[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1745980317048.jpg (85.26 KB, 1600x1600, circle-A-symbol.jpg)

 

what do I think what do I read what do I do please help me become le based anarchist I am clinging onto any identity that makes me feel less like a fat loser

>>2248040
Stirner and Bakunin

you dont have to read anything or even know how to read or agree with any other existing anarchists thats the fun part no authority can define anarchism so each individual gets to have their own personal anarchy and no one can criticize you because you can just unsubscribe from people who who have icky ideas if someone points it out

nothing just be stupid and say dumb things

Why would you want an ideology to make you feel less like a fat loser, when you could have one which would make you not one. This is the true emancipatory power of authoritarian revolutionary ideologies.

don't read anything. reading is hierarchical you're literally letting someone exert authority over your opinions

>>2248071
that is rooted on anti social western mentality. Anti social behavior leads to the desibtegration if society. Who eoukd of thought.

>>2248040
>I am clinging onto any identity that makes me feel less like a fat loser
Becoming a Marxist ain't going to help with that either. Look at >>2248053 for instance.

With that being said, Zoe Baker is one of the few Anarchists who knows what she's talking about and gives good intros into Anarchism and what it stands for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8qamRewWg4&t=54s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPzAn5fo60k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syR0P-2uwp4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnxpfpXF_es~

Andrewism also gives a good breakdown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrTzjaXskUU&t=614s

Once you understand those- it's up to you to where you want to go from there and wether you want to delve deeper into these ideas.

My recommendation would be for Malatesta's Anarchy, and Peter Kropotkin's "are we good enough?"

start slow, and if you're still intrigued, it's up to you to continue reading.

>>2248128
Also should note, as someone who once was an anarchist- you're better off learning from a variety of practices, Communalism, Juche, Pan-Africanism, Leninism, Dem-Con etc. so that you can understand not only their arguments but also if they are applicable in the material conditions you find them in.

Surrendering to dogma either makes you resentful of people who should be your allies, and making allies with people who should be your enemies.

For the love of god, don't go the way of Haz or V.aush.

>>2248040
Anarchism is a concept that takes time to digest and develop your own vision of it. It cover social organization (direct democracy, socialism, free association, etc.) and even personal relationships (family, romance, etc.). Just beware, some anarchists, specially individualists or post left anarchists pretend to be the Master Anarchists who determine the True Principles of what anarchism is. Avoid these, and become a social anarchist. From there, build your own path.

Read Kropotkin, Rudolf Rocker, Chomsky, Bakunin, Bookchin, and ignore the modern anarchist pseudointellectuals

>>2248040
>what do I think what do I read what do I do please help me become le based anarchist
Get involved with stuff locally to you, participate in action.
Politics are what you do, not what you read and think.
>>/QTDDTOT/

>>2248040
Rudolf Rocker and Alexander Berkman, Leftcoms like Council Communists compliment anarchist thought nicely and bring it to a more 'scientific' understanding ala Marx without the Leninism

https://archive.org/details/worldfoodnotbomb00food_0

Food Not Bombs style organizing is very effective.

>>2248040
Whachugondu?

this was made slightly in jest because I'm still figuring everything out but I'm surprised everybody took the time to reply with genuine answers

thanks everybody

>>2248457
anarchists from 180 years ago are cool, but you should want to understand what's going on today although keep in mind picrel with these types of guys.

File: 1746036159541.jpeg (41.76 KB, 680x429, GpaSrYgbEAE1_qz.jpeg)

>>2248595
picrel

stop showering

File: 1747350723404.png (768.7 KB, 1913x2880, 1522270264176.png)

post-left is the only anarchy that makes sense.

File: 1747351392511.jpg (102.05 KB, 1200x1800, 61TEq9jtZlL.jpg)

>>2248040
I like Sartwell.

