since you are not explaining what you are trying to say with this, i have to assume.
i assume you are trying to imply that since all societies impose rules on individuals, states are no worse than any other way to organize a society, and criticising them (pointing out how they arbitrarily legitimize their own violence and criminalize that of individuals) is hypocrytical or pointless.
if this is what you are trying to say, then i have to disagree. not all power structures are equal. states are a hierarchical way to organize societies, disempowering the many, to empower the few. rules are not imposed on people, by themsleves, but by a higher authority. they are authoritarian and oppressive. state violence is illegitimate and defence against it is likely legitimate. this is something states try to obscure and it is something people need to realise, so they will consider overthrowing the states ruling over them.
if you did not mean to imply this. i am sorry for misunderstanding you. tbf i did try to get you to explain yourself. i would still like to read what you meant.
you appear to maliciously misunderstand me, to avoid having your takes criticised. i find you unsufferable to interact with and really disingenius. i am going to block you but i still hope you will stop being this way for the sake of everyone else.
your comment does not seem directly related to the content of the post. i assume you are therefore implying something with your statement. otherwise, what led you to comment it?
none. i am trying to understand why you said what you said. how is “all societies impose laws upon individuals” related to “states legitimize their own violence and criminalize the violence of individuals”?
Here’s my controversial opinion. Using phrases like ‘anarchy’ or ‘socialism’ is a complete waste of time if you’re interested in making any kind of change.
Look at the campaigns of Mamdani and AOC. They talked much more about actual issues and laws than they talked about utopian plans for the future.
If you say you’re a ‘socialist’ you give the MAGat ammunition. “Well, wasn’t Hitler a Socialist?”
If you say ‘tax the rich’ you avoid that.
You can spend time getting people elected, or you can spend time arguing about things that you can’t control.
I kind of agree; actions matters, world shall support. However, actions of many have to be coordinated to aime the same goal. And to do so, we shall be clear of the ideal we want. Hitler do not want to abolish capitalism, but you could have a fascist state that tax the rich. Without upper hand, confusions is counter productive
Either that guy has edited all his posts by the time iv seen this. Or your fucking unhinged in the head. Cause if this is unedited the actual fuck is wrong with you.
All societies impose rules on individuals.
since you are not explaining what you are trying to say with this, i have to assume.
i assume you are trying to imply that since all societies impose rules on individuals, states are no worse than any other way to organize a society, and criticising them (pointing out how they arbitrarily legitimize their own violence and criminalize that of individuals) is hypocrytical or pointless.
if this is what you are trying to say, then i have to disagree. not all power structures are equal. states are a hierarchical way to organize societies, disempowering the many, to empower the few. rules are not imposed on people, by themsleves, but by a higher authority. they are authoritarian and oppressive. state violence is illegitimate and defence against it is likely legitimate. this is something states try to obscure and it is something people need to realise, so they will consider overthrowing the states ruling over them.
if you did not mean to imply this. i am sorry for misunderstanding you. tbf i did try to get you to explain yourself. i would still like to read what you meant.
Removed by mod
you appear to maliciously misunderstand me, to avoid having your takes criticised. i find you unsufferable to interact with and really disingenius. i am going to block you but i still hope you will stop being this way for the sake of everyone else.
what are you trying to say?
That you deserve it and that no society was about you, because the elites deserve their privileges of causing everyone else pain for their own profit.
Exactly what I wrote.
What did you think I meant?
your comment does not seem directly related to the content of the post. i assume you are therefore implying something with your statement. otherwise, what led you to comment it?
Which particular word confused you?
none. i am trying to understand why you said what you said. how is “all societies impose laws upon individuals” related to “states legitimize their own violence and criminalize the violence of individuals”?
Removed by mod
i do not want you to rewrite it in shorter form, i want you to explain with more words what you are trying to get at.
Again, what confuses you?
“All the other kids do it too mom!”
Every society has rules. Anarchists advocate for rules.
I’ve yet to meet two anarchists who agree on what an ‘anarchy’ system would actually look like.
ive met plenty.
I could probably count on one hand the number of anarchists I know that can agree on the fuck it is.
And iv met a lot of them.
i would need at least two hands, and i havent met that many yet
Part of the point is not deciding on the end before you get there, only the direction, so everyone can have a say.
If you want to meet anarchists that agreed on how to organize, you have to meet organized anarchists
Here’s my controversial opinion. Using phrases like ‘anarchy’ or ‘socialism’ is a complete waste of time if you’re interested in making any kind of change.
Look at the campaigns of Mamdani and AOC. They talked much more about actual issues and laws than they talked about utopian plans for the future.
If you say you’re a ‘socialist’ you give the MAGat ammunition. “Well, wasn’t Hitler a Socialist?”
If you say ‘tax the rich’ you avoid that.
You can spend time getting people elected, or you can spend time arguing about things that you can’t control.
I kind of agree; actions matters, world shall support. However, actions of many have to be coordinated to aime the same goal. And to do so, we shall be clear of the ideal we want. Hitler do not want to abolish capitalism, but you could have a fascist state that tax the rich. Without upper hand, confusions is counter productive
what’s ur fav boot flavour, you seemingly enjoy licking the dirt off them
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
the projection is crazy, you are definitely defending a system that only benefits billionaires btw, go touch some grass
Either that guy has edited all his posts by the time iv seen this. Or your fucking unhinged in the head. Cause if this is unedited the actual fuck is wrong with you.
Removed by mod