Fair enough, I must’ve missed your niche definition of “the boot” (AKA authoritarianism).
Bizarre, but I guess if you’re doing mental gymnastics your worldview can definitely make sense to you, much like The Ice Wall is perfectly logical to Flat Earthers.
So in sum, you think that anti-capitalist authoritarianism literally is not authoritarianism. If that’s the case, we have nothing further to discuss.
it’s not mental gymnastics, all definitions of authoritarianism have ideological assumptions baked in. i am opposed to capitalism. overthrowing capitalism is going to be authoritarian from the perspective of the capitalists. i am in favor of that.
i am opposed to a dictatorship of capital, which is what both republicans and democrats are in favor of. that is liberal authoritarianism
Right, but you’re for dictatorship of another flavor, ergo you are not an anarchist.
I am opposed to unjust and imposed hierarchies as an anarchist. Capitalists want to maintain and continue those hierarchies. A revolution which overturns their domination is authoritarian towards them, but liberatory for everyone else.
All revolutions are going to be authoritarian towards someone, and you are acting as if the status quo isn’t also authoritarian. Passively voting and trying to reform a system of oppression does not have a track record of success. It does nothing to actually challenge the system of oppression either.
Also are a cop, incredible gall to call me not-an - anarchist lmao
A revolution which overturns their domination is authoritarian towards them, but liberatory for everyone else.
Yet again, you’re using a niche definition and acting as though readers should have known it.
Passively voting and trying to reform a system of oppression does not have a track record of success.
Not strictly true. You should instead say “I find the rates of peaceful reform for the better to be too slow and unlikely.”
Also are a cop, incredible gall to call me not-an - anarchist lmao
So when kids on the playground said “takes one to know one,” you understood that to be true and wise? I’m not shocked or anything, but it is kinda funny that you still think that way (but seemingly don’t apply that logic to yourself).
Yet again, you’re using a niche definition and acting as though readers should have known it.
yes, i am using a definition other than the liberal moralizing version. if you actually read and engaged with what i have said i would expect you to be able to follow that, it’s not the first time i’ve outlined that.
You should instead say “I find the rates of peaceful reform for the better to be too slow and unlikely.”
this is being pedantic. peaceful reform has a track record of being rolled back whenever capital feels threatened
So when kids on the playground said “takes one to know one,” you understood that to be true and wise?
its more that not even other anarchists are in a position to dictate to other anarchists who is and isn’t an anarchist. having someone who seems completely fine with the carceral state calling me not-an-anarchist just makes me laugh
Fair enough, I must’ve missed your niche definition of “the boot” (AKA authoritarianism).
Bizarre, but I guess if you’re doing mental gymnastics your worldview can definitely make sense to you, much like The Ice Wall is perfectly logical to Flat Earthers.
So in sum, you think that anti-capitalist authoritarianism literally is not authoritarianism. If that’s the case, we have nothing further to discuss.
it’s not mental gymnastics, all definitions of authoritarianism have ideological assumptions baked in. i am opposed to capitalism. overthrowing capitalism is going to be authoritarian from the perspective of the capitalists. i am in favor of that.
i am opposed to a dictatorship of capital, which is what both republicans and democrats are in favor of. that is liberal authoritarianism
They really don’t, but go on.
Not necessarily, but that is one method.
Right, but you’re for dictatorship of another flavor, ergo you are not an anarchist.
I am opposed to unjust and imposed hierarchies as an anarchist. Capitalists want to maintain and continue those hierarchies. A revolution which overturns their domination is authoritarian towards them, but liberatory for everyone else.
All revolutions are going to be authoritarian towards someone, and you are acting as if the status quo isn’t also authoritarian. Passively voting and trying to reform a system of oppression does not have a track record of success. It does nothing to actually challenge the system of oppression either.
Also are a cop, incredible gall to call me not-an - anarchist lmao
Yet again, you’re using a niche definition and acting as though readers should have known it.
Not strictly true. You should instead say “I find the rates of peaceful reform for the better to be too slow and unlikely.”
So when kids on the playground said “takes one to know one,” you understood that to be true and wise? I’m not shocked or anything, but it is kinda funny that you still think that way (but seemingly don’t apply that logic to yourself).
yes, i am using a definition other than the liberal moralizing version. if you actually read and engaged with what i have said i would expect you to be able to follow that, it’s not the first time i’ve outlined that.
this is being pedantic. peaceful reform has a track record of being rolled back whenever capital feels threatened
its more that not even other anarchists are in a position to dictate to other anarchists who is and isn’t an anarchist. having someone who seems completely fine with the carceral state calling me not-an-anarchist just makes me laugh