>In Against the State, Crispin Sartwell unleashes a quick and brutal rejection of the traditional arguments for state legitimacy. Sartwell considers the classics of Western political philosophy-Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hegel, Hume, Bentham, Rawls, and Habermas, among others-and argues that their positions are not only wrong but also embarrassingly bad. He separates the traditional pro-state arguments into three classes: social contract theories, utilitarian justifications, and justicial views, all while attacking both general strategies and particular formulations. Sartwell argues that the state rests on nothing but deadly force and its accompanying coercion, and that no one is under any obligation to obey the law merely because it is the law. He concludes by articulating a positive vision of an anarchist future, based on the "individualism" of such figures as Emerson and Thoreau. Against the State provides a rigorous and provocative foil to the classic texts, and also serves as a concise statement of the anarchist challenge.

>>2270608
He's also more in the American tradition. There's a whole American anarchist thing going back to the 19th century which is distinct from Bakunin and Kropotkin and those guys, and he has a funny way of shitting on authoritarian leftists. I'm not an anarchist but I like him.

File: 1747352769095.png (67.67 KB, 194x210, 1734234746063137.png)

supporting communism is unironically the best anarchist praxis because anarchism is what comes after communism and the true final stage of humanity

Food Not Bombs - Operator's Manual (2002)— indepth guide on starting a food not bombs chapter
https://archive.org/details/worldfoodnotbomb00food_0/page/2/mode/2up

Peter Kropotkin - The Conquest of Bread — the roots of mutual aid
https://files.libcom.org/files/Peter%20Kropotkin%20-%20The%20Conquest%20of%20Bread_0.pdf

Luxemburg Collective - Direct Action Handbook — clean, well-written how-to rebel guide
https://www.organizingforpower.org//wp-content/uploads/2009/03/da_handbook.pdf

Anonymous - Blockade, Occupy, Strike Back — taking escalation to the next rung, essential reading
https://www.sproutdistro.com/catalog/zines/direct-action/blockade-occupy-strike-back/

File: 1747375596065.png (642.72 KB, 867x876, image.png)

>>2248040
there is only one righteous path, that of God

>>2248136
>as someone who once was an anarchist
you still are, btw

>>2248040
Ignore all the people telling you to read dudes from 200 years ago.

If you want to *be* an anarchist, the best thing you can do is understand that the State is a historical form and not a natural institution that exists forever.

Find a mutual aid group near you.

>>2270594
what the fuck is a post-left anything

>>2271171
This poster has it right. Ignore all the people telling you to read, that's the easiest way to really become an anarchist.

You literally just need to label yourself one. That's it.

>>2248040
Analyze CHAZ and employ everything they did into your worldview

>>2271411
CHAZ actually existed at least unlike the fantasist US communist utopia that appeared in your dreams ultra

File: 1747421053530.png (2.35 MB, 1500x1000, The fire rises.png)

The upside and downside of anarchism is that there's no formal process of being one, save for the general desire to liberate humanity from oppression. Because of that anarchism usually overlaps with communism despite how much both groups might chafe at each other's presence. If you're wondering where to start though I'd strongly recommend Malatesta's "At The Cafe". It's a series of socratic dialogues about anarchism and communism that conveys in easy to understand terms the origins and nature of property as well as some decent counterarguments for apologists for capitalism and/or statism. Conquest of Bread and What is Property are good too, but a lot of core Marxist texts also tend to be shared by anarchists.

From there though? Well you can continue reading more modern theory, which can vary heavily in quality to say the least and on average looks more like avant garde slam poetry made into a manifesto than a serious political polemic, but sometimes that's part of the fun. But what's far more useful in the present day and age is to look at what anarchists, libertarian socialists, and similar such groups are doing in terms of tactics and strategy. Observe the Zapatistas, take note of the Greek anarchists, study the successes and failures of various protest tactics during those campus occupations in America. For that Crimethinc is a pretty decent resource, but the important thing is not to put your eggs in one basket regarding any aspect of anarchism and communism.

File: 1747423359037.gif (31.32 KB, 638x474, 1715011046248.gif)

>>2248040
What is it with middle-class losers and jumping ideologies and wearing them like pokemon skins

>>2271457
Personally I blame the proliferation of hoi4 alt history mods. Now having a wacky esoteric ideology cobbled together from multiple mutually exclusive influences is considered "gucci" as they say in Nippon. It's not enough to be a communist or an anarchist, no now you have to be a Technocratic Mayakovskyite or Anarcho-Jucheist with Elements of Harmony characteristics. Yes the ideological supermarket is best fit for looting but you dont loot the rotting food

>>2248596
I look like 2014 and say that stuff

>>2271457
Social media and hypernormalization. Midders (yes, the hard r this time) especially dislike having to actually read and do political research so they vaguely internalize the ramblings of internet strangers to make up for it. Hence the fact that all it takes is a thesaurus or an infographic to sway them.

