Home | Community | Message Board

Avalon Magic Plants
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineOz_Salvia
Conservative
Registered: 04/14/20
Posts: 165
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: Brian Jones]
    #27554562 - 11/23/21 07:23 AM (2 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Brian Jones said:
Is that for the gas rights to their lands?




Huh?

Which mob are you inferring?

https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/map-indigenous-australia

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,295
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: Oz_Salvia]
    #27556559 - 11/24/21 04:49 PM (2 years, 4 months ago)

The oligarchy still rules completely. Only when it crumbles, will Anarchistic principles get a chance to prove themselves.

We might get a situation where all three branches of 911 get knocked out, where roads are blocked so there are supply issues, where the ATMs all stop working at once, when a whole lot of the structure of society breaks down.

At this point assholes of various kinds will run unchecked to commit the assholism they have been fantasizing about all their lives. Your local gangs, criminal syndicates and militia will smell opportunities.

Then, anarchist principles will come into play. Right now they are not in a condition to thrive because people don't feel a necessity to look for alternatives.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica Flag
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: Asante]
    #27557249 - 11/25/21 07:21 AM (2 years, 4 months ago)

When society breaks down people will reflexively grasp for fascism. People don’t respond to not having food, water, and medicine by rationally contemplating a better social model, they act like desperate animals.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Omnicyclion prophet
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 87,295
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27557291 - 11/25/21 08:07 AM (2 years, 4 months ago)

Not necessarily. Some resort to fascism, others will oppose that.

Anarchism is a way to cope with a lack of powers that be.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: Asante]
    #27557374 - 11/25/21 09:12 AM (2 years, 4 months ago)

It is, but that doesn’t mean it’s the path of least resistance.

You take away the Church and people don’t suddenly start reading Spinoza or become atheists. Some might, but most others will desperately seek a plug to fill that hole, and others still will see the disappearance of the Church l, and the consequences therein, as an opportunity to seize power.

If we abolished all hierarchies today, and let the chips fall where they may, the world would devolve into a much worse place to exist.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OnlineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,574
Last seen: 2 minutes, 22 seconds
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: Asante]
    #27558443 - 11/26/21 01:08 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Asante said:
Your local gangs, criminal syndicates and militia will smell opportunities.




Quote:

Asante said:
Some resort to fascism, others will oppose that.




You might note that the people that are most likely to seize the opportunity are the ones most likely to favor some form of fascism. Or another form of government in which they get to be unilaterally in charge, because they have guns.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: Brian Jones]
    #27558526 - 11/26/21 02:45 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Brian Jones said:
Autonomous work groups are the largest functional non-hierarchical units that I'm aware of. Their performance can be measured and compared to traditional organization. This gives them a legitimacy that can't be ignored by outsiders. It wouldn't necessarily lead to their proliferation because capitalists may prefer control to profits.

My intention in mentioning Dostoevsky was just that anti-religous sentiment was taking hold in European intellectual circles 140 years ago. And it was a bigger movement than pro-anarchy sentiment has ever generated, that I know of. I recognize that popularity contests are a flawed metric, but they are what often passes for proof, and what other measures would be less flawed? I believe that non-religion is growing and anarchism is not, because atheism does not get in the way of capitalism. Max Weber made an interesting point about Protestant ethic in the orgins of capitalism, but dumping Christianity does not upset the system economically and the social changes are working themselves in large sectors of the world. Anarchism is a direct threat to capitalism, and I have difficulty imagining it taking hold except by force, and like the communist revelutions that did take hold by force, the end result may not work out as planned.

I can conceive of incremental movement to anarchism, but as I said, time is short, which is another way of saying too little, too late.  Anarcho-syndicalism, that I favor, has elements of anarchism and socialism, but it is only a blueprint/theory for medium sized scale, and I have no knowledge of how these groups interconnect or provide for defense. I think the prospects for social change in this type of arrangement are much more favorable in Europe and probably Canada, than in the U.S. The economic tournament model of winner take all is too much a part of American thinking about economy and society.




Okay, I understand where you're coming from better now. I agree that autonomous work groups, since they still operate within traditional 'workers organizing' structures, are more familiar to the average individual - and this grants them a legitimacy that more informal structures won't immediately gain. Still, I wouldn't go so far as to say this familiarity provides us with the most effective examples. As you say, anarchism is a direct threat to the inherent hierarchy of capitalism - so while non-hierarchical responses to capitalism may be laudable, is this where we should expect anarchism to thrive?

