ITT: we argue which is the best form of anarchism
>>1313810
None.
/thread
How the fuck does anarcha feminism even work? Wouldn't it eventually implode? What do you do after you destroy the patriarchy?
Anyways Green and Pacifist Anarchism definitely work. Look at all those hippie communes still going strong after 50 years like the Farm.
I'm a type 4 myself.
What type are you, fellow comrades? which type is the best?
It's clearly anarcho-autism
Anarcho-Pacifists. At least they don't play word games about how violence = not violence.
>>1313841
>>>/mao/
>>1313852
Why isn't Plato number one? He invented ideology
Anarcho-patriarchy, a society where political, cultural, social and economical power is devolved to patriarchal families.
It's the only form of anarchism that historically worked. Proudhon himself would approve.
>>1313810
Christian anarchism.
>>1313852
>discussion about anarchism
>bring up Mao
>>1313855
Because Plato didn't directly effect humans, besides the dictators he influenced.
I suppose you could call him the grandfather of ideological genocide but then again people have been killing mass quantities of people for various reasons other then ideology so your point is quite moot.
Moot, as in Christopher Poole's masculinity.
>>1313810
National Anarchism.
>>1313868
>discussion about anarchism
>bring up Mussolini
Wow, such hypocrisy.
Do yourself a favor and reconsider what you said, sir.
I don't think any of those exist except in theory, do they?
>>1313810
>>1313862
Anarcho-monarchism
>>1313877
>fascists shit up a thread
>call them out as such
>respond with something factually wrong
Are you legit mentally retarded?
>>1313885
That's an oxymoron.
>>1313810
Anarchy and capitalism are mutually exclusive
>>1313883
No, they don't.
On the subject, since you're an Orthodox Christian, have you ever read The Kingdom of God is Within You, by Leo Tolstoy?
>>1313841
>everyone who isn't an anarchist is a fascist
This is what edgelords actually believe
>>1313887
>Are you legit mentally retarded?
Am I?
You're the autist here for even starting the totalitarian namecalling bullshit in an anarchist thread, when it clearly had nothing to do with it.
This is on you, faggot, not me.
>it's a /pol/ thinks their nationalistic brand of reactionary autism is relevant episode
>>1313913
>it's a faggot thinks everyone here who doesn't agree with him on his special snowflake views is automatically a fascist racist hitler type episode
>>1313883
Rojava is kind of close to anarcho-communism.
>>1313900
Yes
Tolstoy wasn't an Orthodox Christian (or, arguably, even a Christian) though.
>>1313921
No, Rojava is communitarianism.
When you combine them all, you get the international maritime symbol for "I require a tug".
Which makes perfect sense. There is no group more in need of a tug than the anarchists.
>>1313929
I thought he was (or is this one of those, he disagrees with me and so doesn't fit my ideology things?). Anyhow, what'd you think?
>>1313891
It kind of is, but it's actually a legit thing throughout history, especially during the medieval period.
All that nominal almost non-existant state power during the early and mid medieval age created an almost anarchistic society.
>>1313957
Huh, he was formally excommunicated. So he was part of the Orthodox church. I suspect the not even Christian part is exactly what I pointed out with the "disagrees and therefore can't be called as such".
>>1313957
>I thought he was (or is this one of those, he disagrees with me and so doesn't fit my ideology things?)
He was excommunicated, and he believed in reincarnation and later in life believed in Christianity as an idea but didn't think God was real in a literal sense.
>Anyhow, what'd you think?
I think he politicizes Christ' exhortation to non-violence, which is not what Christ intended anymore than he intended his exhortation to socialism to be politicized.
>>1313958
>but it's actually a legit thing throughout history, especially during the medieval period.
No it wasn't, you're conflating communitarianism with anarchism. Furthermore, all these communities had to provide soldiers and money when the king needed it.
>>1313972
Ah, I don't know much about him and frankly don't care enough (or for that matter, at all) about Christianity to want to read it. I was curious for a Christian perspective on the matter.
>>1313976
Would you like the Tolstoyan perspective on the matter?