>>2248040
Join reddit.

>how become anarchist

honestly op, the truth is there is no single anarchist theory. hell, there is no single theory even for a single flavor of anarchism. all you have is a community with strong sense of anti-capitalism but a very vague sense of organization and direction. its a very comforting political movement because you can never be wrong.

i wont judge you for wanting to radicalize towards anarchism since i myself used to be an anarchist, but after a combination seeing the flaws of the movement and reading marx, engels and lenin, i became a communist.

ill say this though, there is a website called "the anarchist library" where there is plenty of resources for all kinds of anarchism. knock yourself out, but this website is one of the reasons i left the anarchist movement, because i have never seen a catalog of such contradictory ideas in my life.

>>2271416
Even a day later I still can't find a way to respond to this BTFO. It's over.

First you should transition

>>2248128
Would you recommend anark?

>>2248053
Meds

>>2248128
Cannabis smokers are like " I wanna take the edge off" like whut the heell they don't want to have to think about getting cucked / cheated, the monotonous work cycle, cybersecurity paranoia and they want to have fun in their free time? That sounds awful, they probably want to rape and kill people and simply hide it under a disguising addiction habit regardless if they don't even get to smoke one joint because they don't want to break the law, its the thought of challenging the divine law of the people by the people that is chinese (eurasia, third world and the progressive eastern races) that shows they are actually western liberal addicts already addicted and can only be fixed by police action. Retarded degenerate druggies are holding back communism from destroying Israel and America! Mossad destabilizes China with THC and China is like this gigachad sober and alcoholic conservative and yet progressive society that will NOT murder fags while liberal westerners are ungrateful that disguising candidates for addiction are being punished by the people's police? What else are we gonna do if the people's police don't punish cannabis users, China will literally become degenerate! I had this one friend who smoked weed and he became a degenerate trans faggot, under internet communism I get to be as chauvinist as possible without getting booed and right now trans and fags are too popular to call them degenerate so its better to write that China tolerates them so they should be grateful, drugs are still taboo so its fine to call all drugs degenerate lumpen and no, I don't care what different drugs are, anything that you can have fun with is degenerate and you should go to jail for it except alcohol and tobacco because its the material conditions and the culture. Conservativism in society is like collectivism that's like communism while liberalism is like individualism like degenerate weed smoking prostitutes which should be arrested and killed on a whim like Catholic Communist Comrade Duterte did. The people's war on drugs is good and the war on drugs is good and based and communism / socialism, its good to kill people for having fun the wrong way because the wrong way is harmful because I say so and my sources which are absolute truth say they will destroy communism if they aren't killed because communism's fate depends on killing cannabis users and other drug users because they're like degenerate and bourgeois decadent and lumpen while the conservative and patriotic socialist nationalists are like the proletariat, the workers, a cannabis user is literally incapable of work and is probably a liberal CIA nazi fascist? This is all true by the way, unironically based and I'm 18 I say based a lot and play videogames and I'm in this group we live in the US (Lord Mao forgive us for being born in the imperial core) its called Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Maoist-Dengpilled Party of the Global South, we're like 3 people (AS OF NOW) and are a catholic communist Palestinian nationalist PFLP DFLP China anti-trot, anti-ultras, anti-ancom, anti-leftcom, anti-heresy discord server that's straight edge and based and the west is jew so if you want to join us too bad because like better to be a son of God than a dog of Odin. Nazbol gang gang anprim gang gang Ohio L Rizz L bozo cannabis users delulu cappin addicts

Remove your brain

>>2248053
>>2248062
>>2248071
>>2271935
>>2309008
At what point did this site become an ML circle jerk? There used to be a lot more ideological diversity here, and a much bigger willingness for people with differing ideologies to discuss them. Even just a few years ago, the MLs ITT would've said why anarchism is wrong, not just "Anarchist stupid lol"
>inb4
I've dipped into and out of this community over the years, but I remember when the OP on 8ch made positive reference to Orwell.
>inb4 also
I'm not an anarchist either so save your breath.