I agree that measures of popularity - especially where this translates into participation - shouldn't be ignored, but another measure I use is 'how does the State respond?' The idea is that the State will reliably recognize effective threats to its structure - a small movement considered a threat is likely to be more effective than a large movement considered a non-threat. Since the early 90s (coinciding with the fall of the USSR), informal anarchist organizing has been viewed as a steadily growing threat - particularly due to the leaderless structure consistently able to coordinate attacks on State across national borders. Without spending too much time on this subject, an immediately recognizable example would probably be the severe response to informal eco-sabotage groups (like Earth First! and ALF) - basically treated like terrorists on-par with homicidal neo-nazis and jihadis - not because they pose a threat to random citizens, but because they pose a threat to the State. The biggest difference between this type of non-hierarchical force, and the revolutionary force of communism is simple but significant: communist revolutions seek to capture the State by force, and use the institutions of the State to create a new society - informal anarchist insurrection seeks to create a new society immediately and use it to weaken the institutions of the State.

To be honest, I think you can find parallels with resistance to religious hierarchy. You talk about religions role in a capitalist society, and I agree with much of it - but before capitalism defined the social context, it was hereditary monarchies built on the divine right of kings. Capitalism may not view opposition to religious hierarchy as a threat, but the monarchies it supplanted certainly did - to question the religious order was to question the rulers power. The history of anti-monarchism is intimately connected with opposition to religious hierarchy, and there are good arguments that early forms of anarchism (pre-dating the term itself) were represented in these movements - the Diggers are a great example, but the history of 'Christian anarchy' has lots more if you're interested. Like the classical anarchism we're familiar with, there were lots of failures and setbacks back then too, but today the once-inviolable divine hierarchy has been by-and-large shattered - a seemingly impossible feat from within the social context it occurred. I see the same cracks forming in the seemingly inviolable natural hierarchy of capitalism.

If you think time is too short for this process to complete, what options do you consider better? This is something that always confuses me - if not anarchism, then what?

Edited by shivas.wisdom (11/26/21 05:44 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27558536 - 11/26/21 03:09 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

The Ecstatic said:
When society breaks down people will reflexively grasp for fascism. People don’t respond to not having food, water, and medicine by rationally contemplating a better social model, they act like desperate animals.



What are you basing this on? It's a common assumption, but I don't think it actually holds up.

The two most likely ways we would see this sudden societal breakdown is through the outbreak of war or natural disaster. War has a lot of political subcontext that, imo, doesn't make it the best place to study human behaviour in response to this type of pressure - there are lots of different pressures to account for. Furthermore, considering much of the 'global west' hasn't experienced war within its borders in several generations or more, the discussion becomes mostly hypothetical.

Instead, let's consider the real responses we've seen to severe natural disasters that temporarily shut down the normal functioning of society - think hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, and ice storms. Yes, some people take advantage of the chaos that follows, but most of the affected people in these areas come together in mutual aid to survive and recover. This is an interesting wikipedia article to peruse: human response to disasters.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: OutsideOfMyMind]
    #27558568 - 11/26/21 03:40 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

OutsideOfMyMind said:
True anarchism is self governance, not a complete absence of any government. When something needs to be done, we would organize for it to all come together and happen. It's more communal.

This is an excellent video on anarchism:



It's a little more indirect, but I've always enjoyed this video of how nonsensical our government looks like from outside of the current social context:




--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #27558829 - 11/26/21 07:46 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

The Ecstatic said:
When society breaks down people will reflexively grasp for fascism. People don’t respond to not having food, water, and medicine by rationally contemplating a better social model, they act like desperate animals.



What are you basing this on? It's a common assumption, but I don't think it actually holds up.

The two most likely ways we would see this sudden societal breakdown is through the outbreak of war or natural disaster. War has a lot of political subcontext that, imo, doesn't make it the best place to study human behaviour in response to this type of pressure - there are lots of different pressures to account for. Furthermore, considering much of the 'global west' hasn't experienced war within its borders in several generations or more, the discussion becomes mostly hypothetical.

Instead, let's consider the real responses we've seen to severe natural disasters that temporarily shut down the normal functioning of society - think hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, and ice storms. Yes, some people take advantage of the chaos that follows, but most of the affected people in these areas come together in mutual aid to survive and recover. This is an interesting wikipedia article to peruse: human response to disasters.




