Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments


Zzzxxxyyy wrote


ziq wrote (edited )

They didn't ask about syndicalism, they asked about anarchism. And I even linked them to a giant wiki I made with descriptions of a dozen different offshoots of anarchy, including syndicalism.

It's not my responsibility to push stale collectivist patriarchal workerist ideologies on noobs.

But you're welcome to give them your definition of 'anarchism' that is a utopia that somehow involves laws and 'humane' power hierarchies. I'd be fascinated to hear more about that.


martasultan wrote

If it depends on your anarchist, then allow /u/ziq to express their anarchism; you can answer the question separately with your own anarchism, you know.


Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Well that’s exactly what I did.

In the mean time, I resent language that suggests there’s some kind of Platonic Anarchism.

I’m fine with ziq having their own brand of anarchism, maybe it’s even mainstream on the Internet. But, from my perspective it’s exactly the anarchism that would maximize human suffering, and transparently so.

Defining anarchism so narrowly means that progressives who don’t prefer communism, and who don’t want humans suffering at the hands of whoever is strongest in the absence of any counterbalancing power, will have no ideological home.


ziq wrote (edited )

Anarchism means anarchism. Communism means communism, mutualism means mutualism, collectivism means collectivism, and syndicalism means syndicalism. No one is obliged to mention every tired economic theory that has attached itself to anarchism whenever someone asks about anarchism. Anarchism is about a lot more than economics.


Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Ok, sounds good. Enjoy your dogmatic, pedantic anarchism. You’d make a great James Bond villain. 👍🏻

At that, I’m leaving Raddle. I suspect there are about 8 users here that post/vote under multiple accounts and the conversations here are boring as fuck.


ziq wrote

dogmatic, pedantic anarchism

lol do you even own a mirror, friend?