Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Loona wrote

bell hooks use transformative love, that is finding one to love and then transform them to anarchist.

5

RatifyGuy1776 wrote (edited )

my experience with talking to other anarchists indicates that this is an incredibly cruel thing to do to somebody you love

Edit: I feel a need to elaborate.

When talking with other leftists in general and with professed anarchists in particular, I've found that suggesting any actual plan of organized action is ignored at best. Left/anarchist discourse online has basically devolved into a neo-Catholicism where your devotion to fixing climate change is measured by mortification of the wallet. Have you ever purchased anything? That's original sin and you're reactionary scum. This isn't even hypocrisy; everyone has bought something, everyone has original sin, including your accuser. Anarchists mostly hate themselves, so they can't help but hate each other.

real cool how leftists reconstructed neocon bullshit about "rugged individualism"

4

AnarcheAmor OP wrote

I think you're mistaking the what Loona is talking about with conversion. A love that transforms doesn't require a bible to read and a preacher to interpret it for you. There is no call-to-action surrounding organized movement nor criticisms surrounding your actions or lack thereof. A love that transforms simply loves you and you change because you've been loved. It's you being with someone and that person makes you feel free.

8

RatifyGuy1776 wrote (edited )

Everyone wants a relationship like that, sure. That doesn't sound much like transforming them into an anarchist, though. That's just... making them happy. If you wanted to frame it in terms of anarchy, you're letting them pretend they live in it for a little while. This is good, and making somebody feel this way is certainly an expression of love. It's really unlikely to change anyone's mind about politics or the economy. That involves more thinking than feeling.

My whole experience of being an anarchist is knowing that any feeling of comfort and stability in the current year is an illusion, and therefore being impotently angry about the massive difference between "does" and "should." Even if I didn't have problems relating to and communicating with people, (and boy howdy do I) doing more than this would probably still feel sisyphean. Any idea that isn't "everything is magically fixed, effective immediately" draws suspicion because its compromises are seen as compromising. Why wouldn't they, when that's what we've seen happen to every movement ever?

That's what I mean when I say it's a really cruel thing to inflict on somebody you love.

Being right sucks. It sucks so bad, and feels so hopeless, that I often wish I could just be oblivious again.

2

fortmis wrote

My whole experience of being an anarchist is knowing that any feeling of comfort and stability in the current year is an illusion

is that... the anarchy? or is that... something else?

8

Gardon00765 wrote

Prolly both. It would be silly to think the way the world works is now is gonna last. No arguing that

1

fortmis wrote

some of this resonates... still i find it to be a bit of a dead end argument... and too pessimistic (care to reference studies saying anarchists hate themselves? aha)

when it comes to talking about anarchy with friends / people i meet, my favourite thing to do is to talk about anarchy without ever saying the word "anarchy" .... it works incredibly well -- before people know it, they're gushing with anarchist thought and feeling -- and I truly believe that this is because everyone is an anarchist to some degree ... everyone wants to be free

5

lettuceLeafer wrote

Everyone wants to be free in theory. Most people would not want to be free unless they feel just as artificially secure as in an totalitarian state. Without that cavite most don't like it. So most people actually don't wanna be free in reality.

4

fortmis wrote

i would argue that fewer and fewer people are feeling (even artificially) secure in their various totalitarian states.

5