cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/54566460
Books, pamphlets, manifestos, you name it/whatever. Please just leave out terminally online "bread"tubers, thank you.
Ideally from a few reputable Anarchist to get a better picture. The literature doesn't have to be exclusively about authority, but should mention it in relative detail.
Edit: Since I rightfully got called out on the following sentence in another thread as being demeaning of online educators work
Please just leave out terminally online "bread"tubers, thank you.
I should maybe clarify that I meant people like Contrapoints who have delightfully little to do with any kind of leftistm, let alone Anarchism
10 Comments
onoira@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 345d
it's breadtube, but Andrewism is still the first online source i've found to define 'authority' the way i and meatspace comrades have used it:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/andrewism-how-anarchy-works#toc2 (~5 minutes to read)
he references Bakunin, with some generative critique.
::: spoiler full citations
alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 345d
Will give this a read too, thanks.
Also I meant "no 'bread'tube" in the sense of: I don't want to hear Contrapoints (or Philosophy Tube as well unfortunately 😔) or any other masquerading liberals opinion on this and am not interested in watching a video essay.
(See post edit)
I'll gladly read this piece by Andrewism :)
TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 345d
I'm also curious about this, because the definition that tankies use is surely not right, but I don't have receipts
Five@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 345d
JudgeSabo has decent receipts. Since Anarchism101 is unmoderated, I've posted it in AnarchismVsMarxism.
BlastboomStrice@mander.xyz · 4 pts · 344d
The an anarchist faq has a section for it, Section B.1:
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 343d
While it's generally ok to study the anarchist perspective on any topic, I would caution against getting caught up in "definitionalism" and related absolutisms. Language is vague. There are no fixed definitions or meanings. There are no magic words. It can be counter-productive to insist on certain definitions or absolutist slogans. It's more about understanding your audience and their definitions, then building bridges and establishing clear communication based on mutual understanding.
alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -2 pts · 343d
My specific goal with this was to understand the mainstream anarchist/ancom definition of a central point of anarchist thought.
I would very much disagree that definitions are not important (but would differentiate between clear definition and semantic arguing).
Like in Marxism how people define socialism can be a categorically opposed group of people.
Without definitions, words have no meaning and theory becomes useless. And without revolutionary theory there cannot lasting revolutionary praxis!
TL;DR: We should be clear about our goals and our enemies. Since I wanted to genuinely understand a crucial part of anarchist thought, I very much am interested in definitions.
Edit: Political economy is a science (even if a "soft"/social one) and the scientific method of analysis requires clear terms.
Of course we are also talking about Philosophy here, but even there, useful discussion cannot be had without consensus of basic definitions.
n0p1lls@feddit.online · -1 pts · 344d
Five@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 344d
Ziq should be more famous for the history of toxic behavior they've displayed in every anarchist space they've participated in, including in their role as the ruler of Raddle․me. Their use of sockpuppets to manipulate and bully has discredited and disgraced Raddle․me and should be the primary reason for their notoriety. Any notoriety as a source of anarchist theory is due to their own tireless self-promotion rather than the strength of their ideas. Their writing is intentionally obtuse, relying on idiosyncratic re-definition of words to create clickbait titles. They make poorly supported claims that are either wrong or communicated more clearly by better people.
When I encounter someone sincerely recommending their writing, I suspect more sockpuppetry.
n0p1lls@feddit.online · 4 pts · 344d
jaijai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 315d
and thats just their background on raddle. they also have a decade long history of doing similar things in anarchist subs on reddit. def don't fall for the innocence act.
ChanceHappening@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 316d
it's depressing how quickly you fell in line with the smear campaign against me