not_Bezotcovschina

not_Bezotcovschina wrote (edited )

About your example with Dr. Jack: that's not a hierarchy.

If I have an illness, and a person with a medical diploma are telling me to do X, and a person without one are telling me to do Y, then, most likely, I will do X, because I'm relying on Dr. Jack's expertise, but doctor have zero power over me. It's not a power structure, nor it's a hierarchy.

This is an argument for punishment / punitive justice over rehabilitative justice

Consequences could be in a form of rehabilitative justice, why not?

punitive justice is also something the raddle strain of anarchism promotes

We aren't ideologically monolithic here. What you have read on wiki - is just a view of a specific person. It might or might not reflect views of other raddle users. However, I'm admiting that, personally for me, for an easy example, punching nazi in a face is more preferable then engaging in a rehabilitative justice, and I'm happily promoting this.

But why does this site get to decide what anarchism is for everyone?

Ok, fuck it, who am I to stop you? Call yourself an anarchist, but prepare to be mocked at any occasion.

EDIT:

Every time I say what anarchism is in my opinion, all the people yell at me to read raddle and learn

People are yelling at a confused person: "Read raddle!" There is something... satisfying in this.

6

not_Bezotcovschina wrote (edited )

When you are thinking about "justified hierarchies", please, think about who are justifying them. I'm pretty sure, that at some point of history, people were justifying monarchy and slavery.

If the people don't get to vote for what we want or say what we want to say, then how can this be an ideology for the common people?

Common people can say what they want and face consequences for their words without hiding behind the shield of "Free Speech". And, in the same manner, instead of voting for what they want, they can just do what they want and, again, face consequences for their actions.

Can I still be an anarchist if I support voting, democracy, freedom to speak and justified hierarchies?

No. It's not a gatekeeping or something. It's just against the whole definition of anarchy. I don't think you should worry about it too much - if it's not your cup of tea, then it would be healthy to stop clinging to it and enjoying being yourself without putting yourself into position you are uncomfortable to be in.

11

not_Bezotcovschina wrote

Reply to comment by mokes in bad!!!! by black_fox

I think, this meme is making fun of people who doubtlessly accept the manufactured maxim: "Everything that state recognize as terrorism is bad". However, at least some of acts, recognized as terrorism, are nothing except a revolutionary self-defense, the last attempt to be heard and heroic martyrdom.

6

not_Bezotcovschina wrote

Is it too late for my galaxy-brain takes?

Anyway:

It seems to me that both sides here are fighting straw-men and "projecting totalitarism", like:

I have no interest in community service since that involves working; I don't care if it's "unionized" or "collectivized". And since antiwork sentiment exists, I doubt I'm the only one.

but

Reds always think all other groups are totalitarian because you're projecting.

Like, do primitivists really think that "red" anarchists will hunt them and chain to machinery or what? Projecting much?

Meanwhile, do "red" anarchists assume that primitivists dream about torching collectivized horisontal medical equipment factories? Or, I don't know, killing anyone participating in your community garden project for doing agriculture?

The hardest thing in my life was ditching utopian thinking about fit-all solutions.

ziq once said that they have a power to persuade anyone into anything, so I don't want to publicly admit his critique of civilization and industry makes a lot sense for me just to deny them any power over myself, but, in fact, it does makes a lot sense for me. All my respect and support to those who managed to get rid of the chains of civilization and become free and wild. I wish I could.

I also don't mind workers taking means of production from their "bosses", if they think that their job is vital for community. I can see how these workers can be rewarded by community for their labor. I can see possible downfalls on this way, but don't think they are unavoidable.

I don't know a shit about you, so I'm not choosing a path for you!

P. S.: I'm afraid I use too much "I"'s in my comments.

3