Wow, this is an interesting document.

Still hoping for something that talks about how things might be without police or prisons but was happy to read that.

Leninism. I wish I knew enough about it have decent opinion about it. It seems like the backbone of Marxism in so many places. Including autonomism.

Related, for posterity

I'm saying he likely fears being treated as queer rather than or in addition to fearing seeming like a woman (and also fears seeing himself as queer etc)

I don't think this is true, since being a feminine man and being a feminine woman are different under heteropatriarchy. One is queer and one isn't. The man probably also fears being seen as queer

I think it's preferable to have conflict resolution infrastructure than not.

Insofar as its focused on policing I think of abolition as a primarily positive project of creating territories or relationships that can deal with conflict without appeal to authority. (and other things, but I will leave that out for now)

Where I am for example people experience extreme violence and there is an all-pervading culture of fear around crime. It's a cause of a lot of emigration and depending on where you are almost everyone has experienced or had a close shave with such violence. For people on the margins of the margins, there is no sense of community. Non-nationals for example are the target of xenophobic pogroms. Poor people occupying land close to opportunities may be faced with assassins sent by developers to kill their leadership and drive them off the land. Even within these groups there are problems and severe harms. Rape, lynchings.

And in this context, sometimes those people need help, and there is no community to call upon for help, there is no infrastructure to build a way to the most basic safety or to bring peace to those who have suffered terrible losses at the hands of others. In those occasions, in the face of some specific harm, even people who hate the police might call the police, because it's not always the case that the police will not be able to prevent further harm, or postpone it until you can make an escape.

So what is necessary for abolition in this context? The task for me is to render policing inoperable, and part of that is to render them obsolete in every sense. When groups have the means to resolve harms themselves, it becomes much easier to live and to thrive, and also to do the 'negative' project of abolishing the police.

I used my context for examples, but I can think of comparable circumstances even in the global north.

I'll stop here, happy to explain further.

Sure.

Are you asking why I think the police are something that needs to be abolished or why I think there should be something in their place once they are abolished?

Ah, I meant alternatives to police. Will edit.

I don't. Rapp's book ended up being too dry for me so I didn't make it to the end, but you can just read the prelude section and get a lot out of it iirc.

Thanks. Looks like I misunderstood what was going on there.

I remember liking The Peach Blossom Spring when I first read about it, in this section of John Rapp's Daoism and Anarchism.

I can't help but find it weird that this happened right after SimpleX came out, like Signal could have done it all along but they didn't until there was a risk of people moving off the platform.

Sad you deleted your post! Hope it didn't have anything to do with me. If it did, I would be curious to hear about why.

When you say 'concepts' do you mean 'contexts'?

All theory says "start where you are", but being a known and visible "other"(Read Black, Male, Introverted and Heavyset), that's a non-starter for most

what do you mean by "start where you are" - can you answer in a way that makes clear what exactly is a non-starter?

What do you mean by "fence"?

How does one organize alternative ways of "being" when all, including this poster, is an unwilling mercenary in service to that which kills me spiritually, mentally and physically?

Think about your context and the most effective way you can engage it to open up possibility for yourself. Then do that.

Thanks!

I'm told a lot of it comes from love, from having a lost love object. Some people say hatred requires there to have been love in the first place. In that sense they'll say it's a pathological maladaptation to loss.

You can read more about this in Freud's essay on Mourning and Melancholia, which is quite good imo.

One of the advantages of being anarchists is that we're not Bauerists or whatever other GreatManist we could be. Most people back then had trash beliefs and it's up to anarchists to be the most critical (with care) of other anarchists.

Since we reject arche, which includes any fundamental ground on which our ideas are based, we're in a good position to be able to leave behind that shit. That does not mean that some of the theoretical tools those people use can be repurposed for our own uses.

But of course that still has to be actively done. Plenty anarchists continue to this day to reproduce hierarchies, even in overt and widely-recognised ways. Part of doing anarchy is seeking out and unmaking those elements of ourselves.

I like the way you went about your response. I will try to come back to this later with my own!

To me solarpunk is a dystopian cruel optimism.

If you would like to know more, some useful starting points are The green economy as counterinsurgency, this stickied post in f/Tech, and a lot of other stuff but I'm not going to overload you.

You haven't said anything about how securitisation will work, but that's going to be a huge problem for this framework so far as I can tell. Happy to talk about that more also.

The alternative? Degrowth.

The personal is political, so really its just a matter of balancing yourself.

Being obsessed with anarchy isn't bad if you do it right, because again, the personal is political.

Yeah somebody needs to remove those old b-ok links. One day.