Comments

3

Tequila_Wolf wrote

I'm not sure why they left just based on a disagreement with you. Seems quite a strong response; hopefully they are OK and they come back.

I do think that anarcho-syndicalism is an actual form of anarchism, and that some socialisms are compatible with some anarchisms. I also think that you might have misunderstood each other, perhaps because of a lack of clarity around their use of 'voting' and 'power structures', for example.

7

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Well, according to Forbes humanity is going to be starved by 2050, so I feel like we don't have to worry so much...

But if things end up continuing to last and make sense in present terms, I'm hoping to be part of a community of people who I live among and who take care of each other.

4

Tequila_Wolf wrote

And I think, for starters, go learn how capitalism works, and, also, don’t think of resistance to colonial violence as necessarily being inspired by Marxism, because the Haitian Revolution happened how many years before Marx was born? People of color across the world have been resisting white supremacy, have been resisting capitalism prior to Karl Marx synthesizing history the way that he did and applied a set of theory to the particular kind of resistances that people had, or, prior to anarchism, describing social organizations in a particular way and historicizing the ways in which people were living and existing. I mean, non-white folks have been existing in kind of organized societal structures longer than nation-states have been a thing. I think people need to not buy into this white supremacist and really Eurocentric understanding of human development, of social development that does revolve around participation in nation-states.

3

Tequila_Wolf wrote

I like the case of Richard Spencer, and I think it's quite possible that if various antifa groups shut down people like Spencer and Yiannopolous with bullets rather than fists in a targeted and clear way that fashy people would be driven even further into political insignificance.

When it comes to leaders of countries and people with significant political clout within ' respectable' liberal politics, like Trump or Obama, murdering them would likely greenlight Friedman style shock capitalist crackdowns of dissent that may do more harm to preferable anarchist futures than not. (This is before we remember that replacing Trump would just mean that Pence is in charge). So I don't know what would be best there, but I suspect that the right conditions for propaganda of the deed would be rare. Which is why we don't see more of it.

1

Tequila_Wolf wrote

If anybody happens to know the differences in position between aragorn and nathan, I'd be interested. Aside from their different life choices, and in spite of the bookchinist NAASN description, I understand both of them to be 'second wave' anarchists, one being a postanarchist and the other being whatever Aragorn is ( - "Pure Black"?).

2

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Layla is interesting. I don't know if it was because she didn't have much more time. And I understand the value of undermining anthropocentrism as well as her specific idea of rewilding, which seems to me to make sense. But it weirdly still had that strong lack of a politics of the human in its own focus on decentring the human, and what seemed to me to be a weak take on humanness insofar as people have been excluded from it. Then there was a kind of weird blame game where postcolonies were somehow supposed to get it all right and go anti-civ after liberation. And I have a pretty visceral distaste for this kind of anarchist. In part because I used to be one.

2

Tequila_Wolf wrote

I ended up mostly liking it, somehow. Nathan is a bit frustrating to listen to but actually he was more interesting this time than when I've heard him speak before. It also feels like Aragorn left Nathan feeling like he wasn't doing enough and I get the sense that that feeling will haunt him, which I like.
They might do better with a written exchange though, keeping it short.

11

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

In the wholly unlikely event that capitalism is replaced in a substantial way, it'll probably a multigenerational process of destruction and unlearning - restructuring our landscapes and our minds is no small task.

I have no idea what it will look like; I think it's a pipe dream, and that even if it were coming it would take longer than the earth has as we know it, because of climate change.

I prefer to widen the gaps in the social fabric, all the while looking for and sharpening weapons to use against it. As our climate change destroys the world around us people are going to be jumping to new ideologies in their shock, and I hope to make better rather than worse ones available for them to take on. More temporary autonomous zones than less is my preference; they at least seem possible.

5

Tequila_Wolf wrote

I think it does, and so does collectivism, and that it's a false dichotomy, and that there are different ways of conceiving of subjects that include the collective that overcome these issues.