Had to leave thread earlier due to being busy but I'm back now!

Had to leave thread earlier due to being busy but I'm back now!
AMA

Hey Yea Forumsros, this board went to shit years ago but w/e

Anarchist user here.
ask whatever you want.
Any question about anything.

Attached: A star.png (230x219, 4K)

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=I2n4MFcvyp4
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why are you opposed to the establishment of a minimal state

tf is this? the club atlas logo?

Are you an anarchosocialist?
If so, how do you reconcile the antiauthoritarian ideals of anarchism with the historical authoritarian actions of socialism?

A state of any form generally leads to eventual tyranny and an unfair hierarchy.

HOWEVER: minimal states can at times be accepted i.e. small self governing towns that follow a fair system with no hierarchies, or a territory with an established proletariat vote system.

lol nice one

I'm not an anarchosocialist, but I think you'd go about it by takes the base elements of Socialism that are also core elements of anarchism, for example;
My neighbour has no bread, I have too much bread, I decide to give my neighbour some bread.

That's textbook socialism (if you remove the mandated statist elements), and its also inline with the anarchist concept of Mutual Aid. There's a lot of over lap in ideas of how to help people, just gotta remove the state.

not OP but my desire for socialism (defined as collective ownership/management of the workplace) stems from my anti-authoritarianism. Being able to discuss when and how I work face to face with a small group and having a vote gives much more power and freedom then doing whatever i'm told by the owner of the workplace. Anarchists have been saying from the beginning that 'collective' ownership through government bureaucracy as advocated by marxists will lead to tyranny. Although I oppose much of what they do about the current status quo I mistrust marxists as much as you do.
> also may as well mention now that 'communism', 'socialism', 'liberalism', and 'fascism' are going to mean something different to every motherfucker who posts in this thread and we should make an effort to clarify every time we use these terms

Big agree.
while we might have different opinion on several things, I can defiantly agree with you on collective ownership and not necessarily trusting Marxists.

I thought the red part in your star symbolized socialism though.
I'm an anarchist myself, but my personal experiences with current socialists combined with reading about how they've acted in the past, makes me very wary of them.
To me mutual aid would be an example of a voluntary social program, while enforced mutual aid mandated from the state would be an example of an involuntary socialist program.
I'm all for cooperation and treating others decently, but the way I see socialists acting, my cooperation would be mandatory and treating others decently would come down to subscribing to a strict adherence to an intersectional victim hierarchy. Adhering to this hierarchy would force me to espouse low expectations of some groups, high expectations of other groups and condemnation towards anyone who doesn't agree with painting these groups with broad strokes.
I don't want to make assumptions about anyone based on their immutable traits and that in my opinion, is what actions based on intersectional thought does.

>established proletariat vote system.
cries in west

Technically it can be syndicalist, or imply you have SOME socialist/communist leanings, so more towards the mutual aid side of things. In this particular case, as bad praxis as it may be, I did just select the first image I saw and knew not to be 100% unacceptable, as I tend to agree with anarcho syndicalist ideas, not all the time, but some of it.

I totally agree, mutual aid has to be voluntary otherwise its literally not mutual aid. I agree with every point you've made here but once again gotta say, personally it was just bad praxis.

Yeah definitions of things have become very murky.
To me socialism basically comes down to espousing ideas about cooperation and lack of prejudice, while asserting that a majority of people are mentally unable to see the merit in these ideas and thus must be forced to be "good people".
It is kind of like saying "In order for people to be free, we must control everything they do" in my opinion.

if you're not a socialist what are you? mutualist? postie? ancap?

I agree with some of the point of Mutualism quite firmly, I'd probably consider myself a mixture of a mutualist and a syndicalist, since there's no such thing as just a straight up anarchist anymore.

I'd probably be a voluntarist mutualist anarchist.
I like other people and enjoy working together with them.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=I2n4MFcvyp4

Are you a music lover?

People can live happily under the rule of a king or supreme dictator/government even if the establishment is like that of George Orwell's 1984. By dismantling big governments, you do realize that chaos will birth suffering greater than that of the supreme authority, right?
Or am I wrong and in the long-term, chaos is better than supreme rule?
I'm open minded and willing to discuss.

Oh and to add to my reply here What is a postie?

Attached: 1010755267.jpg (1612x1270, 156K)

short for post-leftist. anarchists who are opposed to worker/oriented and marxist-influenced organization to varying extents while still hating capitalism.
>i.e. Insurrectionaries, Nihilists and Primitivists

I'd say you are conflating anarchy with chaos.
Anarchy means without a leader, which doesn't preclude people from negotiating their way into a society where people avoid taking actions that negatively affects other people.

Oh, alrighty then.

holy fuck, all those labels.
can you just stop being a faggot and admit that you wont change a shit and try to act as normal decent humanbeing?

Excuse me but are we discussing the violence inherent in the system?

Attached: 0_-QMF6DdQGAyC5kqh.jpg (500x390, 33K)

u gay ?

>post-leftist

>anarchists

oh great,another buzzword.lets look up the definition of anarchy and show how fucking retarded you are for calling leftists

No OP. I'd just like to point out that anarchist societies work and have never collapsed without use of external force. See 30's Spain, Rojava, Chiapas, Makhno's Ukraine. Also Vladimir Putin is gay.

Attached: putin-meme-gay.jpg (1027x576, 47K)

calling leftists what?

I see someone has been reading their Chomsky

how did you know, are you spying on me?

Attached: 1551784536003.jpg (1024x722, 129K)

"but who will build the roads?"
-Everyone's response

yes i was but i wasnt the only one so its not that bad

Attached: 1503563861001.png (1920x1080, 1.25M)

From my understanding anachos tend to hate big pharma and such since they have life saving medicine at such high prices.

Do you honestly think whatever shitty local community you end up to be a part of will even be offered these life saving medicines at all? Why even bother whit your wining when there is nothing to gain from you anyway? They will 100% only deal with competent flourishing communities where they have an interest in.

Attached: ancap2.jpg (600x754, 87K)

is anarchos a new show or some shit

Attached: images (1).jpg (214x235, 11K)

Attached: communismiscentrism.jpg (640x642, 49K)

a leftist was the one who made this meme,since there the ones who think rich people are bad

The neighbor can fuck themselves

No, it is the branch of "anachist" OP is, based of the picture. Which is radically different then for example ancaps, which is also anarchist, but a different branch.

Also what I would have been if an anachist, because it's the only thing that actually build on the anachy definition.

looks like anarchists are gonna need more memes if they ever want to keep a thread alive

Attached: 1503462224655.jpg (394x296, 21K)