Recent comments in /f/Podcasts

fool wrote

That's actually a good point about Black Panthers, while they were decentralized, they were largely Maoist, and heavily focused on dual power.

With Black Anarchists rising from Black Power movements, it makes sense that they have been taught the language of the Maoists that came before them.

5

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

I do think this is one of the better examples of less horrible but still bad dual power on second viewing I would say this could very well be entryist in some way. I.e. it's Leninist dual power that they learned from being in the Marxist black Panthers and then adapted it to anarchism but it still keeps parts where it helps Marxists and hurts anarchists with the transition crap and trying to create a state like thing.

I think this kinda dual power could easily turn Marxist if it were successful.

4

Vulgar_Soda wrote

This makes way more sense to me than quoting some dead white guy. There's a lot to like here. Mutual aid was mentioned too. So ... as I understand it, "dual power" starts by helping people out with what they need, and then using the momentum from giving aid, a formalized structure is created in opposition to the state, and then using that organization, revolutionary sentiment is fomented within The Masses™, creating true change in society.

Which is cool. I guess. I don't see the step from "aid" to consolidating "power" as necessary or even desirable. Recreating the state but "better" will just lead to more hierarchy, more of the same oppressive bullshit. Why does feeding your neighbors need to be anything more than feeding your neighbors?

Though, the more I think about what the speakers were saying, then more I'm like ... isn't this just the same grassroots organizing that every leftist and their mom has always aspired to? Why the branding of "dual power?" Some big YouTuber is behind this, right? or is it ... TikTok ... or ...

:0 !!!

Dual power is a government psyop meant to destabilize raddle's economy! Quick, everyone, to the anarcho-battleships! We must defend the ghost of Proudhon, because something something he created dual power without even knowing something something Lenin * barf *

3

Chrisorg wrote (edited )

Hey FDSisthewokest !Don't feel guilty for your sadism or BDSM fantasies. It is normal. If you are having consensual sex, THIS IS NOT VIOLENCE. Don't let your sexuality be closed inside you. Share it with the world and trust me, you will enjoy every moment. Just find the proper partners, and don't be afraid to try new things. Do not close yourself in the box because you will face many psychological problems in the future. You can try https://shagbook.com/] Dating online site for finding partners with the same fantasies. Don't let your sexuality be closed inside you. Share it with the world and trust me, you will enjoy every moment.

1

lettuceLeafer wrote (edited )

My live response to the podcast

Electoralism sucks

Hell yeah

We are a bunch of Marxists

Oh no

Capitalism is anti democracy

Based

In fairness this is a pretty approachable critique of capitalism which is helped by the group dynamic. Which I think most fuck up. So good job on that.

3

celebratedrecluse wrote

Without a state, you could still have a network of smaller democracies, workplace democracies, authoritarian assholes in 'externally constituted' communes, etc.

Shh, the anarcho-democrats do not want you to say this lol

Interesting redefinition. I actually agree, but yeah the classical anarchist and current hegemonic within anarchist position, is what i described, at least as far as I understand other people's ideas. your position is more nuanced and the definitions are more useful and efficiently generalizable to a useful praxis.

4

subrosa wrote

Not really, no. My understanding of things would go something like this:

Governmentalized societies are politically organized; the social relations and institutions they give rise to are constituted externally and 'directed' by authorized people in various hierarchical relations. The state is the largest political entity, consituted by 'the government' / state government, with a (written) constitution as the basis for legal order, and represented by a handful of individuals.

The reason I generally talk about anti-governmentalism is that anti-statism doesn't address governmental relations in smaller polities. Without a state, you could still have a network of smaller democracies, workplace democracies, authoritarian assholes in 'externally constituted' communes, etc.

4

celebratedrecluse wrote

the state is the religion of hierarchy, in the social sphere. it is the police, the military, the unelected petty officials, the media outlet, the religious organizers, the planners of industry. It remains basically unchanged in every election, and continually expands in order to survive very similarly to the market which is produced by its life activity.

governments are just the people in the official positions, who give the commands formally. they are not really in charge for the most part, and are just a superstructure built upon the state.

these are my understandings, do they align with your? because it seems common sense, on this definition, why anarchists are primarily anti-state, and only agnostic/apathetic on governments and elections etc.

5

celebratedrecluse wrote

I was just playing with the original actual quote

I think it's a weak argument for anarchy, because it's too easy to flip around and be basically as convincing. It just depends what you think is hegemonic-- whether you focus on the state's control of material resources and work, or on the non-profit and "social movement" world's frequent appeals to anarchist aesthetics and imagery and discourse. it's a funny joke to me because, hegemonic (not Raddle) anarchist logic (idealism and abstract forms > materialism) would actually lead you to conclude the second quote, not the original, because the state's control over material resources and work shouldn't matter if it's just all about cultural and social signification/forms.

3

subrosa wrote

I rarely use anti-statism because that would get me in trouble real quick; I really don't have a good grasp on what the state is. It always made more sense to talk about anti-governmentalism, which also seems to better 'translate' to an anarchist analysis of the workplace and other spheres.

I'll save this for later, thanks for sharing.

3