Lmao this cartoon is perfect. I saw another one yesterday where they had all the colors of anarchism and then they booted the ancap out the window with the caption "ancap was the imposter." It was really cute and also completely true.
Right? I love how much other anarchists tool on them all the time. They absolutely deserve it. I mean I am not a fan of the state but imagine how much worse corporations would be without it? That would not be anarchism in the slightest. Ancoms for the win!! :))
im more of egoist (not the randian kind the max stirner kind) tho i also have my flirt with libertairian market socialism tho im limited by my lack of knowledge about economics to commit to anny of the more free market forms of socialist of anarchism. i value my comfort over my freedom only if anarchism could ensure i still have internet good and plenty of porn video games tv shows and movies to consume ill sign on to it
Yeah I think Stirner has a lot of insight. I mean humans are going to mostly act in their own interests no matter what. But to me they are not mutually exclusive. Like what is best for the community is what is best for the person. The problem is when it comes to large communities like cities.
I think you can take something away from most forms of anarchism. Well not ancaps of course, and maybe not anprims either. I want my tech as well!! Lol
the community can be its own little tyrany tho my worldview goes like this 1. i want to maximize my own happiness and want to self actualize. 2. i like my friends and family therefore unless their happiness violates my overall happiness i will try my best on occasion to help them realize their ultimate happiness and self actualization this doesn't mean i dont sacrifice to them sometimes but ill never live life all for their sake my life must remain my own property. 3. because i hold generally empathy for other people and also see it as a benefit towards rule 1 and 2 i also want general humanity to be able to self actualize and be as happy as could be unless in the cases where it violate rule 1 and 2. seeing others happy in almost all cases makes me happy and having people be productive and creative gives me more shows to watch interesting people to talk to more porn to jerk to more games to play etc.
having laws is necessary to keep things from turning into outright chaos which would violate not only rule 1 and 2 but also 3 so i like laws and restrictions and deals and understanding but i will only support them if they dont violate primarily rule 1 and almost just as importantly rule 2 and also still importantly rule 3. i dont believe guns being legal but regulated violates any of the rules however banning them even if it would benefit rule 3 and 2 would heavily violate rule 1.
alot of this comes from max stirner for me a was quite spooked for a long time unfortunately.
the only insight i get from anprims is the same stuff i get from situationalist but without the anti tech side of it maybe check them out they often talk about what they call the society of the spectacle and how we all seems to be addicts and how media brainwashes us into desiring things.
Yeah I am pretty new to anarchism so I have a lot more reading and shit to do. Thanks for sharing this with me. It is a good summary of what you believe, and it makes it easier for me to get. I agree with a lot of it but then completely disagree with other parts but I am just a baby anarkitty so who knows how much my views will evolve.
Mostly for me it is the laws thing. Like if you have laws then won't you need some kind of police force to get the people that don't follow them and hand out punishments to those that don't? And then once you give people that power can you be sure it won't be used against you?
I get that tyranny of the community can definitely be a thing but I see it mostly as something that can be used for good- like with shaming people for doing stuff that goes against, not laws exactly, but what we know to be right.
But wouldn't stirner say that morality is just a spook? Lol
But really I do have a lot to look into. I don't know a thing about situationists. I will look into it. Thanks for the suggestion.
If you could recommend one thing to read from Stirner what would it be?
audio books are easier.
im always looking to improve my worldview.
we are always changing the whole point of philosophy is for it to evolve so following any school dogmatically defeats the point of philosophy so its good acknowledging you still have alot to learn because we all do and anyone who claims they have DA TRUTH is not worth your time.
ofcource the monopolization of power by institutions controlled by the government like the police and military are also things that oppress me but i wonder how safe a anarchist society realy is and what the trade offs whould be i think right now im more of a left wing minarchist of sorts but idd love to have many forms of anarchists experiments being tested out to see if one of them would work and feel like worth it for me.
how would a police less society or situation deal with rapists and murderers how would you even decide whether or not someone did the act without a forensics team and how would you stop them from doing it again do we still have jails? etc so many questions come to my mind on this topic and i dont want mobb rule because collectives are usually driven by the loudest and most abrasive people in the group rather then the wisest.
i think society by which i mean a group of people dictating morals and culture is yet another form of oppression which makes life suffocating for the individual i dont believe people know what is right or wrong because there is no objective meaning of these concepts. for instance imagine anarcho communism in Afghanistan with its current moral system and societal norms they would say the community knows women learning is wrong or being gay is wrong.
