bearboiblake

joined 9 months ago
[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 0 points 1 week ago

None of us are free until all of us are. If you're happy benefiting from slave labor, I don't have anything more to say to you.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

I'm an anarchist. I advocate for anarchism. I'm not a fan of China at all. But Capitalism is way worse than anything China is doing. Capitalism is why we have kids working in sweat shops, conflict minerals being mined in war-torn countries, colonialism, slavery, and fascism. World War 2 was directly caused by capitalism.

https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago

Thanks for the question, I'd be happy to expand a little bit - the basics of it go something like this: the more money you have, the easier it is to accumulate more money. Money can be used to purchase goods and services, including all sorts of propaganda. Over time, wealth will concentrate in fewer and fewer hands. This leads to progressively worse and worse inequality. This inequality is most harshly felt by the most vulnerable to begin with, but eventually it begins to impact more and more of the working class. As the working class begins to push back against the growing inequality, those in power are incentivized to shift the blame onto others, because they don't want to give up their wealth and power. The wealthy will use their institutional power, their control over media apparatus, etc. to push a narrative that the problems felt by the working classes are caused by [whoever]. They also push all sorts of propaganda to divide the working class into smaller and smaller sub-groups - if you've seen stories in the news about how Millenials/Boomers/GenZ are ruining X/Y/Z, that's an easy example of the ruling class sowing division among the working class. Eventually, as the inequality grows worse and worse, the poor suckers who bought into the ruling class's propaganda begin to demand more and more extreme solutions to their problems - which obviously aren't improving, because [whoever] isn't actually responsible for their problems, it's the ruling class.

Laws can't solve this problem, because lawmakers can be bought. Elections can't solve this problem either, because the problems are so deeply entrenched that even if we managed to elect leaders that truly do represent us, the ruling class have so much institutional power in other instruments of the state - the military, the police, the judiciary, the media, the education system, the civil service, the intelligence services (CIA, FBI, NSA, et al.) and so on - are controlled, directly or indirectly, by the ruling class. This is why we need a social revolution, we need to throw off the ruling class and never re-establish it. If there are rulers, then there will always be oppression.

I'd recommend taking a look at an anarchist FAQ for more information about the problems in society and how anarchism can solve them.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If we made an anarchist society and we all get wiped out by genocide, at least we would die as free men and women, fighting for our homes and our lives. In the present we die as slaves and give our lives to increase shareholder value.

People are so scared of uncertainty, and all of these "what if" questions are just thinly veiled fear and insecurity. I get it. But if we want to live in a better world, we need to find the courage to act.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 3 points 1 week ago

The inevitable outcome of classical liberalism is fascism. A free market means the accumulation of wealth into fewer and fewer hands becomes inevitable. Then liberalism dies and is replaced by corporatiam. Classical liberalism is propaganda for capitalism. They made you a slave and called it freedom. And you love it.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

There is no productive conversation to be had. I've stated my case and you've stated yours. I'm convinced I'm right, you're convinced that you're right. There's nothing I can do to change your mind. I'm not insulting you or whatever, it's just the reality of the situation. Your beliefs are built from your experiences and you believe that humans can't put aside greed to co-operate. It's sad that you believe that, but I'm unable to change it. Only you can do that, and I'm not seeing any interest, you just want what you currently believe to be correct, and to not have to change your world view. I understand that because I've been in the same place. I can only hope something I've said has taken root in your mind and will sprout some time in the future.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Again, humans are incredibly co-operative, but we've all been subject to brainwashing from childhood against our better natures. We can act against that brainwashing. It absolutely requires a social revolution - we need to be honest about our society and culture. If you think co-operation is delusional, I'd recommend learning a bit about paleolithic and neolithic human societies.

Anyways, I'm sure you won't change your mind, the brainwashing is real, I get it, it's tough. As long as you're anti-capitalist, that's fine with me, you'll get there.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Seems like your mind is made up! I think this is just going to be one of those "agree to disagree" situations. The answers to your objections can be found in the Anarchist FAQ, I'd recommend learning more about it before dismissing it!

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago (7 children)

You're missing a few major pieces of the puzzle here - why would you threaten me with a bat in the first place? Most crime is a result of inequal power structures to begin with. If all of our needs are met, why would we choose to be violent? Some crimes of passion may occur, but that's not likely to create any hierarchies.

If we have an anarchist society, then we have already been successful at dismantling power structures. Any attempts to establish new power structures can be dealt with in the same way - in fact, in a much easier way, since they won't have anywhere near as much pre-established power.

Revolution is not a single, one-off event. Anarchism requires permenent revolution, a commitment by the society to collectively prevent the formation of new power structures. It requires serious social changes that are likely to take at least a single generation, but probably longer.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 5 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with liberal values. If the rights of the individual and equality are important to you, then you should oppose capitalism, because it is responsible for creating the greatest inequality humanity has ever seen, and for creating the most oppressive regimes the world has ever seen. Fascism is capitalism taken to it's logical conclusion.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

There's a lot of questions in there, and I'm genuinely really sorry to say, there's way more than I can hope to address with the limited amount of time and energy I have, but I think you're imagining an "anarchist state" or something like that - that's still thinking with a non-anarchist mindset. There is no country to invade, there's an amorphous blob of land, which I suppose another nation could attempt to impose itself upon, but in that case, all the working class needs to do is overthrow the new would-be autocracy. Why would a standing military force be more effective than an informal, organized resistance, fighting for their own land? You're imagining pitched battles and the like, instead imagine trying to occupy land where there's not really any clear military targets, but everywhere you attempt to impose control, your soldiers end up getting shot, stabbed, or having molatov cocktails thrown on them/their vehicles. Militarism does not protecting the people who live in a country, they're a tool of the ruling class to fight other nations. This is just my opinion, though - ask ten anarchists, you'll probably get twenty answers. We believe in creating a better society through consensus, which makes it a little tricky for anarchists to talk about solutions to specific problems on an individual basis.

I'd recommend you check out the anarchist FAQ if you have more questions - https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

It goes beyond oversight, it needs to be a flat structure, where no one person has authority over any other person. It's not enough to create three groups, give them all power, and have them all watch over each-other, for example, because that would also inevitably lead to corruption. The only thing that can guarantee freedom, peace, justice, and equality for all requires the abolition of all power structures. We need anarchism.

view more: ‹ prev next ›