|
Mantis42 posted:yea it sucks how many people get libelled these days, hope he is able to move past this trauma lol no I mean another one for him
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 07:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 15:53 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've been trying to follow this dumb argument: you're never allowed to wield violence unless you're the underdog, once you get into power and continue to wield it, you guessed it, that's authoritarianism baby
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 07:28
|
|
|
I dunno where the talking point that the slaves "emancipated themselves" even came from, because it's not true at all. The south had an elaborate and militarized security system in which its militias were constantly mobilized to catch runaway slaves and immediately put down slave rebellions with extreme prejudice. They maintained this security regime even to the detriment of the Confederacy. The abolition of slavery came at the tip of Union bayonets and was enforced by the occupation. Emancipation just wouldn't have been possible without it. I get why this poo poo comes up. There's a lot of revisionist attitudes that minimize the slave struggle and blame them for their own bondage, since they didn't "do enough." But I still don't see how you can believe it. I suppose you could do some rhetorical aikido and say that slaves emancipated themselves through black union soldiers, but there are no black men under arms if the Union doesn't commit to war on the Confederacy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 08:19
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I dunno where the talking point that the slaves "emancipated themselves" even came from, because it's not true at all. The south had an elaborate and militarized security system in which its militias were constantly mobilized to catch runaway slaves and immediately put down slave rebellions with extreme prejudice. They maintained this security regime even to the detriment of the Confederacy. The abolition of slavery came at the tip of Union bayonets and was enforced by the occupation. Emancipation just wouldn't have been possible without it. The idea was one my leftist African American history teacher repeated. Essentially the idea is that slaves forced the issue of slavery by fleeing to union lines during the civil war and demanding to fight despite Lincoln's original intent simply being the reincorporation of the union. It fits neatly into the ideological construction of the Civil War as a "second American Revolution."
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 09:01
|
|
|
there's a grain of truth in that continued resistance of blacks and abolitionists forced the south to go to such extreme measures that even the moderate compromisers couldn't appease them hard enough to keep them from seceeding, if you want to spin it that way
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 09:10
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've been trying to follow this dumb argument: Reminds me of Libertarians talking about forced desegregation and the Civil Rights Act. If they ever confess that an organized and disciplined force prevailing over the common sentiment resulted in more human rights, the thin edge of the wedge has gotten in and could pry the whole ideology apart. Libertarians will get out of this by arguing that government overreach is worse than racism (morally misguided but internally consistent). Anarchists are nominally part of the left, or at least trying to win over liberals and socialists, so that's not an option. Instead "authoritarian" is defined as whoever is successfully imposing their will on the public, which is very close to the secret true meaning of anarchism: Ross DaouThot posted:you're never allowed to wield violence unless you're the underdog, once you get into power and continue to wield it, you guessed it, that's authoritarianism baby Anarchism is failure. All sorts of lovely personal misconduct and over-the-top paranoid threats can be enjoyed guilt free if you have already forbidden yourself from really doing anything about it. This gets them off the hook ethically at the expense of revealing them to be completely loving useless while the world burns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 09:15
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:The idea was one my leftist African American history teacher repeated. Essentially the idea is that slaves forced the issue of slavery by fleeing to union lines during the civil war and demanding to fight despite Lincoln's original intent simply being the reincorporation of the union. It fits neatly into the ideological construction of the Civil War as a "second American Revolution." They still resisted letting blacks serve in the army both because it was illegal and because they were afraid of border states seceding. It wasn't until Antietam made Lincoln feel confident enough that they could keep the border states in line to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, that black recruitment really took off. The one still follows from the other. The problem with "slaves emancipated themselves" rhetoric, in the way it's used ITT - is that it treats slaves as having a unique agency that didn't depend on the context of a civil war upending the power of the slaveocracy and creating the opportunity for them to take up arms. These conditions feed into each other, and at the end of the day emancipation still doesn't get enforced without the authoritarianism of a military occupation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 09:23
|
|
|
