by a mountain too.

Also modes of production aren't something that exist just because people "support" it. Just because someone doesn't support the capitalist mode of production doesn't mean they no longer operate under it.

Also you keep using the slaves and general talking point to deflect. This was an event that happened in reality. It happened in history. A fascist army was attacking and anarchists organized and fought back in response. What do you think should've been done to the POWs in this situation? Do you think people shouldn't have organized to fight back against fascists?

2