>>2248067
The end goal of Marxism is anti-authoritarian. The only way it significantly differs from anarchism is the presence of a transitory DoTP. If you want authoritarianism you're a bad Marxist.

>>2270629
This.

File: 1749571743681.jpg (40.3 KB, 500x730, polpot_based_dept.jpg)

>>2248053

>>2309047
People grew up Anon, realized liberalism is death and accepted the eternal truth of Marxism Leninism

>Muh authoritarianism

It's not real anon, there's no such thing, once you understand this there is no going back

>>2309205
>People grew up Anon, realized liberalism is death and accepted the eternal truth of Marxism Leninism
Then it should be extremely easy to explain why that is the case. Just saying "I'm right you're wrong" gets us nowhere.

>It's not real anon, there's no such thing

Maybe not in the liberal sense, but in other ways it absolutely does exist.

A nation ruled entirely by one guy and his full-time army with no checks on their power is authoritarian. On the other hand, a federation of participatory democracies with a people's militia is libertarian. The difference between the two is not the presence or absence of any liberal "freedoms" or "human rights", but rather the structure of society itself.

Libertarian socialism aims to abolish power hierarchies, which is not the same as the abolition of political power itself. In all likelihood, a libertarian socialist society, being the true political manifestation of populism, is going to be far less tolerant of liberal "human rights" than any hitherto existing authoritarian system.

>>2309262
>Then it should be extremely easy to explain why that is the case. Just saying "I'm right you're wrong" gets us nowhere.
No anon, I cannot convince you through a couple posts on a message board, you're going to have to come to this realization yourself. Hopefully it will come through time

>Maybe not in the liberal sense, but in other ways it absolutely does exist

Liberals are the ones who invented the term authoritarian and the only ones who use it

>A nation ruled entirely by one guy and his full-time army with no checks on their power is authoritarian

This has never existed


>On the other hand, a federation of participatory democracies with a people's militia is libertarian

In what way? Don't people still have to exert "authority" over each other to get anything done? Aren't militias inherently authoritarian?

The point is that this is a useless dichotomy that does not address the actual reasons for the way things are. A purely moral arbitration

People generally live freer and have more protected lives, aka they are not subjected to authoritarianism, when their economic conditions are prosperous, it's that simple

>Libertarian socialism aims to abolish power hierarchies, which is not the same as the abolition of political power itself. In all likelihood, a libertarian socialist society, being the true political manifestation of populism, is going to be far less tolerant of liberal "human rights" than any hitherto existing authoritarian system.

It's just posturing my man, for all intends and purposes authoritarianism is not an important measure, it simply does not matter in terms of the historical progression of society, geopolitics or the class struggle

>>2309306
>Liberals are the ones who invented the term authoritarian
So? Liberals invented a lot of things.
>and the only ones who use it
I'm not a liberal and I use it.

>This has never existed

I'm aware. It was an extreme for the sake of example. In reality all hitherto existing states (at least as far as I'm aware) exist somewhere between authoritarianism and libertarianism.

>In what way? Don't people still have to exert "authority" over each other to get anything done? Aren't militias inherently authoritarian?

In the sense that it eliminates, or at least greatly reduces political hierarchies. A group of people is no longer ruled over by some guy and his friends, it is instead ruled over by members of itself.

>The point is that this is a useless dichotomy that does not address the actual reasons for the way things are. A purely moral arbitration

Do not delude yourself into thinking that Marxism is above morality. If it were fully descriptivist, Marx would not have written something like Manifesto.

>People generally live freer

"Freedom" means so many things to so many people that it might as well mean nothing at all.
>aka they are not subjected to authoritarianism, when their economic conditions are prosperous, it's that simple
But is it? Logically, a political system is going to work in favor of wherever political power is most centralized. A fully planned economy isn't worth much if that planning is primarily to the benefit of the higher political "classes". As such, we must strive to eliminate political class, for much the same reason we strive to eliminate economic class.

>It's just posturing my man, for all intends and purposes authoritarianism is not an important measure, it simply does not matter in terms of the historical progression of society, geopolitics or the class struggle

Except for the part where we achieve a classless, stateless society. Unless you're uninterested in the latter part, in which case you are a revisionist.

tfw i will always be an anarkiddie by definition because even if i became like Stalin i'd still never believe in institutions as a container for power

Hegel only made me realize more how institutions exist to be anhiliated and replaced.

I can understand the need for some people to believe in the consistency of a state, but i don't think it's a healthy coping mechanism for the chaotic state of politics

>>2248596
Venture capitalists aren't software developers 🙄. I really dislike how "techbro" became got up with conmen and Nazis. I just wanted to be a code-monkey for gods sake 😕.

>>2309539

I don't care about Hegel's conformist opinions, i'm more focused on it's "tangible" historical uh "revisionism"?

like good revisionism

as in, wherever i go it all comes back to Hegel.

>>2309475
>So? Liberals invented a lot of things.
>I'm not a liberal and I use it.
Anon, I…

>I'm aware. It was an extreme for the sake of example

It's just something you made up to justify your conception of authoritarianism.

>In reality all hitherto existing states (at least as far as I'm aware) exist somewhere between authoritarianism and libertarianism.

Anything can exist on a made up scale, every society is skewed somewhere between blue and red, every society is skewed somewhere between 0 and 1

>in the sense that it eliminates, or at least greatly reduces political hierarchies. A group of people is no longer ruled over by some guy and his friends, it is instead ruled over by members of itself.

So you're just against centralization for some reason? Seems a bit reductive to describe complex political systems as some guy and his friends.

>Do not delude yourself into thinking that Marxism is above morality. If it were fully descriptivist, Marx would not have written something like Manifesto

Morality is purely a construction of our material circumstances. Marx viewed moral arguments as basically irrelevant and would laugh at you for bringing such things up. This does not mean he was not a moral person or that we should concern ourselves with morality in a basic sense

>"Freedom" means so many things to so many people that it might as well mean nothing at all.

Just like authoritarianism

>But is it? Logically, a political system is going to work in favor of wherever political power is most centralizedA fully planned economy isn't worth much if that planning is primarily to the benefit of the higher political "classes". As such, we must strive to eliminate political class, for much the same reason we strive to eliminate economic class.

Says who? Again it just comes back to you being against centralization, seemingly the only concrete thing you can point to as being some form of authoritarianism. I just reject outright that a more decentralized system automatically produces some kind of better system for people's lives. In fact that pretty much goes against all communist thought since marx.

>Except for the part where we achieve a classless, stateless society. Unless you're uninterested in the latter part, in which case you are a revisionist

The state will wither away when the conditions that give rise to its existence are no longer present, authoritarianism has nothing to do with it


Look I get it anon, I have a libertarian streak too, but you should probably let go of it eventually, it's just liberal moralism

>>2309703
I'm not against centralization generally, I'm for participatory democracy. You can have a fully centralized state, you can even have a vangard to check the public's power and keep things on track. But the public must have direct involvement in what laws get passed, otherwise exploitation by capital gets replaced with exploitation by state.

>The state will wither away when the conditions that give rise to its existence are no longer present

And how do we get there? By strengthening the state? Seems counterintuitive to me.

>it's just liberal moralism

As opposed to Marxism, where we fight to end the exploration of the proletariat for no reason. After all, the point is to understand the world, not to change it!

>>2248040
read Statism and Anarchism

Read Proudhon, Bakunin, Sorel and join the IWW

>>2313649
>Seems counterintuitive to me.
yeah. the only way out is through. the conditions are a quantity of productive forces that transform production to have the quality of post scarcity, building the material foundation to establish "from each…to each" with rights and freedom being determined by the economic structure and not the other way around. every historical example has to do this balancing act where they weigh productivity against defense from counterrevolution and imperialist invasion

Similar question to OP but specficially about being an ecoanarchist

>>2314063
Read Masanobu Fukuoka, try his farming methods, realize they don't work, move on.


Unique IPs: 46

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]