As someone who knows nothing about any of the movements besides the first two I think anarcho-primitivism is the only one that could possibly not implode on itself because it skipped the middleman and its goal is the collapse of civilization.
>>1313810
Why can't we have pure anarchy? Why do people have to mix their own special snowflake ideology with anarchy?
Anarcho Tyrant.
>>1313979
I don't know much about it. I just assumed it was an odd Christian perspective on anarchism (or an anarchist perspective on Christianity).
>>1313989
Because anarchy is impossible. The point of anarchy is to not have any clear collective goal that a society has to follow to function, so everyone can act as individuals, but shitters just use that idea to say "we should not follow any collective goal (except for mine)".
>>1313976
I think we have a duty to defend our house, our family,our king, our country, if we are called upon to do so.
>>1313815
First post best post.
>All of these spooks
We all know the Anarcho Egoism is the best
>>1314005
And why would that be?
>>1314051
What's with the choice of colour? Personally I think grey and black would have been more fitting.
Individualist anarchism.
All the others are communism by a different name (+ancaps, which, like the others, just describes one choice a Union of Egoists could choose to partake in [but they never would])
>>1314058
Anarcho Nihilism already got Grey and Black
>>1313810
Anarcho-Fascism
>>1313997
I think the Anarchism is incidental (but a very serious aspect) of Tolstoy's thought. That is "anarchism" is a modern label, for an old idea.
For example, I strongly disagree with Psuedo-Constantine that Tolstoy's writing politicizes Christs message. I think that itself is a politicization of Christ.
Politics is the act of legitimating violence. If you don't have legitimate and illegitimate violence. you don't have a state, period. The welfare of the people, property rights, security, protection from outsiders, all of that comes after the legitimation of violence.
Tolstoy sees that Christ rejected all legitimations of violence. He takes very seriously and literally the command to turn the other cheek, to forgive the enemy, and to go the extra mile. And he does so under the common understanding to 'forgive'. It is not 'forgiveness' to shoot a man with no malice in your heart. To forgive a man is to forgive a man, wholly radically, and without condition.
Tolstoy's anarchism comes about when he recognizes the fact that if actually implemented, Christ's teachings would be the end of society as we know it. If we were to all follow Christ's teachings the state would collapse for lack of judges, jurors, jailers and hangmen. Capitalism would collapse because no man would use violence to establish and maintain his property. Where Tolstoy is a radical is that when he realizes these consequences, he does not say 'Christ could not intend this, for to do so would be to disrupt our way of life.'
He recognizes Jesus Christ as a serious man, who means what he said, and said things so troubling to those in power that he was put to death for it. Now, Tolstoy did not believe Jesus was god, unfortunately, but it seems that many Christians are eager to downplay Christ even further than Tolstoy.
>>1314058
grey is a spook
>>1314068
Isn't Stirnerian anarchism inherently nihilistic?
>>1314074
That's very interesting.
>Implying Anarchists shouldn't be lined up and shot
>>1314074
Tolstoy recognizes that Christ meant what he said, and said what he meant. If your eye causes you to sin, it is better to pluck it out. If your state causes you to sin, it is better for it to collapse.
Note however, that this is still as I said, tertiary to Tolstoy's reading of the sermon on the mount. We are not to go out and try to abolish the state, or form political parties, or engage in political action.
We are to remove ourselves from the state, mentally, physically and spiritually, because to do otherwise is to engage in sin: Murder, and extortion, and usury and the taking of blood money.
Once you get used to it, you see that the Government behaves like any other den of sin: They want nothing more than for you to join them, in some small form, so that they can universalize their sin, implicitly reasoning that if their sin is universal, they cannot be condemned for it.
To accept the moral alchemy that allows governments to convert a sinful action into a not sinful one opens the doors to countless heresies and countless situations where moral sense fails.
>>1314095
>Implying we wouldn't forgive you, and pray for you.
>>1313810
Anarcho-Syndicalism is the only one which could plausibly work imo since its the only Anarchist tendacy with somekind of an organized goverment type entity behind it. AnCaps is hilariously stupid the rest are just different aspects of Anarcho-Syndicalism/Anarcho-Communism.
