Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

8

Pop wrote

full illegalism (say, bonnot gang style) is probably isolating as fuck and also a death sentence

jacking shit from work and stores and cutting legal corners is just basic stuff that makes being in this world a little less hard

4

selver wrote

I don't think there are any.

Really the only thing is who will be affected when/if you're caught. But in the case of the actual illegalist anarchist movement, many of them had few other choices, it was an issue of survival.

1

conishuser wrote

what if you use illegal actions to harm those who are also preforming illegal actions, or to harm the "little man"? This seems like a big moral problem if you are using illegalism under the guise that you are not harming anyone who is being harmed and are helping the little man from those in power.

1

ziq wrote

You talk like illegalists have no control over their actions. Why would an illegalist steal from the poor?

4

ziq wrote (edited )

This is gonna be hard because I don't value those arguments so I'll have to lie.

It creates in you a propensity to focus on your immediate material desires; gaining a shallow gratification from the products of capitalism rather than building a more sustainable praxis that bypasses the desire for 'things' so you can live independantly of the system and make your own things.

3

bloodrose wrote

I mean, this is an argument against theft of products. What about squatting? Or illegal foraging? This argument is only good for "don't steal x-boxes". And since you don't value said argument, I'm sure you don't mind me pointing out its weakness. :)

5

ziq wrote (edited )

There's really no way to make a good argument against illegalism. That was the best I could do and if someone said it to me I'd instantly poke it full of holes. Being against illegalism is like being against survival. Any argument would be coming from a place of extreme privilege. No better than people who think no platforming fascists is counterproductive and we should debate them instead.

4

rot wrote

It sounds like the argument is that illegalism isn't good praxis. It isn't a good argument because how can you tell if it's good until you see the effects? Is squatting less effective than going into the wild to live? Idk? Probably not but who knows?

4

bloodrose wrote (edited )

But you can't go into the wild without squatting now. When everything is owned, not purchasing something is illegalism all on its own. It's illegal to dumpster dive. It's illegal to sleep on the streets. So mere existence outside of the machine is illegalist.

Btw, I think we're all agreeing with each other. :)

2

PerfectSociety wrote

It creates in you a propensity to focus on your immediate material desires; gaining a shallow gratification from the products of capitalism rather than building a more sustainable praxis that bypasses the desire for 'things' so you can live independantly of the system and make your own things.

Why do you disagree with this argument?

3

ziq wrote (edited )

Because there's no reason you can't do both. Take what you need from the system while building a life apart from the system, like a commune as far from the law's reach as you can get. And then when that commune inevitably needs resources that can't be gained from nature (medicine, books, animals, farming equipment, solar panels, appliances, satellite dishes, computers), go back to the city and take them. Self-sufficiency works best when it's aided by illegalism.

I steal fruit and irrigation pipes from the rich farmers around my homestead. When I'm in town, I dumpster dive for food, furniture (outside a furniture warehouse usually - they dump cosmetically damaged furniture), appliances (an appliance store warehouse - when people buy new appliances, the store takes their old ones for recycling) and firewood (I steal palettes).

I also stole a new bathtub from a construction site and use it as a pond, as well as lumber, rebar and cabinets, and I take whatever other opportunities like that arise.

1

boomboompsh wrote

Not so much an argument against all illegalism, but shoplifting tends to hurt workers more than owners, because the owners take out the profit loss on their workers, instead of taking a pay cut themselves. Squatting 10/10 though. And if you need to lift to live, go ahead. (This argument originally comes from Shaun&Jen, who are probably not anarchists)

4

GrimWillow wrote

I find the owners take from the workers whether or not there has been a profit lost, so the correlation seems loose to me.