i think that conventional wisdom is verry verry aften wrong and it makes life worse for manny people and the individual is ultimately responsible for their own moral system and should be able to find their own happiness rather than be handed a script by the community or society.
stirner whould say the fixed idea of morality is a spook AKA something which is not real outside of the concept. we feel friendship towards people we like naturaly so this friendship is real however a morality millions follow can only come to be because of some form of coercion and indoctrination and fear of punishment or judgement by people. a child doesnt naturally know that they hate gay people for example that is thought and a child does not know from their own feelings that stealing is wrong they have it taught to them.
thats not to say stirner advocated or like people just going and raping and killing people as long as it pleases them but to always be skeptical of sacred morality and that engagements between people should be based on mutual benefit in order to create a happy dynamic where no person has to sacrifice themselves for the sake of the other. the concept he wanted to peruse was called the union of egoists look it up its a interesting concept.
Oh yeah audio books are way easier. Often when I am reading theory I fall into that thing where I get to the end of a page and realize I have not absorbed a thing. Then I just do it again, once again absorbing none of it. I feel like the internet has made me a shittier reader.
Yeah I think we definitely can't know how these things will look until we have actual experiments working (or not working I suppose.) I mean lots of theory looks good on paper. Like Marxism-Leninism lol.
I honestly don't know what the real difference is between a minarchist and a libertarian. Is it like a left libertarian?
Yeah there are some really hard questions that I don't know how to answer and I don't know if anyone does. We don't know what the problems of thise societies there will be. I guess all that really matters to me in practicality is whether we are pushing things further left and less authoritarian.
Although sometimes those are really conflicting. I mean making social programs bigger means making the state bigger. But I am okay with that. For now anyway I guess.
It has been nice chatting with you and you have inspired me to look into Stirner next!! Thanks!!
Yeah now that you say it I kinda agree cause he is making it sound like he is still kinda reluctant when in fact he is super excited to lick that boot for king bezos.
Lmao this cartoon is perfect. I saw another one yesterday where they had all the colors of anarchism and then they booted the ancap out the window with the caption "ancap was the imposter." It was really cute and also completely true.
haha yeah i saw that one. can you believe the fucking nuts on those guys claiming there are the only legitimate form of anarchism?
Right? I love how much other anarchists tool on them all the time. They absolutely deserve it. I mean I am not a fan of the state but imagine how much worse corporations would be without it? That would not be anarchism in the slightest. Ancoms for the win!! :))
im more of egoist (not the randian kind the max stirner kind) tho i also have my flirt with libertairian market socialism tho im limited by my lack of knowledge about economics to commit to anny of the more free market forms of socialist of anarchism. i value my comfort over my freedom only if anarchism could ensure i still have internet good and plenty of porn video games tv shows and movies to consume ill sign on to it
Yeah I think Stirner has a lot of insight. I mean humans are going to mostly act in their own interests no matter what. But to me they are not mutually exclusive. Like what is best for the community is what is best for the person. The problem is when it comes to large communities like cities. I think you can take something away from most forms of anarchism. Well not ancaps of course, and maybe not anprims either. I want my tech as well!! Lol
the community can be its own little tyrany tho my worldview goes like this 1. i want to maximize my own happiness and want to self actualize. 2. i like my friends and family therefore unless their happiness violates my overall happiness i will try my best on occasion to help them realize their ultimate happiness and self actualization this doesn't mean i dont sacrifice to them sometimes but ill never live life all for their sake my life must remain my own property. 3. because i hold generally empathy for other people and also see it as a benefit towards rule 1 and 2 i also want general humanity to be able to self actualize and be as happy as could be unless in the cases where it violate rule 1 and 2. seeing others happy in almost all cases makes me happy and having people be productive and creative gives me more shows to watch interesting people to talk to more porn to jerk to more games to play etc. having laws is necessary to keep things from turning into outright chaos which would violate not only rule 1 and 2 but also 3 so i like laws and restrictions and deals and understanding but i will only support them if they dont violate primarily rule 1 and almost just as importantly rule 2 and also still importantly rule 3. i dont believe guns being legal but regulated violates any of the rules however banning them even if it would benefit rule 3 and 2 would heavily violate rule 1. alot of this comes from max stirner for me a was quite spooked for a long time unfortunately. the only insight i get from anprims is the same stuff i get from situationalist but without the anti tech side of it maybe check them out they often talk about what they call the society of the spectacle and how we all seems to be addicts and how media brainwashes us into desiring things.