Not sure you can just set aside that political sub context in favor of a far less political situation like a natural disaster. And yeah, in the West we will cheer on the genocide of the global south before we ever accept a sudden drop in standard of living. But, when our institutions crumble, the power behind them won’t simply wither away. Folks just simply won’t have the chance to build non-coercive, autonomous modes of social function. The weapons, the technology, the food, water, medicine, and other resources will be in the hands of those that the average person will quickly yield to, regardless of the terms. “Hey you’re all slave laborers now but I will be generous and give you food water and shelter.” Alright sounds good, beats starving to death.

To be clear, I’m not saying that people are stupid animals who can’t figure it out for themselves, I’m just saying that they won’t ever be given the chance to do so in the event of some social breakdown.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27558932 - 11/26/21 09:56 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

I'm not saying we should completely discount the reality of war - but war is essentially a disaster caused by human conflict, so the human response to this type of disaster will have conflict baked into it. If we want to examine how people respond to not having food, water, and medicine, then using war as the base disaster gives us a much larger amount of variables to control for - and it's much more difficult to make useful generalizations.

On the other hand, natural disasters cause similar societal disruptions without necessarily including baked-in social conflict; and as a result they provide a better place to start considering the human response to disaster. In these instances, when society breaks down people do not "reflexively grasp for fascism" - the exact opposite occurs.

Now, if you say 'when society breaks down people the State will reflexively grasp for fascism authoritarianism', I will wholeheartedly agree - but we shouldn't confuse the 'rational' actions of the State with the rational actions of humans; anymore than we should confuse the 'rational' actions of corporations with those of humans. The State responds to disaster with authoritarianism (under capitalism, this is usually fascism) - but humans respond to disaster with solidarity and mutual aid.

It's important to acknowledge this because 'protection from societal breakdown' is often used to defend the necessity of the State, when in reality countless examples show the much greater importance of human relationships in the aftermath of societal breakdown. We will be even stronger if we focus on cultivating these types of relationships before disaster strikes - but if we prematurely convince ourselves of their impossibility, will we even try?

Of course, the disaster of war will complicate this - especially considering the high possibility of future climate disaster causing widespread collapse, it's unlikely that natural disasters will occur in a vacuum. In these cases, maybe the goal isn't necessarily to fight for global anarchism - maybe we can't help people who are starving on the other side of the globe - but we can still have a positive affect in our own community.

There is a now-classic anarchist text, Desert, that asks the question "What could it mean to be an anarchist, an environmentalist, when global revolution and world-wide social/eco sustainability are not the aim?" - like, for example, if we find ourselves living in the global West at a time of environmental collapse and benefiting from the genocide of the global South without any clear way to prevent it. If we acknowledge that non-hierarchical methods of organization are more effective at disaster response, wouldn't making our local community less-dependent on the State for our needs still be a net-positive? We won't have a chance to find out if we preemptively convince ourselves it's impossible.

Even in an apocalyptic scenario where the State is turning its own citizens into slaves in response to an existential threat - in the absolute worst case where the vast majority willingly accept - where any resistance is almost guaranteed to be brutally snuffed out - should that be reason to not resist? First, I want to be clear that I don't believe there is much benefit in using absolute worst case scenarios to decide what is most effective - but if the hypothetical situation you describe became reality - what would you do? Give up or fight back.

I haven't read the book yet, but I printed it off recently and it's on my winter list: Blessed is the Flame - An introduction to concentration camp resistance and anarcho-nihilism. I'll leave you with a passage from the book, because I don't think it needs further explanation:

Quote:

At heart, this book is about tapping into the instinctual rebelliousness that resides underneath of every organization, affinity group, project, and action that we participate in; that reflexive spirit of resistance rooted in the basic existential understanding that recalcitrance is simply a more meaningful and joyous form of existence than docility. Too often our insurrectionary urges get bogged down in ideological costume, rhetorical mandate, and hobbyist paradigms. We channel our energies into dubious conduits of prefabricated dogma and inevitably burn out or become listless at the very mention of Revolution. Forms of resistance rooted in social obligations and lifestyle choices all too often fade into lives of despondency, alienation, boredom, or material comfort. It speaks to the very nature of our domestication that we only choose resistance so long as it feels like something we can win.

That’s where nihilism enters the picture. I am interested in the sort of resistance we pursue, not because we necessarily believe it will produce desired changes or lead us into a brighter future, but because it is the most meaningful response to this world we can imagine. Because we simply can’t stomach the idea of being passive in the face of a system this brutal, regardless of how far we may be from our dreams. Nihilism urges anarchists to embrace our feelings of cynicism around radical milieus, our feelings of boredom with prescribed methods of resistance, our feelings of hopelessness in the current landscape of domination, and to engage in forms of revolt that cultivate immediate joy and moments of liberation.

