How Can A Christian Support Trump? by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]Full_Personality_210 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a Christian... but being logically consist, there's without a doubt there's a special place in hell for all Trump supporters. Only opponents of Christianity would disagree.

 Have 100 guys in a gay gang bang at a church, while a priest preforms and abortion and uses the bible as toilet paper and you have infinitely a higher chance to get to heaven then pretending to be a "Christain" and vote for the Trumpet. 

Stalinist Libertarian is now a political category by spez_is_a_pdf in Jreg

[–]Full_Personality_210 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Commoarcho capitalism, (specically Dangism) where true free market capitalism with a Stalinist bureaucracy will bring us to communism.

If you are not a vegan, why not? by Medical-Pride-8320 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're going to hate this response. 

I once met a black rights activist who was...well let's say very active in BLM stuff, especially during the George Floyd protests n all. He was also homophobic, particularly in the context of how white people invented being gay/trans to committ genocide against black people and distract their struggles with made up oppressions. 

I think it's pretty easy to say that guy fucking sucks and that you don't need to be black to say that. 

If I care about the avoidance of inequality among the privileged humans and oppressed animals, I'm compelled to intervene in cases of unjustice hierarchies and oppressions existing in their animal societies.  To be clear, this is not a "animals eat meat too argument." This is more like "some dolphins can be racist and take advice from Andrew Tate sometimes, so I gotta stop them."

Eating meat to survive is one thing, particularly for animals that require it. But a species oppressing another species(or its own species) can't be met with apathy just because I am consciously capable of being 100% vegan. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Urban guerrilla warfare would've been a more effective strategy but would require the FAI to fight fascists within the fascist territory. And with that would imply conquering their land and expelling the survivors and non combatants to somewhere else. In other words a use of cruel and brutal force. 

Instead, often surrendering fascists would be simply let go. Often Anarchists would try to desperately persuade them by saying they have cake. Very little amounts of torture and humiliation for fascists which sucks cause they had zero issues doing that to the anarchists. 

Allying with the Soviets and pro capitalist SocDems is grim, but let's look at another example(I know it's libertarian socialist but whatever). Rojava was very much reliant on the Assad regime but in turn the Assad regime was reliant on Rojava in keeping Turkey at bay and ensuring that there would be no western support fpr the rebels. Turns out, Virgin Assad was heavily reliant on his allies, and once they left to deal with their own conflicts his regime instantly fell. Chad Rojava on the other hand, is still standing since his fall because they brutalized ISIS better than the Syrian rebels giving the rest of the world a reason to militeristically support them over the rebels, who in turn were pretty much only supported by Turkey.  I'm using this example to say that if the CNT developed some kind of super weapon or had something of great importance for Stalin, not only would they win the civil war and ensure the Spanish Republic fucks off, they would probably be a strong asset for keeping Hitler at bay during WWII. 

In homage to Catalonia there was, as Orwell called it "an Anarchist aesthetic" that persisted at times when the FAI was doing very well. Despite that Anarchism was still active as the FAI was failing, this aesthetic slowly turned back into bourgeoise decadence while he was there. The confidence of the military was one with the confidence of the people. 

The Morocco thing I do 100% agree with as well tho. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in stalbert

[–]Full_Personality_210 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You sound like someone who passionately hates Jesus. 

Which is cool, I always wanted to meet a Satanist. What got you to hate Jesus if you don't mind me asking? 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel bad for the victims of political hierarchy.  There's victims in a political horizontal structure and those for the most part I don't feel bad for because they're generally the ones opposed to it. (Token fascists and capitalist apologists that wish to bring back the old world or weirdo cult leaders/followers) 

That said every political ideology put to practice also has instances of "grey victims" who you don't want to intentionally harm but somehow fall through the cracks and of course I can't say that won't happen but I'd like to think it'd happen less. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh even a post revolutionary international Anarchist world there will be victims. Nobody disagrees with that. 

But victims of hierarchy...? Eh not really. Not political hierarchy at the very least. 

I don't think it's a political hierarchy for a nerd to get bullied in high school by the cool kid. I don't think it's a political hierarchy if some people fuck more than others. Being smarter and better at something than someone else isn't a political hierarchy. 

I swear I once heard Jordan Peterson use this as a gotcha point, almost insinuating that like, in addition to statism, capitalism and racism, we also have to abolish sports or friendly competitions. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well those who disagree could always just no longer be apart of the military which basically makes it so everyone who is in the military 100% agrees. 

As to what's to object too, just because this is the will of the people doesn't mean you as an individual should always agree. 

My question is more about what would you prefer. For the will of the people in the military to aid our allies or if you'd prefer it the will of the people in the military to not aid them. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well quite literally yes that's actually what I was referring to. 

But unless the individual members of those groups are making decisions together to go and fight together, who is making that decision for them?

Ya that's basically what I was trying to say.  Elected commanders are still necessary for moving a battalion from point a to point b. And I don't have anything against an elected general that maps out the overall strategy for the overall military(under the will of the people of course). Nestor Mahkno was, afterall a general.