>>1313887
Keep fighting the good fight against the fascist dogs comrade
>>1314054
Same reason we have have a duty to defend our home against a fire.
>>1314211
>Implying the fascist aren't as bad
>>1314233
There are literally no fascists in this thread except the ones in your head. Get over yourself.
>>1314230
To protect all of God's children?
>>1314230
But we don't have a duty to do that. Something being good sense is not the same as it being a duty.
>>1313810
>Trying to smear syndicalism by some tenuous association with the unabomber's idiology, "queerism" (whatever that is) and pic related
>>1314074
>>1314110
But Tolstoy does fail in his lack of faith. That is crucial, and it is a great failing.
If you are really going to be a Christian Anarchist, you must believe wholeheartedly in Christ. You must believe that he lived and died and lived again. It is a supernatural thing, a holy thing. You must believe that he transcended all reality.
And so you do what you do, you dissolve the state and all property, because your example is not just a man but a God. Marx said that the poor have nothing to lose but their chains. Christ says that the poor will inherit Eternal Life. If you are a Christian Anarchist you believe that God Himself has sanctified your path away from property and economy.
If Christ is God, then maybe anarchy is economy. If one clings to Christ for his anarchy, perhaps one should therefore cling to Christ in his divinity. How can you take Christ seriously without acknowledging that he was God? This is crucial to every aspect of his public ministry. Perhaps we should work harder to take Christ as he is.
>>1314293
But the Unabomber was right
Yes I note the irony of saying that on the Internet
>>1314333
>Hurr durr technology is bad
Why don't you practice what you preach and never see the doctor again?
>>1314352
I don't? It's a pipe dream anyway. Doesn't mean he's not right. I try.
>>1314256
No, he have a duty to protect our household from harm.
>>1314309
I cling to Christ for his divinity. I fully believe he has sanctified this path for me. And my belief in the life everlasting convinces me more than anything that Tolstoy's interpretation of Christ is the right one. If the poor will inherit the earth, who will fight and die for his tiny patch of property?
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."
This history of states has merely been the storing up of treasures, until moths and rust eat them.
>>1314352
You forgot there's americans on this board, right?
>>1314074
I think maybe you should read Dostoevsky's PoV on this in the Brothers K. When Ivan (an atheist) says the Church should be the state, and the Elder Zosima explains why he's wrong..
If everyone were a perfect Christian, yes, there would be no state because you wouldn't need laws. But we wouldn't need doctors either.
Anarcho-fascism
>>1314384
And if you wait until everyone is a perfect Christian to start trying to act like one, we won't need Christians either.
>>1314369
No, we don't. It's our household, we can let happen to it what we will. Your notion of duty is built on sand, like literally everything you believe.
>>1314402
Acting like a Christian means fulfilling your duty. Dangers threaten us like fires and other disasters that are a product of the fallen world, and sometimes those dangers are other sinners.
>>1314406
I'm using "house" and "household" here to include occupants and family.
>>1314414
Then you're back to fucking square one. You already said family in the original thing I questioned. On what fucking basis?
Good fucking lord, Socrates would have had a field day with you even if he would have agreed with you; you're a complete fucking imbecile.
>>1314419
When you marry, you have an obligation to protect, when you have children, you have an obligation to protect. When you are begotten, you have an obligation to protect. The basis for these duties is existential, you would not exist without family, and the family you endow depend on you and you accept that responsibility upon endowing them.
>>1314423
Nah. I had no choice in existing. It was thrust upon me against my will. As a child I was raised when I was in no state to engage in a conscious, willing choice about my state of affairs. On this basis, I have no duty to my family, as a man who is forced to take a gift has no duty to reciprocate. Whether I choose to help them lies entirely in my own will, just as it lies within your own whether to serve fiction.
>>1314431
>It was thrust upon me against my will.
Unless you had a positive will to not exist (which you obviously could not have prior to existing), this is not the case.
>>1314438
Then perhaps more precise language would be in order: without my consent.
Regardless, duty to your family is an inherently absurd notion. It is to your benefit to keep to your family, but you have no inherent duty to them, and you would do well to remember that. Unless you want to live in a world where abuse victims are bound to serve their abusers.
