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".
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.
Imo there is a reasonable difference between copying a product of a huge (and exploitative) company and taking the effort of hobbyist and just sharing it in ways they didnt intend.
For me* its the same when I shoplift, I dont steal from the local self-owned shop, I steal from the big multibillion company.
Jewish people from all over the world have been and are currently actively organizing and fighting against zionism, occupation and genocide. They have nothing to ashamed of. Instead they are important in the struggle for liberation not just in Palestine but also worldwide.
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
Margaret seems to have stepped back a little from podcasts (as far as i can tell), but you can find older podcasts episodes where she hosted / participated here: https://channelzeronetwork.com/
I feel like many great anarchist communicators are (semi) anonymous and publish texts as / via collectives. thinking about individuals that publish their work, Peter Gelderloos comes to mind
If you are more flexible regarding the medium - so not just straight up texts - it gets easier to find anarchists with extensive libraries of their opinions, such as YouTubers like Andrewism, Anark and Zoe Baker or writers such as Margaret Killjoy
I have to admit that my examples are not that similar, but I know the person running https://paradox-a.de/ is pretty academic, but most of their texts are german.
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.
Folks in Minneapolis burned down a whole police station after throwing bricks. This is of course an extreme example but it should show the possibilities of how it could go instead.
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.
copy from a 4 year old reddit comment that seemed to contain some interesting breadcrumbs that might lead you to more uptodate information:
Yes. But there's not much publicly available. Just a food not bombs and I think a social space in Guangzhou. I think there is likely a larger underground of squats that are not really easy to find out about.
The Wuhan punks had a small bookstore/gathering space that was shut down in 2016 due to non-payment of rent.
Being a Nazi collaborator is not a contest or something you have to make a ranking. Either you are one or you are not.
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.
Thanks, this is what I was looking for. Kinda how the expectations and "rules" around this are.
Imo there is a reasonable difference between copying a product of a huge (and exploitative) company and taking the effort of hobbyist and just sharing it in ways they didnt intend.
For me* its the same when I shoplift, I dont steal from the local self-owned shop, I steal from the big multibillion company.
PTB I think this is a justified report.
Jewish people from all over the world have been and are currently actively organizing and fighting against zionism, occupation and genocide. They have nothing to ashamed of. Instead they are important in the struggle for liberation not just in Palestine but also worldwide.
Context because somehow it seems to hard for the user to actually link any relavent explaination. I
Important to note: Even the Buchenwald comitee themselves are not calling the words "to each his own" a dogwhistle when used in the english language.
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
Margaret seems to have stepped back a little from podcasts (as far as i can tell), but you can find older podcasts episodes where she hosted / participated here: https://channelzeronetwork.com/
Linking one I liked: Margaret and Casandra on "How To Get Started Prepping...Or Getting Prepared"
100k AFTER all your expenses.
I feel like many great anarchist communicators are (semi) anonymous and publish texts as / via collectives. thinking about individuals that publish their work, Peter Gelderloos comes to mind
If you are more flexible regarding the medium - so not just straight up texts - it gets easier to find anarchists with extensive libraries of their opinions, such as YouTubers like Andrewism, Anark and Zoe Baker or writers such as Margaret Killjoy
I have to admit that my examples are not that similar, but I know the person running https://paradox-a.de/ is pretty academic, but most of their texts are german.
Thank you for responding. While I don't agree I can see your reasoning and appreciate your approach of communicating it in a transparent way.
Everyone needs to do their part. That includes you and me. Dont wait for others to step up, show responsibility by leading by example.
How does this post even make sense in this community? literally written in the sidebar:
If only one man owns everything, then expropriation would be really fast in theory
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.
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.
I heard of it. Sounded really scary and awful. I do not get your point tho
Folks in Minneapolis burned down a whole police station after throwing bricks. This is of course an extreme example but it should show the possibilities of how it could go instead.
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.
So? I dont agree with him.
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.
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.
Things I mostly found on reddit: