Unite

[lilanarchist]

Free thinkers unite!!!!! What the hell are you doing arguing how the hell you're going to coexist in anarchistic society? First you need to decide on a feasible means to getting there. Have you heard of Alice's Restaurant by Arlo Guthry? He was talking about the draft and how his fellow anarchists would fail the physical exam in order to be taken off the list. My point is we need to make more and more difficult and uneconomical for the government to do it's job! Oh, I have an idea! Let's jam the system with frivolous disability claims,workers compensation claims, everybody get a divorce, enlist in the military under false names and S.S. numbers, can you think of a few?

[jack]

I hope you're 13, trolling, AND high.

[thelastindividual]

Well, one idea I had was to group together into some kind of organisation and protest against the state whilst distributing information to others and winning them over to our side and then abolishing the state through some kind of revolution.

Crazy I know.

[jack]

Yeah a buddy of mine and I were drinking one night and he came up with a crazy idea: That we intervene in the class struggle! What a nut .

[Guest]

Let's jam the system with frivolous disability claims,workers compensation claims

Any anti-capitalist who understands capitalism will understand that this is actually preferable to working for a boss. The idea of an anti-capitalist activist going to work for a capitalist every day, is utterly nonsensical: by showing up to work, you reproduce the very beast you claim to oppose. And since most days you won't be engaging in activism against capitalism, but will simply be going through another day of work, errands, fatigue and slumber, it's a net win for capitalism.

"Go ahead, organize on the weekends, as long as you show up to work on Monday." --Capitalist


Aside from going on the dole (which I'm not at all opposed to) have several options:

1. Become a wage-master

2. Become a wage-slave

3. Become a member of a co-op.

4. Become self-"employed"

5. Become self-sustaining

6. ?


#1 is bad because it's exploitative.

#2 is bad because it sustains #1.

#3 is good because it's internally non-exploitative, but it's also bad because a co-op under capitalism still must go out on the market to fight for a slice of the profit pie, which exists by the exploitation of workers in "normal" capitalist firms. Thus, #3 would only be an answer to capitalism if ALL businesses followed suit.

#4 is good because it doesn't share the problems of #1, #2 or #3, but it's also bad (see #5).

#5 is best because it doesn't sustain the division of labor (as the others do), which most alleged "anarchists" utterly refuse to recognize as exploitative, because they don't want to do stuff like grow their own food. Naturally, they'd rather explore their individuality and live life to the fullest; but in order for them to do so, someone else must take on the burden of sustaining them, which means that this other person won't be free to... explore their individuality and live life to the fullest. Being self-sustaining doesn't mean having no time for such pleasures, it just means less of it for those who currently have plenty of it, and more of it for those who currently have none.

#6 is ...? There may be an option that avoids the problems addressed in #5, but i haven't found it yet. Or shall I say, I've heard a thousand of them, but they all reduce to attempts by alleged "anarchists" to rationalize privilege at the expense of others.


Of course this must all be weighed against the fact that workers -- not capitalists -- created civilization and are thus entitled to inherit its fruits. It's not incumbent upon us to abandon civilization and become subsistence farmers of live in caves. This is our world. I'd say the most anarchist compromise would be to join a co-op with an internally anarchist structure. But probably the WORST thing one could do is #2, since #1s couldn't exist without an army of #2s to sustain them. (That's not an argument for becoming a capitalist!)

[jack]

You're stupid, your ideas are very stupid, and I doubt you've worked a day in your life. Yet you can afford to have a computer, which alludes to the fact that you live with your parents, have never had a job, and are a mere anarkid who thinks their ideas matter.

[Guest]

You're stupid, your ideas are very stupid, and I doubt you've worked a day in your life. Yet you can afford to have a computer, which alludes to the fact that you live with your parents, have never had a job, and are a mere anarkid who thinks their ideas matter.

I'm nearly convinced by your powerful argument, but I need to see your reasoning before I declare you the winner. Please be specific.

[thelastindividual]

I'd say the most anarchist compromise would be to join a co-op with an internally anarchist structure.

Read through this: http://libcom.org/library/bailouts-co-operatives-or-class-struggle-debate

But probably the WORST thing one could do is #2, since #1s couldn't exist without an army of #2s to sustain them.

Because with the capitalists controlling most of the worlds resources that's a totally viable option

[Guest]

Struggle is always a given, but it don't pay the bills.

[coup-detat]

I'm mostly self sufficient. We have a small greenhouse that we built in our backyard and grow most of our food there. Then I work under the table for a local business to buy luxuries, like meat, weed, part of this computer, etc.

[Jawn Disease]

You're stupid, your ideas are very stupid, and I doubt you've worked a day in your life. Yet you can afford to have a computer, which alludes to the fact that you live with your parents, have never had a job, and are a mere anarkid who thinks their ideas matter.

For fuck's sake it's irritating when you say shit like that. Debate ideas, don't attack thinkers. Also your signature makes me cringe.

[coup-detat]

He's quoting Francis.