>>1314451
You have a duty in a social, cultural, legal and religious sense. What other sense is there?
Anarcho communism. Everything else is meme tier.
>>1314465
>religious duty
Stay in your fucking /rel/ containment threads you fedora.
>>1314465
So, not in any inherent or substantial sense. Good for you for admitting that, you stupid cunt. Also the legal sense is no different than the duty I have to any other person.
>>1314472
>So, not in any inherent or substantial sense
What do you mean by "substantial" exactly? You mean it in Hobbes' sense?
>>1314490
As in it continues to exist if people don't consider it to exist.
>>1314410
> Dangers threaten us like fires and other disasters that are a product of the fallen world, and sometimes those dangers are other sinners.
So we're obligated to commit sin to combat sin?
>>1314499
These duties do continue to exist metaphysically.
>>1314507
>metaphysics
Top fucking kek. What absolute fucking woowoo.
>>1314504
Failing to protect is a very serious sin. If you can find some way to protect without sinning, that is surely preferable, that's up to you.
>>1314511
All relations are metaphysics.
>>1313810
Queer anarchism ofc.
>>1313929
He himself claimed to be one.
In 19th and early 20th century there were Russian "Orthodox" sects of every kind though, Rasputin was said to be in one which organised orgies every sunday for instance, so Tolstoy would easily fit somewhere.
>>1314518
Metaphysics as a term has never been sufficiently defined. But metaphysics existing in any sense but as a field of thought meant to explain concepts such as free will is complete fucking woowoo. There is no reason to believe there to be some sort of platonic realm which gives concepts such as duty, family, nation, etc. an actual existence outside of the mind, and there's nothing etched into the earth that notes them to exist, and so there is no reason to believe that these things actually exist.
>>1314536
>Metaphysics as a term has never been sufficiently defined.
Any truth not composed of atoms.
>>1314514
>Failing to protect is a very serious sin
Oh, so now you're a consequentialist? That's cool.
>>1314539
Then these metaphysical truths don't actually exist.
Don't go around pretending you've solved the problem of universals, you arrogant piece of shit.
>>1313810
The only thing which is potentially incompatible from that list is communism and capitalism but those can both be reconciled through some form of syndicalism which allows for (some) private property and market interactions
All the other ones are mutually inclusive, so it's really just a matter of what 'flair' you're most concerned with
>>1313989
Anarchy is wholly different thing from anarchism.
Anarchism of all sorts can be looked at through the lenses of "ordinary" politics, it's the form of government and state which is as decentralised as possible and has as little legalistic procedures as possible.
Anarchy is outside of ordinary politics. It's point is that there's no politics.
Reminder that Psuedo-Constantine asked a tranny to marry him, chased said tranny off the board and now wears the Trip Bufallo Bill style.
>>1313989
Because Anarchy isn't an ideology. It's a state of being. The ideologies give us answers about how to get there.
>>1314565
What on earth are you talking about
>>1314572
If I put two boxes in front of you, one of which contains a quarter facing heads up, one of them facing heads down. If you pick the one facing heads up, I kill your family.
Is it a sin to pick the left or the right box?
>>1314586
Picking either box is a sin.
>>1314576
What you did. Are you claiming now that you're the original poster to use the Constantine trip?
>>1314589
Woops. I kill your family for not picking a box. Guess that was a sin.
>>1314595
>In that case I must pick a box, and neither pick is a sin.
To late. Your failure to guess where this example was going is a sin.
Next question, how many hours did you spend preparing to fight me, today?
>>1314603
>To late. Your failure to guess where this example was going is a sin.
No it isn't.
>>1314595
>I am
Are you a woman?
>>1314607
Sure it is. You failed to protect your family, a sin.
>>1314611
I don't want to sound rude, but I am getting super sick and tired of people asking me this. How on earth does whether or not I'm a woman affect my posts, how does it have any relevancy to anything I say here? This is 4chan, this is not facebook, this is not about me as a person, this just about post content
>>1314613
No willfully. That's like saying it's a sin to be raped.
>>1314626
We all know you have gender identity issues, no need to be sour.