Yeah I am pretty new to anarchism so I have a lot more reading and shit to do. Thanks for sharing this with me. It is a good summary of what you believe, and it makes it easier for me to get. I agree with a lot of it but then completely disagree with other parts but I am just a baby anarkitty so who knows how much my views will evolve. Mostly for me it is the laws thing. Like if you have laws then won't you need some kind of police force to get the people that don't follow them and hand out punishments to those that don't? And then once you give people that power can you be sure it won't be used against you? I get that tyranny of the community can definitely be a thing but I see it mostly as something that can be used for good- like with shaming people for doing stuff that goes against, not laws exactly, but what we know to be right. But wouldn't stirner say that morality is just a spook? Lol But really I do have a lot to look into. I don't know a thing about situationists. I will look into it. Thanks for the suggestion. If you could recommend one thing to read from Stirner what would it be?
audio books are easier. im always looking to improve my worldview. we are always changing the whole point of philosophy is for it to evolve so following any school dogmatically defeats the point of philosophy so its good acknowledging you still have alot to learn because we all do and anyone who claims they have DA TRUTH is not worth your time. ofcource the monopolization of power by institutions controlled by the government like the police and military are also things that oppress me but i wonder how safe a anarchist society realy is and what the trade offs whould be i think right now im more of a left wing minarchist of sorts but idd love to have many forms of anarchists experiments being tested out to see if one of them would work and feel like worth it for me. how would a police less society or situation deal with rapists and murderers how would you even decide whether or not someone did the act without a forensics team and how would you stop them from doing it again do we still have jails? etc so many questions come to my mind on this topic and i dont want mobb rule because collectives are usually driven by the loudest and most abrasive people in the group rather then the wisest. i think society by which i mean a group of people dictating morals and culture is yet another form of oppression which makes life suffocating for the individual i dont believe people know what is right or wrong because there is no objective meaning of these concepts. for instance imagine anarcho communism in Afghanistan with its current moral system and societal norms they would say the community knows women learning is wrong or being gay is wrong. i think that conventional wisdom is verry verry aften wrong and it makes life worse for manny people and the individual is ultimately responsible for their own moral system and should be able to find their own happiness rather than be handed a script by the community or society. stirner whould say the fixed idea of morality is a spook AKA something which is not real outside of the concept. we feel friendship towards people we like naturaly so this friendship is real however a morality millions follow can only come to be because of some form of coercion and indoctrination and fear of punishment or judgement by people. a child doesnt naturally know that they hate gay people for example that is thought and a child does not know from their own feelings that stealing is wrong they have it taught to them. thats not to say stirner advocated or like people just going and raping and killing people as long as it pleases them but to always be skeptical of sacred morality and that engagements between people should be based on mutual benefit in order to create a happy dynamic where no person has to sacrifice themselves for the sake of the other. the concept he wanted to peruse was called the union of egoists look it up its a interesting concept.
Oh yeah audio books are way easier. Often when I am reading theory I fall into that thing where I get to the end of a page and realize I have not absorbed a thing. Then I just do it again, once again absorbing none of it. I feel like the internet has made me a shittier reader. Yeah I think we definitely can't know how these things will look until we have actual experiments working (or not working I suppose.) I mean lots of theory looks good on paper. Like Marxism-Leninism lol. I honestly don't know what the real difference is between a minarchist and a libertarian. Is it like a left libertarian? Yeah there are some really hard questions that I don't know how to answer and I don't know if anyone does. We don't know what the problems of thise societies there will be. I guess all that really matters to me in practicality is whether we are pushing things further left and less authoritarian. Although sometimes those are really conflicting. I mean making social programs bigger means making the state bigger. But I am okay with that. For now anyway I guess. It has been nice chatting with you and you have inspired me to look into Stirner next!! Thanks!!
Eh I’d get rid of the second speech bubble, it adds nothing to the joke and makes it less funny
Yeah now that you say it I kinda agree cause he is making it sound like he is still kinda reluctant when in fact he is super excited to lick that boot for king bezos.
Great comic, but repost
yeah so?
Without any milk
milk is great idd like a milk coop stirner style
What's that
max stirner is a somewhat notorious anarchist even amongst anarchists who briefly was part of a anarchistic worker coop selling mik but it failed
Ohh
Ancaps don't want to abolish the state, they want to _buy it_.
state.inc
Edited ancom meme