I've always thought about it as a "prime mover" incident where you had slaves risking themselves by fleeing to Fort Monroe to the point where Butler considers returning them to slaveholders - as the Union had done previously - as materially aiding the enemy, which gets you to the contraband system, which eventually means that emancipation in some form has to be pursued. If Garibaldi's terms for commanding the Union armies had been agreed to, I could see him pursuing guerilla tactics where slaves were surreptitiously armed and encouraged to do coordinated uprisings on plantations, at which point "the slaves freed themselves" would be literally true rather than just shorthand for explaining the contraband system. But in this context it seems like anarchists aren't comfortable with the fact that their ideology precludes things like emancipation so they have to twist themselves in knots and use "the slaves freed themselves" to pretend that it was spontaneous insurrection by slaves that decided the issue rather than a mass "authoritarian" bloodletting
MeatwadIsGod has issued a correction as of 09:42 on Aug 31, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 09:38
|
|
|
Yeah, they are really laser focused on the fetishization of spontaneity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 10:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/OcculticAcid/status/1432488633047658499?s=19 And yet... Ross DaouThot posted:you're never allowed to wield violence unless you're the underdog, once you get into power and continue to wield it, you guessed it, that's authoritarianism baby Yeah this seems to be the core of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 12:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Tsunderedante/status/1432442433166528520
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 14:24
|
|
|
just thinking about bifo… was autonomism really a Marxist movement? self-organized labor and individual actions?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 14:35
|
|
|
We've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a pandemic, when we should've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a nuclear meltdown.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 15:41
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:We've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a pandemic, when we should've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a nuclear meltdown. Considering the responses itt, I would imagine not well OP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
MeatwadIsGod posted:I've always thought about it as a "prime mover" incident where you had slaves risking themselves by fleeing to Fort Monroe to the point where Butler considers returning them to slaveholders - as the Union had done previously - as materially aiding the enemy, which gets you to the contraband system, which eventually means that emancipation in some form has to be pursued. If Garibaldi's terms for commanding the Union armies had been agreed to, I could see him pursuing guerilla tactics where slaves were surreptitiously armed and encouraged to do coordinated uprisings on plantations, at which point "the slaves freed themselves" would be literally true rather than just shorthand for explaining the contraband system. But in this context it seems like anarchists aren't comfortable with the fact that their ideology precludes things like emancipation so they have to twist themselves in knots and use "the slaves freed themselves" to pretend that it was spontaneous insurrection by slaves that decided the issue rather than a mass "authoritarian" bloodletting I think a big problem with people looking back is that so many keep the viewpoints they developed 170 years later. At the time of the civil war and its leadup, slaves were considered property. Any ideology that venerates or gives special status to property rights would've been in a massive internal war among its followers at best and basically completely unwilling or unable to actually do anything. When you hear liberals or libertarians proudly declare they would've been on the right side of things, just look at where liberals and libertarians were back then. Maybe they're right, but the odds are something like 4 in 5 that they'd be unhappy both with the status quo and with the notion that something should be done. I mean come on, is there any revolution against capitalism that proved successful that anybody but Communists have actually supported, even rhetorically? Pener Kropoopkin posted:We've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a pandemic, when we should've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a nuclear meltdown. They never would've gotten far enough to have one lol, like "how does an anarchist society build renewables that can produce on a scale above sub-household outputs" is the current issue, building a nuclear plant is out of the question
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 16:01
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've been trying to follow this dumb argument: I admit I have a pedantic dipshit sympathy for this part Those two words do mean distinct, often related, things 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fibDNwF8bjs
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 16:13
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:We've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a pandemic, when we should've been asking how an anarchist society would contain a nuclear meltdown. As with all these questions the answer is "Better than the loving Tankie Leninists!" with no further explanation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 16:20