>>1314634
I don't have any gender identity issues, never have,never will. I identify 100% as the sex I am and was born as.
>>1313810
mutualism
>>1314626
>No willfully.
So as long as you're not willing your family harm, it's NOT a sin now?
>That's like saying it's a sin to be raped.
Well, yes. That's another example of your obligation to protect.
>>1314646
>That's fucking funny coming from a tripfag.
That has to do with connecting many posts together into a cohesive representation, not about me as a person
>And is it the same sex as a few months ago?
Yes. If you are trying to accuse me of misrepresenting my sex here, even if I did it would be to ensure my gender did not receive attention over my posts, it has zero to do with me as a person in real life.
>>1314679
>Yes.
One of those non-binary gender choices, I see.
>>1314634
I still think this is the creepy waifufag, not the actual tranny. He's being evasive because he doesn't want to get caught being contradictory, but he's already too confused by his failed attraction to a transexual to try roleplaying a girl on 4chan for his own pleasure.
>>1314695
>One of those non-binary gender choices, I see.
No.
For goodness sake, I'm an Orthodox Christian, we don't approve of transsexualism remotely. Are you trying to provoke me or something?
>>1314679
Don't lie, you affect a persona you fucking genderbent queer. You're all about "muh devout Christian" while you have porn open in another tab. You're a joke.
>>1314706
No, I don't.
>>1314699
No. Why are you being provoked about such simple questions?
I'm on your side, psuedo-Constantine. I don't think you're a transexual. I think you wanted to marry a transexual, and are now deeply regretting that.
>>1314722
>No. Why are you being provoked about such simple questions?
Because I have to keep answering them over and over
>I'm on your side, psuedo-Constantine. I don't think you're a transexual. I think you wanted to marry a transexual, and are now deeply regretting that.
Why do you think this?
>>1314711
But you admit you're a joke.
>>1314728
Because nobody actually gives a fuck about you and you should stop using a trip
What bible verse is your trip? Tell me
Eco-fascist
Anarchist can suck my big wing wang
>>1313810
>anarchist-despotism
>>1313921
Rojava is libertarian socialism.
>>1313899
Lies, crony capitalism highly resembles anarcho-capitalism: The poorest suffer from violence, lawlessness and have no societal protections while the richest effectively run the country and government while enjoying all the things money can afford.
This is something we can see exemplarly in countries with high inequality such as Brazil, Mexico, pre-Castro Cuba, and to lesser extents South Africa and Gilded Age America.
ancapism isnt even real lol how u gonna say government is bad but bosses aren't
>>1315186
tiers are spooks
all forms of anarchism are unsustainable. anarcho-communism would just lead to chaos, while anarcho-capitalism would either lead to a dystopic society with a few trusts or monopolists rule everything, or a chaotic state resembling feudalism. green anarchism, anarcha-feminism etc. are basically memes.
the only anarchism which could work for some time would be anarcho-primitivism, if we went back to living in small pastoral or agricultural tribes, it would be possible to do without leaders. of course, eventially one tribe would decide to adopt more effective ways, forcefully integrate and steamroll the rest of the tribes. or a neighboring nation would overrun the nation that implemented anarcho-primitivism and was left without any real means of self-defense.
Anarcho-Totalitarism is a best one.
anarcho-nanmachinism
>Which turd is the most delicious
I'd rather have a proper meal instead you know
>>1313810
Anarchism is shit by definition
> best form of anarchism
Current one that exist on global scale between all of the nations. Countries are free actors and there is no higher power that rule over them. You could say that international law is shit form of anarchy, but it is only one that works.
>>1313810
Who else here is /national-anarchist/?
>>1313815
Don' /thread your own post you gaylord.
>>1313841
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a Fascist
>>1314572
>Then no relations exist
Yes, indeed. Holy fucking hell, how did it take you this long to get this? The relationships between you and other people exist in the same sense Winnie the fuckng Pooh exists.
