The guy you’re trying to pass the buck to, money_loo, is from a lemmy instance that only has Chicago sports communities and whose front page is mostly federated meme posts. You’re a BeeHaw user. You’ve presumably read and agreed to the Beehaw community documents.

I expect more than anti-intellectualism from you.

So many questions!

Are you suggesting that the political aspects of technology shouldn’t be discussed in a technology community?

Are you implying that technology is apolitical? That there are technology subjects to discuss that don’t have a political component?

Do discussions of the applications of technology not belong in a technology community?

Crack Attack! is a loving parody of addictive tetrislike games that is also an extremely addictive tetrislike game.

The first amendment doesn’t exist to prevent editorial censorship. It has nothing to do with “cancel culture.”

It protects freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It has been interpreted by centuries of court decisions to protect against exactly this - harassment and prosecution by government agents for engaging in protected speech, especially political protest.

You must not be from a culture with an antifascist tradition of “First they came for the <unpopular free speech group>”

I’m concerned you would think this is an okay thing to post, and I’m worried about the people who subscribe to socialism and would upvote this kind of sentiment.

Furthermore, you’re not even correct. The police’s justification is the vehicle’s attendance at an unaffiliated nonviolent climate movement protest, though I doubt that changes things in your mind.

Enron and the collapse of California’s power grid is directly linked to deregulation by George Bush’s regime and a lack of public control and oversight of electricity markets. Corporate media blamed the energy price crisis on the governor, leading to a recall and his replacement by a Republican. Capitalists would love for that to happen in Chicago too; squeeze poor families with energy prices they can’t afford and then blame it on the government to shift the state’s politics to the right.

This is not an appropriate post for this community.

Sometimes people’s message is different from their words. Please don’t tell me not to say it like it is. And please don’t try and shame the oppressed for not being civil to oppressors.

The lesson to be learned from Daryl Davis is that bigots should be ostracized, ignored, and de-platformed. Once their movement has been defanged and members isolated to their anti-social groups, you can more safely reach out to those groups to deprogram the people on the margins, if that’s what you want to do with your life.

The story would be very different if the KKK still held social and political power. A black man who didn’t support the KKK’s mission attending a KKK rally would not last very long. No one should give these people a platform, or treat them civilly when they’re spreading their brain worms in civil society.

I don’t think he’s trying to amend for past misdeeds – I think he’s just trying to live his life. If we lived in a restorative justice society instead of a punitive one, I’d have different expectations of him. We are a society ruled by war criminals who have never seen a day of prison. Things are hard enough for people who’ve survived incarceration, it’s a shitty thing to throw his past at him. Especially since the people who tend to do it are acting in bad faith, and whose actual beef is that he’s not simping for genocidal dictators.

If Beehaw made a dime every time a .ML tankie invaded a post to slander socialists, they’d have more money than Facebook.

Fuck yeah unions!

If you think monetary economies developed from barter economies, attacking the OP for sharing the scientific consensus makes you look culty. You’ve got a lot of indignation and no evidence.

Related: AFL-CIO strike map

Ziq seems to be primarily a prominent poster on raddle.me. I don’t want to say he’s not a significant anarchist thinker, but it makes me wonder if some of the posts the decade+ I’ve been posting about anarchism on internet forums maybe belong in the Anarchist Library also.

I’m not super familiar with his work, but he sounds like someone from the anti-civ branch of anarchism. It’s very popular in this branch to represent themselves as the only true exemplars of anarchism, so a forum personality denying Chomsky his due is pretty on message. Franklin López of The Stimulator fame came up from this trend, but it also includes Deep Green Resistance and Derek Jensen; there’s some troubling concordances with eco-fascism, ‘bio-truth’, and trans-exclusionary philosophies.

Unlike the C4SS article this looks like something worth analyzing, as they seem to have done some research. I don’t have time now, but might come back to it later, especially if there’s interest.

I do find the use of ‘minarchist’ here unusual also. Contrary to the C4SS article, minarchist is a bad thing in context. Ziq does seem to be using minarchist to mean a kind of authoritarian or capitalist, but it’s strange language to use. It seems like a rhetorical trick in that calling Chomsky this very specific, underutilized word that usually means capitalist sounds less ridiculous on the face of it than saying plainly that Chomsky is an authoritarian or capitalist, actually.

Okay, in your own words, how would you summarize each of those articles? If you want to discuss them perhaps putting each in their own thread would be convenient.

Chomsky self-identifies as an ‘libertarian socialist’, which is widely regarded as a synonym for or category of anarchist, I don’t know what authoritative source told you he’s a minarchist. I’ve usually heard ‘minarchism’ used as a synonym for capitalists of the Libertarian Party persuasion. There’s a lot of disagreement about where the ontological borders of anarchism are, and it sound like someone who disagrees with Chomsky is trying to metaphorically push him outside of those borders rather than engage with his ideas.

This isn’t a ‘gotcha’ game. I’m giving you an opportunity to explain the words you’re using, so I can better understand how you have come to an apparently self-refuting conclusion. I’m glad that my assumption was correct that you must be using a words in ways they weren’t intended. Are you just posting to ‘dunk’ on anarchism, or do you want to be understood?

You are a ‘statist’ then. What functions would a minarchist state perform?

How would a monarchist solve the problem of another monarchist group using violence to impose a patriarchal system on their group?

The pre-colon title is apposite as a quote from an anarchist soldier during a civil war. It was a response to a reporter asking how he felt about winning and “sitting on a pile of ruins.”

“You must not forget, we also know how to build. It is we the workers who built these palaces and cities, here in Spain and in America, and everywhere. We, the workers, can build others to take their place, and better ones! We are not in the least afraid of ruins. We are going to inherit the earth, there is not the slightest doubt about that. The bourgeoisie might blast and ruin its own world before it leaves the stage of history. We carry a new world, here, in our hearts. That world is growing this minute.“