Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

But don't they all want to destroy civilisation and technology? So the reactionary belief is still the same, regardless of minor ideological differences.

−4

CaptainACAB wrote

But don't they all want to destroy civilisation

I want to destroy all forms of dominion. Civilization necessitates dominion in order to function. So, yes. Doesn't mean I can or will; it's doing an apt job doing that on its own.

technology

No. I don't want to destroy all forms of technology, but I think that something needs to be said about how finite the resources that go into making a new Iphone every fucking year are and how the process of making all of this technology is horribly exploitative. If you think Anarcho-Communism will solve this problem of exploitation because everyone will want to share or something, you're naive.

8

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

We wouldn't need a new iphone every year under anarcho-communism because they'd be built to last and would use modular technology so we can upgrade them as we need to.

There wouldn't be exploitation to the workers making the phones because there wouldn't be bosses under anarcho-communism.

−3

CaptainACAB wrote

What interest would people in another country have in mining for materials to send to a factory elsewhere? Why would they not simply use their newfound time and freedom to develop their own societies towards self-determination? To stop growing cash crops and grow food instead?

4

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

So there would be no trade in your ideal society? That's not very realistic tbh.

People would mine for materials in order to trade them with other ancom communities to procure things they lack. If one community has milk, but not carrots, they would need to cooperate so both communities can have milk and carrots.

−1

CaptainACAB wrote (edited )

ideal society

retch.

But to answer your question; I don't have any control over what other people near me do, so what I think of trade is irrelevant; it would happen regardless of how I felt about it.

That's not very realistic tbh.

You don't honestly have much ground to stand on when it comes to what is realistic; quite a few of us used to be ancoms, too.

People would mine for materials in order to trade them with other ancom communities to procure things they lack. If one community has milk, but not carrots, they would need to cooperate so both communities can have milk and carrots.

Food is one thing. Material for technology is a whole other beast and also what brought about this conversation to begin with. Why would anyone want to do something as dangerous and laborious as mining when they can put that same energy towards procuring necessities?

6

L0rdEMPRESS_GaLaXyBrAiN wrote

We'll still have iPhones under ancom lol

2

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

What would you do to the iphone factories? Burn them down?

0

L0rdEMPRESS_GaLaXyBrAiN wrote

You wouldn't?

0

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

I'd liberate them.

0

L0rdEMPRESS_GaLaXyBrAiN wrote

Define reactionary. This will be good.

3

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

Regressive.

−1

L0rdEMPRESS_GaLaXyBrAiN wrote

So you're a reactionary too?

1

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

I'm not regressive... I want a brighter future.

−1

L0rdEMPRESS_GaLaXyBrAiN wrote

Through magical thinking and class reductionist ideas.

−1

Peter_J_Kropotkin OP wrote

Are you honestly so disillusioned that you think having hope for the future is a bad thing? Or that a bright future would require magic to enact? We don't need magic, we only need revolution.

0