☭ Blursty ☭

Is that not a blatant admission of selling out?

If he’s “sold out” he’d give a far less “gun to my head” answer. It’s obvious he’s saying that the decision was not his. Who do you think he’s sold out to exactly? Can you elaborate on the conspiracy theory?

Sir, you came in here blustering about false premises and offered nothing bu walls of empty text about your fantasies. You’re shadowboxing with your own notions and have no coherent response to anything I wrote. You’re a waste of everyone’s time here.

You do know that this is by far false,

I didn’t know that no. Looking forward to hearing an argument against it.

So what good is it to base some conclusion on a false premise?

I think it’s a terrible idea to base a conclusion on a false premise. I’d advise against it. I’m still waiting to hear a counterargument for this simple truth.

Do you think when Marx was spending time with Kropotkin discussing, playing chess, it was because Kropotkin was defending the freedom to exploit?

People play games for fun. This is what I would imagine the reason for them playing was.

Go read the consititutions of CNT, of FAI, the Italian Federation, and see whether there is a clear position against ANY exploitation of humans by humans.

I very much doubt if they’d state it openly. It’s a simple and obvious end result of “freedom maximalism”.

… The more anarchists try to organize the fewer stay with it as they feel uncomfortable with the contradiction.

Presumably because the individuals’ freedom being inevitably curtailed by unavoidable realities contradicts their anarchist beliefs.

There is a trend (specially after 1950s cointelpro activities) of individualism that can extent all the way to anti-communism, otherwise called insurrectional individualist anarchists, who are also very much against any formal organization as being the source of oppression. Those fools write and write as individuals, appealing to individuals, and formulating individual beliefs that can never escape their lack of organization. Lack of a collective organ to promote their ideas keeps them well in the bottom of movement significance. They have never been able to achieve anything. But you can’t characterize 150y+ traditions by some neo-con trends of youth lifestylism.

I’m going to guess that this is some copypasta you just tried to shoe-horn in here. Honestly without your comment history I’d guess that this is chatGPT copy paste. Who is characterising anything “by some neo-con trends of youth lifestylism.”. What for that matter even is a neo-con trend of youth lifestylism?

How would you classify and explain the presence of IWW for two centuries? The presence of CNT in the 1930s Spain’s uprising against the invasion of Franco with US and German support?

As proven failures. What’s to explain?

If there is superiority of m-l over anarchism/libertarian-communism, there must be presented and analyzed on true premises not lies and characterizations empty of content.

If there’s to be any counterargument for what I stated, I’d like to hear it. All I’ve got is weird randomly generated paragraphs of nothingspeak.

For the anarchist freedom can not exist without equality, but equality is as political as it is economic. It would be hard to believe that people of “equal” presence in decision making would produce a system of exploitation or oppression, or any other form of inequality.

Hard to believe? Wait til you hear about Capitalism.

Systems of inequality exist because minorities serving individual interests form organizations to maintain inequality.

And such minorities are an inevitable product of systems designed for pander to individualism.

I’m still not sure if I’m talking to a robot.

I love this line:

The bourgeois will become an anarchist again after the proletarian revolution: he will once again become aware of the existence of a State; of the existence of laws foreign to his will, hostile to his interests, to his habits, to his freedom. He will realize that “State” is synonymous with “compulsion” because the workers’ State will take away the bourgeoisie’s freedom to exploit the proletariat, because the workers’ State will be the bulwark of a new mode of production which, as it develops, will destroy every trace of capitalist ownership and any possibility of its revival.

This is exactly the crux of the failure of ideological “Freedom Now” maximalism. That maximalist freedom they want includes the freedom to exploit and take away the freedom of others. The paradox that needs to be accepted and synthesised is that Freedom necessarily must be imposed at this stage.

Show me anywhere in the world that has open Nazi units serving in the military.

Show me anywhere in the world that openly celebrates Nazis as national holidays.

Show me anywhere in the world that renames streets, shopping malls, stadiums after Nazis.

Show me anywhere in the world that runs Nazi indoctrination camps for children.

I can show you all of these for Ukraine.

Over to you. Darling.

Ukraine has a serious Nazi problem. You’re going to have to grow up and learn to deal with the real world.