Comments

2

happy wrote

I wish this was still a thing. Ive been battling minor depression for a while (undiagnosed cause US medical system is so great) and just recently had a bout of much more severe depression and now im in a very weird self-reflective depressed mental state. I scared to get older if for the only reason is the very possibility of my deteriorating mental health.

2

happy wrote

If I actually owned my labor and I was sharing it, but people were taking more than I felt comfortable with them taking, then I would either stop sharing as much or simply stop sharing as much with those individuals.

If I am sharing that means that I want the products of my labor to be uses by others. Say if I had a garden and had too many tomatoes so I put some out on the sidewalk with a free sign and someone came up and took all of them I wouldn't be upset because I was sharing all of those tomatoes.

3

happy wrote

I would recommend the short essay Anarchy Against Utopia https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anonymous-anarchy-against-utopia

Anarchy is not utopian and to have utopian ideals means there is an image of perfection. Perfection is a catechesis and people will have different ideas of perfection and therefore perfection doesn't exist. Governments strive for perfection in one way or the other but it never works because there is no such thing as perfection.

Anarchy is the best way for everyone to live out their own ideas of perfection.

I totally went off on a tangent. You were talking about free will and I don't see why it matters if we truly have free will or not. We still make independent choices everyday regardless of existing rules and the wiring in our brains.

2

happy wrote

Why not use something like strawpoll.com? That will get rid of the weighted and spread out order of the posts, threads won't need to get locked so veto posts can go inside the thread instead of out making the board cleaner.

3

happy wrote (edited )

My phone's browser is blocking this sight. Could someone tell me what the meme says?

Or not. I can check later on my laptop I guesss

2

happy wrote

tbh your answer was low effort and condescending

You're not wrong, but thanks for the heated vocab in your first sentence.

Anything that creates social stratification is going to to create hierarchy, inevitably. This is a very common critique on various technologies. Am I for the abolishment of all forms of technology? Definitely not. Am I being critical of the technologies that are actively being created and maintained? Yes.

Proponents of capitalism argue that it gives possibilities to people and we both know how wrong that is in creating hierarchy. We currently have the choice to eschew technology but if someone wants to have a place in society they are coerced into using those technologies. Anarcho-transhumanism won't be any different. Just because it's under the guise of choice doesn't mean its actually free.

Being critical of technology is not actively choosing to letting people live with shit lifes. Anarchism should have absolute egalitarianism as a goal and creating technology that is going to create more social stratification is not egalitarian.

3

happy wrote

I think creating a separation between augmented and regular humans is a price worth paying

This is literally creating hierarchy and I would not consider it to be anarchism at all.

we're quite good at creating challenges

Please expand on this? :)

Spend some time reading /r/ or /f/collapse. Saving the environment is not something we can just take care of now. It requires a lot of future planning.

2

happy wrote

I'm torn on Sankara. Definitely a great example of a socialized state increasing the quality of life in a very short amount of time, but also he limited speech and was anti-queer (while, not excusable I think it was too much of a global societal norm to be an active critique of what socialism would be today, I feel terrible for saying that).

Are there any accounts from people that lived in Burkino Faso during his leadership?

3

happy wrote

Regardless if the transhumanism is anarchist or not I think there will be alienation for those that abstain. Brain implants would bring about a new ableism, or ableism towards people that don't have the internet in their heads. Also, look at how people treat and call out people against vaccines. I can see the discourse being very similar.

I think a part of the human condition is a desire for knowledge and new challenges. A cyborg with a computer brain will have no mental or physical challenges. They would be able to achieve practically anything they want to do. Without challenges I think people will get very bored and depressed.

It takes more than preserving the environment to actually save it though. A utilitarian view is going to give the mindset that the world is not a living thing and things can be taken from it freely without giving anything back.

2

happy wrote

I have a hard time seeing how trans-humanism isn't going to lead a lot of wrongs. Alienation of those that choose not to put wire in their brains, increased depression due to having infinite knowledge and ability, the possible authoritarian reign that robots would have over our actions and ideas, and is going to lead to more environmental devastation from the production and maintenance of the tech.