>>1313810
The one that creates a failed state the fastest so that actual states can take that wasted land
>>1313824
Fucking wish I was a type 4. Type 1 on a bad day, type 2 usually, type 3 on a good day. I drink so much water and eat dried fruit erry day but I always bleed a little when I poo
>>1313818
There's that guy on youtube that says that Anarchism and Feminism are inherently synonymous. You know, the libertarian socialist guy?
>>1313810
>Queer Anarchism
Can somebody please attempt to explain this one to me? How is dicking the same sex related to anarchism? Is everybody required to be a fag in a Queer Anarchist society? I have so many questions.
>>1317984
Like anarcha-feminism, it's an idea that queer struggle is synonymous with anarchistic class struggle. So basically that gaining equality for gays (much as it is for women in anarcha-feminism) is tied in with abolishing hierarchy.
Neither a full-fledged theoretical systems.
>>1313818
Anarchist believe that culture and society is inherently malleable so a culture that is strongly anti-greed, violence etc would make anarcho-feminism possible.
It's funny since their argument could be used for absolute neoliberal capitalism as well.
>>1313810
Anarcho Primitivism.
I am typing this on a log.
>>1313810
None. It fails as soon as a government that has a military industrial complex funded by taxes invades.
>>1318015
Anarchists also justify their lack of action, contributing to the capitalist system, eating chips and drinking coke by saying: "It's a capitalist system! I need to participate in it to survive, it's not my fault"
regular anarchism, fuck this sectarianism.
>>1315262
>high five
>>1313815
this anarchist is degenerate
>>1313810
Anarcho-Anarchy
>>1313810
From greatest to least
Synthesis anarchism
Anarcho-socialism
Anarcho-primitivism
Anarcha-feminism and queer anarchism
Christian anarchism
"anarcho-capitalism"
anarcho-pacifism
>>1313810
anarcho-anarchism
>>1315536
i don't like parties
>>1313810
As an ex-anarchist, I implore any thinking people who remain in that milieu to abandon that corpse of an ideology, which has long been merely the bleeding, poorly militant edge of Progressive LibSoc Capitalism. Catching felonies and batons (as I have) for the cause of a kinder, more inclusive capitalism is retarded. Abandon the left, seek new vistas.
>>1318418
Nice try shill.
>>1318427
lol. Okay, child. I am not sure what I would be shilling for but layered within your response is the pretension that anarchism or anarchists are in any way a threat to any one important and we both ought to know that is a lie. I am not saying do what you will to erode capitalism and the state or what have you, but a milieu based on the corpse of a once--and i mean like pre WWI--noble and effective movement is death itself. Leave the left, do better.
>>1318525
*I am not saying _don't_ do*
>>1313810
What is fag monarchism?
>>1314374
Friendly reminder that monarchy is a good thing
>>1318418
>>1318525
Do better in what sense? I'm not an anarchist in the first place because it's effective at achieving anything in particular or because of a special opposition to capitalism or the state. What I'm against is the principles that find themselves brought out in those. I'm against government before I'm against the state, and I'm against bosses before capitalism. What should I leave the left for?
>>1313883
There have been anarchy-syndicalist communes (Spanish Civil War had quite a few) but they don't tend to last long.
anarcho-anarchism
>>1313852
>Only 3 of the dictators with the most kills are white
My liberal public school education never prepared me for this
>>1318806
>gorgeian
>white
Cyxa bylat
None because it doesn't work
>>1313815
Self /threaders are faggots , but
/thread
>>1313810
national-anarchism
>>1316772
Go to the hospital
Anarcho-primitivism is the ultimate redpill
>>1318648
The left will never pose any real radical challenge to bosses, the state, government or capitalism. The entire thing is a loyal opposition that helps those very things ameliorate their most excessive evils to maximize their survivability. Leftism is the whetstone on which the meme of the current order makes itself more dank.
>>1313815
FPBP
>>1313824
Type 3 master race, though sometime 4 if I've had a lot of dairy, and sometimes a really dense solid 2 if I've had a lot of meat.
Also how often are you meant to shit, I end up going like 3 times a day like clockwork
Anarcho-Monarchism
Anarcho Futanarism
>>1314423
>getting married
>having kids
Topkek
>>1315209
What the FUCK is a spook
All I know is it can mean black people