And that’s where the Nazi holocaust becomes particularly interesting.

Concentration camp resistance challenges nihilism to consider just how bleak it is willing to get. The resistance of those in the Lagers who were deprived of every vestige of hope, every morsel of inspiration, and every shred of comfort, poses rich questions about how much hopelessness we are willing to wade through for a chance to fight back. It reminds us that resistance is not just about getting results, but about our reflexive reactions to oppressive situations. Whether we succeed in overthrowing our oppressors and bringing about a brighter future can only be secondary to the visceral need to rebel against the shitty conditions of our lives.

Both topics — anarcho-nihilism and concentration camp resistance — challenge anarchists to realize a spirit of resistance that can endure horrific conditions, that can weather the storms of absolute futility, and that can still muster an exuberant desire to rebel.




--------------------

Edited by shivas.wisdom (11/26/21 10:09 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #27559228 - 11/27/21 07:33 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

What ought to happen and what will happen are two distinct paths, though.

We should be resisting the political ambivalence to climate change NOW, but the West is far too comfortable for that. Not to mention the underlying acceptance that, by controlling the resources of the world, we will be least affected when the chips are down, or that natural disasters are already being subtly transformed into a war-like situation. Refugees from the climate crisis will be treated no differently than the migrants fleeing war from a few years ago.

“While it’s sad that these people are dying, there’s only so many resources left and we can’t just go giving them away and letting these hordes of unwashed masses disrupt our last vestiges of civil society.”

That is the playbook, and judging by how effective it’s been, I don’t see reason to suspect there’s some mass awakening on the horizon amongst the most comfortable people on the planet.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27559426 - 11/27/21 10:54 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Do we need a mass awakening before we can start resisting the political ambivalence to climate change?

"What ought to happen and what will happen are two distinct paths, though."

Ok, so what ought to happen is a mass movement towards eco-sustainability and anarchy - but instead what will happen is the global West will cheer on the genocide of the global South before we ever accept a sudden drop in standard of living.

Will you join in the cheering or resist anyways?

Beginning to resist the political ambivalence towards climate change is as simple as forming a neighbourhood mutual aid group. It might not make it easier to help people who live thousands of kilometres away, but it will certainly make it easier to help those in your locality.

Getting started is as simple as you contacting a dozen people in your community - deciding on (multiple, redundant) methods of communication - finding out what skills people can offer, what needs people have - and then asking each of those people to talk with their neighbours, friends, and family. It's about building real human connections. Mutual aid doesn't have to be couched in anarchism or radical politics - people cooperating to take care of each other during times of disaster is taking advantage of the most-common human response to disaster and giving it the benefit of organization.

The hope is that if people personally experience the benefits of self-organization over State-dependence, they will be more likely to continue acting in this way. Maybe your community is able to help a neighbouring community, and the mutual aid project spreads just a tiny bit further. Maybe it doesn't ever spread, but you help the elder who lives on their own or the homeless person without any shelter. Maybe that elder or homeless person helps you and your family. We'll never know if we don't try.

So what's holding you back?




www.mutualaiddisasterrelief.org



Edit: mutual aid 101

- reach out to a dozen people in your community that you're closest too (family, friends, neighbours, co-workers)

- decide on (multiple, redundant) methods of communication

- identify the zone(s) you will cover (people on your floor, in your building, your block, your neighbourhood, or a non-location-based social community); it's better to start small and build up

- outreach! Invite people (flyers in community spaces, social media, knocking on doors, networking)

- find out what skills people can offer, what needs people have

- organize yourselves into groups of 10-20 based on a combination of skills, needs, and location - you can be in multiple groups (ie, one with your neighbours, and one for your specific skill)

- communicate and coordinate in response to the needs of your community (something best honed through experience and practice)




Some scenarios

You're too sick to leave your house, so you contact your local group and someone does a grocery run for you.

The power is out, so you check-in on the people in your local group that have health or mobility issues.

A hurricane hits, so you communicate with your local group to find out who needs help and repairs. You coordinate with neighbouring local groups where necessary, and coordinate with specific skill groups when you need outside equipment or knowledge.

Evacuation order for a wildfire, and everyone on your street knows who has a vehicle, who needs a ride, and who needs help getting into a vehicle.

The government collapses and fascist paramilitaries are marching - you already know who has your back.



