cyb3rd4ndy

cyb3rd4ndy wrote

Investment in public infrastructure would come from decisions made by the future users of said infrastructure. This assumes some sort of collective decision-making body with the power to plan for the distribution of resources. In a mutualist society, the decision-making body would be some sort of public bank that lends free credit to those who would propose an acceptable, or the best plan for development. Otherwise, instead of a public bank, the commons would be the source of resources available for investment. The difference between these is the use of credit.

That applies to town planning and the transportation systems that come under those plans.

At least that is what I think anarchists who talk about these questions a lot are saying.

5

cyb3rd4ndy OP wrote

ummm sorry, this isn't in English I don't think. You may be able to find a different video somewhere. I saw that Amazon has it to rent and for free if you have Prime.

2

cyb3rd4ndy wrote

I think that the guests said something like that about another city, but not Chiapas. And I wasn’t the one saying that. When I brought up Flores Magon and the Zapatistas the first time, it was to talk about their relation with historical struggles along anarchist lines in Mexico. Later the EZLN came up because I wanted to clarify that the guests were not talking about the EZLN.

1

cyb3rd4ndy OP wrote (edited )

I prefer to use the terms “subjugation” and “domination” to “hierarchy”… mostly because it’s easier to understand bottom-up organizing (councils, delegates, etc.) without giving someone the impression that anarchists are horizontal absolutists.

1

cyb3rd4ndy wrote

I forget which one it is but one of them can do pictures in the terminal, I think using Ranger (a file manager that can do image display in the terminal). Maybe that’s w3m… pretty rad. I use lynx a lot with the —dump flag when I want to scrape something. Very useful.

2