"negative peace "

toxic positivity/ negative peace aside, I would imagine that not being represented within the established political hegemony could foster some negative emotional response.

cringe and/or lame

who were they doing it for, an-crap?

antiwork no longer means the abolition of the oppressive relationship with the capital owning class in which we sell our labor as a commodity.

it’s been completely co-opted as a place for milquetoast reform (capitalism will work if we put the right people in charge and call it socialism), and low-effort outrage-porn.

cringe

imagine a society not dependent on individual charity (with wealth expropriated from the working class) for improving material wellbeing.

does a ‘nice’ king justify monarchy?

no. power centralized in the beaurocratic state apparatus is also oppressive. electoral politics are a sham, and democracy is impotent when the capital owning class can simply buy influence.

if 9 people vote to kill the 10th, is that just?

itt: those in the priveledged position to rely on the state for defense of self and community would rob others of the ability to enforce their bodily autonomy and community defense.

‘only the [fascist] cops should be armed’ brain worms,

enforcing the capital owning class’ monopoly of violence (against ourselves),

a negative peace at the expense of justice.

you know-- bootlickers.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralism

the practice you are claiming as essential to communism is just the result of authoritarians and self-proclaimed vanguardists placing party above people in a self-perpetuating class-based heirarchy antithetical to communism (see: Marxist/leninism under Stalin)

“…frustrated at Britain’s attempts to help Ireland during the Irish famine…”

lol. was this written by an English aristocrat?

reactionary recuperation of revolutionary aesthetic-- shallow, reductive simulacrum of class analysis, stripped of systemic critique, intersectionality, and radical solidarity.

conservative pandering. lame af.

this is news?

we don’t need to acknowledge or address the efforts of those acting in bad-faith to delegitmize egalitarian leftist philosophy.

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. Jean-Paul Sartre”

but have you considered putting the right smart guy in charge?

lhd suggests otherwise, yank.

je suis l’etat-man

tongue-ass national forest😻

I love old-school chainswords

how? abolish the standing beaurocratic heirarchy which perpetuates and expends its own power and the interest of the ruling class by inflicting violence on the working class. what that looks like depends on how the people who make up a community choose to govern themselves.

realistically I don’t expect a revolution of the proletariat to take place, so I promote the institution of robust mutual aid networks, radical solidarity (organized labor, intersectional liberatory philosophy), and resilient autonomous communities, to compete with the prevailing system of power.

attempts at anarchist-adjacent organizing have existed, and continue to in some communities, though of course execution varies, as does identity.

the USSR was not an attempt towards a stateless society, being a state-capitalist imperialist kleptocracy.