throwaway

Reply to comment by /u/ziq in Anarchy or Anarchism? by /u/ziq

2

throwaway wrote (edited )

I've always been of the impression that anarchy simply meant absence of laws and rules, without the concepts that make such a state a good thing: solidarity, mutual aid et cetera, while anarchism is the theory and action of libertarian socialism. I much prefer anarchism.

2

throwaway wrote

Conforming to society would involve cutting off all the parts of myself that I value in order to fit in and devoting what is left of my life to the collection of money I don't need for the purpose of self-soothing by purchasing products I don't want.

The first rule of fight club is: you do not talk about fight club.

1

throwaway wrote

Whatever floats your boat, just try to remember that skin color and sexuality isn't some sort of faction. All whites and all cis aren't the same, and they aren't involved in some white plot against the rest of humanity. There is no 'they' and 'us' when it comes to skin color (or at least there shouldn't be).

In a way, you're riding the same ridiculous wave as the far-rights that claim white genocide and all, with that statement.

0

throwaway wrote

Oh come on... Don't take it out of context. I said in that specific area. They are superior to you in that particular field, because they know more than you do about architecture.

It's a given that I don't believe them to be superior to your being just because they're good at architecture.

-2

throwaway wrote

The article does make a valid point when seen in the bigger picture, but it contains a lot of bullshit too. It reads like something written by an angry armchair closeted authoritarian.

I'd love it if people could stop dividing everything by the color of their comrades skin.

1

throwaway wrote (edited )

I completely agree on the point of left / right division being shit - we're all workers, and we have the same common goals - but we all have different visions of how those goals should be achieved. Libertarians aren't being dissed just because they're on the other end of the line, but because they somehow have convinced themselves that capitalism would be love and pink skies if only the state would go (it should be pretty obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by their own capitalist assets why this is a horrible idea).

That being said, I'd work alongside a libertarian to smash the state any day. Common goals are common goals, and libertarians are in no way bad people, like some of their fellows on the right are.

e: I'll add that I often do call myself a libertarian socialist, too.

e2: Your picture actually points out my argument perfectly. Libertarians are nothing but anarchists that are too invested in the capitalist system to let go of it, blinded by greed and the material values that they've worked for their whole life. They do not care that capitalism is an inherently evil, exploitative, inhumane and abusive system, because what they own is more important to them.

Libertarianism is indeed anarchism for rich people - or, egoistic and blinded rich people, at least. Both Kropotkin and Bakunin was rich, but they were strong enough to let their privilege sink into the sand in exchange for fighting for what is right.

No state, no capital. Only people.

3

throwaway wrote

When anarchism first started taking shape, in the 1800's, libertarianism was its equivalent; they were synonymous. The term has since then undergone some metamorphosis (degradation, you could say), and has become closer to being synonymous with anarcho-capitalism than anarchism and anarcho-communism.

Kropotkin often uses the word 'Libertarian' to refer to an anarchist.

2

throwaway wrote

That is true, I'm of course not denying that i am descended from Christian peoples - but there is a good argument to be made that, of the two, paganism is the one most rightfully and truthfully belonging to us, if you are of the conviction that one should follow the beliefs of their ancestors.

Reply to comment by /u/ziq in My Beliefs by /u/GeneralHelghast

4

throwaway wrote (edited )

I saw an image on here recently, it pictured Jesus speaking to the masses:

"I can't feed and help these people; that would destroy their incentive to better themselves".

That's capitalist Jesus for you.

2

throwaway wrote

Christianity- I embrace this as part of my heritage as well

Christianity is not your original heritage, it's a collection of values violently forced upon your forefathers to make them easier to control.

If you really care so much about honoring your heritage, you would be asatro or pagan.