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:I think a big problem with people looking back is that so many keep the viewpoints they developed 170 years later. At the time of the civil war and its leadup, slaves were considered property. Any ideology that venerates or gives special status to property rights would've been in a massive internal war among its followers at best and basically completely unwilling or unable to actually do anything. When you hear liberals or libertarians proudly declare they would've been on the right side of things, just look at where liberals and libertarians were back then. Maybe they're right, but the odds are something like 4 in 5 that they'd be unhappy both with the status quo and with the notion that something should be done. This intellectual laziness of transporting one's currently held beliefs into a totally different time, place, social order, etc. is a big part of what makes anarchists anarchists in the first place. On some level I sympathize with it because it's difficult to get outside your own chauvinism without studying the world outside of where you live, history, etc. but for basically any Communist-curious people I know IRL the push I give is trying to get them to understand the daily life and attitudes of, say, a Russian soldier in 1917 or a guajiro in the pre-revolutionary Cuban countryside. Imagine what your conceptions of, like, "rights" or "liberty" or whatever would be given the predominant conventions of your time and place, your almost guaranteed status as illiterate or semi-literate. Then imagine how your conception of yourself as an individual and all your relations to the state would change radically through the development of socialism in your country. Even trying to put yourself in the shoes of these people is incredibly difficult without extensive study of their time and place both pre and post-revolution. But if you're willing to attempt that, it makes all the grandstanding about "how I would have done x" completely ridiculous
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 16:22
|
|
|
iirc something like a quarter of the south's slave population just walked off if not took up arms as the civil war got into gear. i still need to read the appropriate chapter of dubois for details but that's probably what people are referring to (and can't really be dissociated from the union armies rolling in at the same time)
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NotComradeSnake/status/1432742641104347136 Not anarchist, but lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 16:49
|
|
|
get her rear end, the rock!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 17:48
|
|
|
in matter of boots, refer to the bootlicker
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
What's the utility in correctly recognizing the science if you're incapable of actually using that to protect or help people
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:What's the utility in correctly recognizing the science if you're incapable of actually using that to protect or help people the moral purity and inner serenity one can normally only attain by not pulling the lever in the trolly problem
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:in matter of boots, refer to the bootlicker
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
Tiler Kiwi posted:the moral purity and inner serenity one can normally only attain by not pulling the lever in the trolly problem that trolley is full of people, and they have a right to get to their destinations by the route they chose and violation of this right is a greater crime than any amount of people crushed by the trolley as I can only assume they also wanted to be crushed by the trolley if they were in front of it
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
who pulls the lever for the lever pullers
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:in matter of boots, refer to the bootlicker
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:17
|
|
|
the boots that the people who defeated Nazis wore were made of fake leather, would love to have seen that level of dedication to our animal comrades from the anarchists at the time
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:23
|
|
|
the nazi's won tho
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:40
|
|
|
pnac attack posted:the nazi's won tho not in Soviet held territory they didn't
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 19:57
|
|
|
Beating the Nazis was done by black hearted authoritarians and so it would be better to let them control all of europe than to compromise the purity of anarchist thought.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1433295789716086787 Max here is trying to position Chomsky's answer as bad just because of the basic principle of "unvaccinated people should be isolated from society" but I listened to the clip and the more... mockable aspect of his response is that Chomsky here is saying that isolating them from society should be the convention, but he has no answer about how you would enforce such a thing presumably because, per anarchism... you couldn't???
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 07:03
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:in matter of boots, refer to the bootlicker hahahahah
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 08:30
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1433295789716086787
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 16:02
|
|
|
Relying on private organizations to do your enforcement isn't anarchy, it's libertarianism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 16:32
|
|
|
eSporks posted:You are seeing this, with things like concerts and other businesses requiring vaccine proof. Its the same enforcement we used for masks. You could argue whether it works or not, but thats ultimate how you isolate people. Anarchism is when the market enforces quarantine
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 15:53 |
|
|
Sure, but I'd argue its the market responding on a different axis than normal market pressures. Its not the market or business influencing mask wearing with lower/higher costs or economic pressure. Its businesses excluding people from society based on social pressure. These are "public" events that excluding members of the "public" based on social pressure. It jsut so happens that all "public" events take place int he context of a business because thats the world we live in. If your society is fundamentally a market, then any societal solution will involve the market to a degree. If I refuse to make a cake for a gay wedding, is that a market force or a social force? Enforcement is still going to come from a state power that says businesses can discriminate based on vaccine status. eSporks has issued a correction as of 00:21 on Sep 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 23:44
|
|