The idea is that the simple connections build stronger relationships to help us prepare for disaster when it comes. Practice is better than any theory.


--------------------

Edited by shivas.wisdom (11/27/21 04:31 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #27561659 - 11/29/21 07:51 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Do we need a mass awakening before we can start resisting the political ambivalence to climate change?




Yes, resisting the political ambivalence to anything really. Until material conditions change in the West there is no incentive for people to upset their relatively comfortable lives.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27561919 - 11/29/21 12:27 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

You understand that 'it's not worth starting something unless everyone is already doing it' is a self-fulfilling prophecy, right?

The basic practice of mutual aid outlined in my previous post doesn't need mass participation before becoming viable - ground-up organization begins with the individual - that's what makes it so beautifully radical.

If the mutual aid disaster relief project is successful, it will undeniably benefit your relatively comfortable life - if the project is an abject failure, your relatively comfortable life will still be there - low risk with high reward - so what's holding you back? - what more incentive do you need?

I'm not asking these questions to some impersonal monolith of 'the West' - I'm asking them of you personally because a non-hypothetical answer to the OP question will be interesting to me.


--------------------

Edited by shivas.wisdom (11/29/21 12:54 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #27562326 - 11/29/21 07:42 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

You understand that 'it's not worth starting something unless everyone is already doing it' is a self-fulfilling prophecy, right?





Of course, I’m just saying we aren’t even close to being there yet, not that it’s not doable.

Quote:

The basic practice of mutual aid outlined in my previous post doesn't need mass participation before becoming viable - ground-up organization begins with the individual - that's what makes it so beautifully radical.




It doesn’t, but isn’t the viability we’re discussing here an alternative to the dependence on liberal democracy and the power therein? The ability to be independent is certainly a prerequisite to independence, but it isn’t the only factor. “Our subjects have developed mutually beneficial relationships in their community, guess our global hegemony is over.” Nah.

Quote:

If the mutual aid disaster relief project is successful, it will undeniably benefit your relatively comfortable life - if the project is an abject failure, your relatively comfortable life will still be there - low risk with high reward - so what's holding you back? - what more incentive do you need?




What’s holding me back is a 40 hour a week job, school, dogs, wife, housework, leisure, etc. Nobody in my community worries about disaster relief because I live in the suburbs and everyone has insurance. I’m not going to give up what little time to myself I have to develop an aid network that my community neither wants nor needs. If/when material conditions change, that might change, or if I suddenly hit the lottery and am no longer required to spend the vast majority of my waking life selling my labor to survive.

It’s nice to make a difference though. My local DSA chapter does vehicle repair events, food banks, clothing drives, etc, I’m some of the poorest areas of the city. That’s a thing people want and need and a thing my comrades and I can easily do.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27562403 - 11/29/21 09:07 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Apparently your comrades disagree with you regarding mutual aid - DSA: "We believe that mutual aid is a key component in building community power."

It doesn’t have to be disaster relief - although this type of mutual aid project isn't focused solely on rebuilding, it's also about responding to crises more quickly than either the gov't or insurance companies can. I focused on disaster relief because we were talking about how people would react if society breaks down.

You know your community better then I do. That's part of the joy of horizontal organizational structure - out of touch folks from across the country don't get to dictate your priorities. If people in your community need and want vehicle repair, food, and clothes more than disaster relief - focus on that!

The basic principles of 'social solidarity - not charity' can still come into play though! Do your community projects take the form of mutual aid or charity? Do they create a dependent relationship between 'haves' and 'have nots' - or do they create a mutual relationship of people helping each other?






I'm well aware that the conditions of capitalism don't leave people with an endless font of energy for activism. Whether by design or function, it's an insidious aspect of capitalism - we have to struggle rebuilding something that many pre-capitalist cultures have implicitly. I've made specific life choices to make it easier for myself, but I know they aren't realistic choices for many. That's why I think mutual aid is so radical! It's an activity that isn't out of reach - you're already putting in the necessary effort with your local DSA chapter! And the stronger your mutual aid network becomes, the more resilience your community will have in the face of the soul draining conditions of capitalism!

Something doesn't have to instantly abolish global hegemony to be worthwhile.  Waiting for that type of mass awakening is an endless wait. Working together to figure out the strategies and resources necessary to meet each other's needs, while also organizing ourselves against the unjust and oppressive system that created these shortages in the first place - that's something we can do while passing the time.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #27562416 - 11/29/21 09:27 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Absolutely, I’m just saying we’re nowhere near a point where mutual aid systems can replace the current structures, and that people will be devoted to said structures until a better opportunity presents itself AND THEN the real fight begins. Because having an alternative isn’t enough, you have to have an alternative that can  defeat the status quo, otherwise we just descend further into dystopia, and I think at some point that affects people’s willingness to entertain alternatives. “If we keep pushing it might turn out bad for us, so let’s just accept the current paradigm since we (folks in the West) don’t have it so bad.”

That’s no reason not to push, obviously, and to build something now, but any realist has to accept that a leftist end goal society isn’t going to be achieved in our lifetimes, and then decide how to spend their life accordingly. Not to mention that those leftists make up maybe 5% of the population. MAYBE.


--------------------

Edited by The Ecstatic (11/29/21 09:40 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,471
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 4 hours, 8 minutes
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: The Ecstatic]
    #27562509 - 11/29/21 11:04 PM (2 years, 3 months ago)

I think the anarchist alternative can defeat the status quo. Remember that anarchism is not a blueprint - it's not a system that would supposedly work if only it were applied right, like democracy - nor a goal to be realized in some far-off future, like communism. It is a way of acting and relating that we can put into practice right now. Yes, an anarchist society could probably achieve much more than an individual anarchist can - but that individual is still just as much an anarchist, regardless of the type of society they live in.

Anarchism is both the ends and the means. I'm an anarchist because it gives my life more joy and meaning right now then the status quo offers - and I'm an anarchist because I think it will create a more joyous and meaningful society than the current status quo.

The DSA is big on workplace democracy. Did you know that direct experience is a more likely indicator of support than either ideology or class? This is why I think the anarchist alternative can defeat the status quo - the actual experience of having control over our own lives is enough to convince people that this is a better way to live.

The challenge is that you can't force other people to have this type of experience. The best I can do is always relate to others as an anarchist.

Unfortunately this is compounded by the compelling force of a lifetime of direct experience with authority. Social domination structures our experience so systematically that it appears to be 'just the way things are done'. Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but much of your prior posts seem to hold to this line of thought - "When society breaks down people will reflexively grasp for fascism."

But the current system doesn't adequately meet every need. So, as an anarchist, I go where the State retreats because that's where the opportunity to present a better structure exists - and I help build the kind of human relations that are more likely to give people the experience of having control over there own lives. 


"But we anarchists do not want to emancipate the people; we want the people to emancipate themselves."
-Errico Malatesta


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,750
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 20 minutes, 1 second
Re: Why have anarchist tenets not taken hold within the world? [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #27562747 - 11/30/21 07:17 AM (2 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but much of your prior posts seem to hold to this line of thought - "When society breaks down people will reflexively grasp for fascism."




I think that’s a fair assessment, but they’re grasping for a few different reasons; the social domination you mentioned, the hunger to maintain power by the fascists already running things, and the ignorance (in the purest sense) that a better world is possible. The latter might be the biggest obstacle. But I’m a communist because I believe that wrestling power away from the status quo requires the power of the state. I don’t think we’ll ever rid ourselves of the excesses and abuses of the human condition, it’s endemic, but it can be mitigated by developing a system in which human happiness and well-being is the end goal. Only then, imo, will we possess the capacity (on a large enough scale so that it’s feasible) to have decentralized communities based on mutual aid.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Capitalism or Socialism?
( 1 2 3 all )
PotSmokinHippie 7,472 40 08/01/01 05:14 PM
by svoboda
* Recipes For Disaster an Anarchist Cookbook, by Crimethinc al_uh_looyah 2,914 10 03/03/07 05:55 PM
by Turn
* You May Already Be An Anarchist.
( 1 2 3 all )
FutureExPatriot 5,007 45 10/16/02 01:16 AM
by zeronio
* God is an Anarchist.
( 1 2 all )
Baby_Hitler 4,824 33 07/21/05 01:12 PM
by rogue_pixie
* Anarchists being harrased y police/ May Day Riots PGF 1,562 3 06/04/02 08:49 AM
by hongomon
* Tenet, Out!
( 1 2 all )
afoaf 997 22 06/06/04 10:38 AM
by afoaf
* The Reluctant Anarchist Evolving 2,014 17 06/12/04 09:27 PM
by RandalFlagg
* Some Iraqi Scientists Are Cooperating wingnutx 583 11 08/01/03 03:09 PM
by luvdemshrooms

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
3,984 topic views. 7 members, 8 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.