• 3 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 16th, 2025

help-circle

  • I believe we can agree that “people should be fairly/ethically rewarded for their labor” is a reasonable ideal

    I dont really see why this is a particularly goof ideal to build around the systems we use to express and fulfill our needs. Maybe you could explain why you would prefer to use that instead of ideals like “From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs” or “well-being for all”.

    I think an interesting read might be the section I.3 What could the economic structure of anarchy look like? of An Anarchist FAQ.

    What I would be interested in is an more insurrectionist / individualist / egoist answer to this question, because their perspective is often not mentioned in these kinds of questions.







  • PTB because rule 1 - “Be civil” is super inappropriate when it comes to an ongoing genocide and removing someone calling out propaganda in an impolite way is in a way taking sides


    more on a personal note: Are you really sure you are helping Palestinians with this kind of online posting? Like I think you could actually make reasonable arguments instead of making snarky comments. Also every comment under Israeli propaganda increases the reach of said propaganda, especially on Lemmy where comments increase the “Active” metric by a lot and push otherwise ignored posts into the feed of thousands









  • I am also wondering how peaceful movements that succeeded would have continued if they failed eirh their strategies. Would they have turned (imo rightfully) violent and would that have worked or not? Or the other way around for movement labelled as violent.

    But I just want to debunk this idea that nonviolent resistance can’t work against a violent enemy. It’s simply not true.

    I think thats a important point to bring up in discussions. I want people to be informed about as many options as possible in the hope of them being able to actively choose the ones best fitting for them.




  • Most examples of overthrown dictatorships seem to be after they were already in place for atleast a few years to sometimes dozens of years. This is not the current situation in the so called USA where we see an rising and escalating fascist regime trying to take hold.

    In general I think choosing nonviolence because it worked in the past and it seems efficient is not the way to go. Instead look if its the best for you individually and collectivly in your specific circumstances and if its in line with your ethics/morals and with you current emotions and goals. Nothing is won by denying yourself and others the way you/they want and can resist your/their best way.


  • First, look up Martin Luther King. He called for non-violence in a situation that was much worse, against a tougher foe.

    So? I dont agree with him.

    Second, who made you leader? Who decided that you had the right to instigate violence?

    I am not presenting as an authority figure or as anyones boss. I am fine if you dont want to join. I think thats totally valid. But I can “instigate violence” because its covered by the instance rules, because its not looked down upon in this community and because from my anarchist perspective it seems to be one of the most effective actions you can currently take.

    Because you keep ignoring my basic point, that it’s not going to be the one who throws the brick who will get caught.

    Its just a statement without any reasoning, proof or context. As I have shown multiple times in our discussion, I value different viewpoints especially if they get brought forward kn good faith. But valuing them doesnt mean I have to agree with everything you say.