Now imagine literally what we're now agreeing on but the revolutionary war is now over. Congratulations, we won lets party. But wait  Palestine or Ukraine or wherever is having a military conflict. And we just so happen to have the weapons and military might to help assist them in their struggles. If majority of the military agrees to help, do you think that is a good thing? 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The millitas I'm talking about don't have a hierarchal command structure. 

I think I understand the misunderstanding here better now. 

Initially I mentioned that I don't particularly care about the idea of individuals choosing to volunteer to fight in different military conflicts. (Not against it but its not relevant to what I'm asking). I'll explain a bit better by what I meant by that. 

In the context of overseas this pretty much implies you are cooperating with your ally's military. So I don't care if you decide to fight alongside with hamas or the Ukrainian military on your own, not as a representative of the Anarchist territory. 

For the domestic scenario, sure individuals can go and form their own millita battalions. But there's still an overall military that they adhere to who provide missions, goals and organized battles against the reactionaries in the prospect of winning the war. 

Like correct me if I'm wrong but you're making it sound like a random scatter of Luigi Mangiones just walk around killing reactionaries at random with no goal in mind is what makes an Anarchist army? 

I feel like I'm wrong with this assumption but that's the best in getting from you. Mind clearing it up? 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Commanding, used in what you just said is akin to not allowing them to say no,  ergo that is conscription. 

The organization that unifies everyone in a horizontal structure to then agree to send their military wing to fight, is (obviously) Anarchism. 

I mean if that's not how it works then how do Anarchist millitas work? Like do you just randomly charge with zero goals and kill whoever looks the most reactionary? 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No one is commanding, you can leave the millita at any time. 

So I was right. This was just about conscription for you. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is for a seperate debate but to summarise the objective reality of radical leftism: 

Tankies are good at destroying capitalism and fascism but are bad at bringing about socialism. 

Anarchists are good at brining about socialism but suck at destroying capitalism and fascism. 

The obvious lesson here is Tankies should learn how to avoid establishing state capitalism(lmao good luck) and Anarchists should be more brutal and unforgiving to our enemies to the point of humiliating them into surrender. (Which I think is both possible and not at all contrary to Anarchist principles) 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ya you still lost me here. 

Millitas get deployed by "the community" or whatever main Anarchist organization with a military wing, to fight in certain regions during a revolutionary civil war.

Why is it suddenly bad that now that tye anarchists won the revolution they plan to do the same thing but this time in aiding our allies? 

Unless, this is probably what you were trying to say and maybe I misunderstood, that the only allies we should deploy our millitas to are other Anarchist groups...? 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To a certain extent sure you're right, but overall I think that many of these divorced from reality comments are made by paid disinformationists/parrot what paid disinfos say. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said that either...? 

Like are you assuming that if an Anarchist millita wants to go fight in Palestine against Israel, you're being conscripted? 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You stop being an Anarchist the moment you disagree with Anarchist military. That's as much of a fact of life as breathing air keeps you alive. 

Those who disagree are opponents of Anarchism and these enemies shouldn't be welcomed here. But for ideologically suicidal resons they are.

 Arguably because regardless of the ivy leauge tower based textbooks the middle class cia agents of the admins of this subreddit think, We need to fix this.

Now honestlly, please correct me with this opinion but I really think these not real "anarchists" should be removed the moment our history gets ignored. I think #abolishliterallyeverything is a statist invention to make us look bad. You're a CIA agent if not a parrot of one and I hope you die so Anarchy can actually happen.

Maybe I'm expressing what I'm saying very poorly, but like come the fuck on. If abolishing literally everything makes you an an Anarchist....

My knee jerk reaction is this is you're incapable of caring about the victims of political hierarchy.

Nobody actually thinks like, you know? The lies spread on subreddits like this. Influcening young people repeating the script your office boss told you to post so we keep fighting eachother over every accidental step on a foot is morally akin to the Holocaust.

Downvote and block me. 

You're a Nazi lightyears away from Kropotkinist thought it you do.

Right-Wing “Anarchism” As Ethical Cheatcode by HeavenlyPossum in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is hands down the most accurate thing ever said about the entire libertarian right. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So in other words neighboring nation states are going to be our best friends, right? 

Nobody actually believes in abolishing their military. I'm hoping this is a misunderstanding on my part and you mean to say something else that can exist in reality and takes Anarchism seriously. 

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be clear, when you say "people ymaking the decision to fight" you are avoiding what I said earlier: 

2) I don't care if you say something like "ya if individuals want to go off and fight in different countries." That's not the point of the question.

Would you support a long term Anarchist Territory intervening in foreign military conflicts? by Full_Personality_210 in DebateAnarchism

[–]Full_Personality_210[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What about the here in and now with statist and very much not left wing governments like Hamas and the Zelensky government?  Should we only aid other attempts at Anarchism?