ziq

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Plus Obama couldn't get his person on the court when there was an opening because the repubs said no. Also plus, the dems had 50 years to add abortion to the constitution, including multiple times where they had supermajorities in both houses. They declined to because they'd rather use it as a carrot on a stick to get votes/donors. Even now they could do it by killing the fillerbuster but nope. Gotta keep that culture war going.

3

ziq wrote (edited )

Because they didn't pay for it like a good little consumer - and by bypassing the supermarket, they directly take money out of the pockets of the supermarket workers, the farm workers who grow industrial lettuce, the lab technicians who develop the patented seeds, and the factory workers who manufacture the fertilizer and pesticides to grow it. Not to mention the workers who drive the trucks that deliver the lettuce to the supermarkets and the workers who drive the unsold lettuce to the landfill and the hospital workers who treat all the pesticide-related cancer.

Do you even care about workers, lifestylist trash?

7

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by Archaplain in Anarchy is dead by ziq

Figures. Idk what it is about reddit mods and their attachment to that app.

4

ziq OP wrote

Reply to Just... what? by ziq

voting them in doesn't do anything but you need to vote because then they know you voted for them

did i successfully unwrap it?

3

ziq wrote (edited )

The reason the state loves to control women's bodies is because people with children will be far less willing to revolt because them getting arrested or killed would risk the wellbeing of their children. The more responsibilities people have, the less risks they're going to take and the more they're going to advocate for stability (prolonging the current system) vs. radical change that could put their family's safety in danger.

12

ziq wrote (edited )

Trump and Bush lost the popular vote so that's bullshit.

Democrats (who work to get repubs elected in red states) are salivating at this ruling because it lets them use it to get votes. Because people are as gullible as you. The snipers on the roof of the supreme court were put there by a democrat government. They are not on your side.

10

ziq wrote

Anarchy is when courts and politicians have no ability to rule people's bodies because no one will accept their authority. It's when no one will obey any order or produce any profit or recognize any law or leave any symbol of authority standing because the people who ruled them have exposed themselves so completely that there's no going back.

10

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Sorta, but anprim is also a critique. By 'rejecting' they really just mean they acknowledge the alienation it causes:

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-moore-a-primitivist-primer#toc5

Green nihilists and post-civs recognize it too, so the difference is really down to appearances. Postcivs try to soften their language so leftists won't react with murderous rage. But they still think civ is shit. They just say it in a more roundabout way, using vaguer terms, so leftists won't catch on as much and try to purge them

4

ziq OP wrote (edited )

That doesn't make any sense because post-civ is a form of anti-civ.

Anti-Civ is a general analytical framework that contains within it various anarchist tendencies and schools of thought unified in their critique and challenging of civilization. It's an umbrella term, covering everything from post-civ to primitivists.

Post-civ, on the contrary, is a specific tendancy within the umbrella of Anti-Civ in the same way that primitivism is. Particularly, post-civ posits the critical deconstruction of civilization in such a way that allows it to, in its deconstruction, morph into something different shaped wholly by the individual communication and individual agents in a given space. You can take specific aspects of civilization to forge something entirely new. Now, with that in mind, remember that post-civ remains an ANTI-civ school of thought, so don't conflate such ideas with "well certain aspects of civilization are positive". Incorrect, and Civ as an interconnected, mutually reinforcing network is to be rejected.

3

ziq OP wrote (edited )

I watch everything mike judge does. The new movie was great. I'm behind on tour bus but will catch up soon. He has a bunch of new cartoons coming out including more koth. B & b isn't nearly as good as koth but it's not meant to be. It's raw and chaotic. At least in its early seasons when it was hand drawn and biting commentary on the mtv generation

everything everywhere all at once

Didnt get around to watching it today cuz i got tired

How has this been?

I love it. Best Trek since DS9.

3

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by Styx in The Problem with Hierarchy by ziq

afraid of geolocation shit. apparently even media outlets can pinpoint an exact location based on a landscape

they do it all the time to determine if e.g. photos of corpses were taken in a Ukrainian village

5

ziq wrote

I like how scattershot and frantic their videos are, jumping from topic to topic like they're running out of air

anarchy hierarchy chaos no restraints anarcho-capitalism free market states social conventions deconstructing liberalism libertarianism political structures cultivating autonomy individuals autonomy autonomy best interest holistic zoomed out birdseye understanding hierarchy coercion act in your best interests individualistic not the situation the cool thing one cool thing understanding individual collective interlinked exist in a feedback loop individual community can't thrive solitude can't thrive hivemind cultivate trust safety multiple options safe good welcome choice options coercive element certain choice act coercion no consequences purpose cultivating autonomy relationships show up authentically authentically desire utopian relationships expectations responsibility obligation triggers feeling unsafe fear relate with one another safety freedom zero sum game exchange freedom security freedom valid constructed ways of relating not that much fun funner better i want that for you for me i want to talk about the things all the things document everything fascinating conversations worthwhile resources best path no hierarchy situation no end state no achieve anarchy let's drink always deconstructing practice continual movement not rigid focused outcome way of life choose things betterment things anarchy good for your health ideology philosophy anarcho-relating re-center the anarchy anarcho-relating really fucking the tits can't say the tits branch off of anarchism

someone should cut this into a music video

3

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by ShadesPath in The Problem with Hierarchy by ziq

can we stop pretending anyone can get cancelled for being associated with me

im not a deeply problematic person

i live alone in the woods with my cats, take photos of wildflowers and troll privileged settlers on the internet

im probably the least problematic person you know

i just rub leftists the wrong way because i won't conform to their (neurotypical, colonialist, racist, workerist, authoritarian) standards and constantly gnaw at everything until it breaks open

6

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by Styx in The Problem with Hierarchy by ziq

just the idea that pissy little shits obsessively hate-read everything i say is enough to complete me

4