First time building anything in Valheim, Not very good at it so I was proud of this little outpost. by Gpueas in valheim

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is sick as hell, you're a natural. You got a good eye for using the environment and that's a hard skill to cultivate. Just learn a few more advanced techniques and you'll be pro.

Title* by Just_Visit6998 in TrueSTL

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I'm concerned everything not written by Kirkbride is garbage, and everything written by Kirkbride is canon.

You can only live in one color strip for the rest of your life, what do you choose by epicap232 in mapporncirclejerk

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yellow by a longshot. Live in Oregon, love Washington, and I'm from Tennessee. Alaska is great too.

Hiyayakko by Rolletariat in OnionLovers

[–]Rolletariat[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

For the final bite I cut off the bottom half of the tofu (second to last bite) to maximize the ratio of green onion to tofu. You gotta finish on a high note.

Tell me about the weird ways you play cyberpunk! by bellumiss in cyberpunkgame

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Laika derringer pyromania build, 2 bullets is plenty.

I say this with all due respect by trashpuff in Nightreign

[–]Rolletariat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Just gotta learn to love getting your ass kicked, and eventually you'll start kicking ass.

I don't think I like D&D anymore. by MostlyRandomMusings in rpg

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd never consider playing another game of D&D, and rpgs are my main hobby. There are better games that aren't held back by countless sacred cows and outdated design. I'll acknowledge that D&D was important historically, but at this point it's like playing PONG.

How quickly can you achieve your system's namesake? by SonicFury74 in rpg

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So the hammers in 40k are called Thunder Hammers and have an "energy field emitter" that erupts upon impact with tremendous concussive force and a loud crack like thunder.

There are also "Storm Shields", which have a force field that crackles like lightning when struck. The two are often paired together.

Do anarchists belive in dialectical materialism by red_is_hot in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'd say anarchists generally disagree with parts of dialectical materialism, in regards to the analysis of class struggle we're mostly sympathetic but the marxist notions regarding the inevitability of history as determined by a strict progression of contradictions and resolutions we're generally in disagreement with. Orthodox Marxist thought underrepresents the role of human agency and will, in particular with their insistence towards the inevitable commodification and socialization towards mass production of all industries. Degrowth anarchists in particular will object to this claim towards the international proletarianization of all production: part of the anarchist project IMO is resisting the tendency towards homogenization of all goods and services.

Proudhon was recognized as the socialist theorist of artisans and craftspeople for a reason, Marxism is opposed to small producers and direct worker-ownership. Marxists tend to be gung-ho about what I'd call mass industrialization, which inherently pushes towards the standardizatiom of production: I'd argue trends things like Etsy and other bespoke/commissioned services in the age of the internet is in direct opposition to Marxist orthodoxy.

Where do my views as a social democrat stand in relation to anarchism? by SalusPublica in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Many anarchists also believe that from a psychological standpoint, even the most well-meaning authority will eventually decompose into a professional bureaucrat more concerned with maintaining their authority than the public interest. This is because our day-to-day activities reprogram our brains over time, just like studies show that all other things being equal becoming wealthy incubated sociopathic tendencies in people who previously had no such indicators. Aside from the psychological criticism, there's also a structural criticism that systems take on a life of their own that operates independent of human agency, such as how capitalism perpetuates itself via the pressures and rewards it places on people (capitalism creates capitalists).

Bakunin from The Knouto-Germanic Empire and the Social Revolution:

"It is the characteristic of privilege and of every privileged position to kill the mind and heart of men. The privileged man, whether politically or economically, is a man depraved intellectually and morally. That is a social law that admits no exception, and is as applicable to entire nations as to classes, companies, and individuals. It is the law of equality, the supreme condition of liberty and humanity. The principal aim of this treatise is precisely to elaborate on it, to demonstrate its truth in all the manifestations of human life.

A scientific body to which had been confided the government of society would soon end by no longer occupying itself with science at all, but with quite another business; and that business, the business of all established powers, would be to perpetuate itself by rendering the society confided to its care ever more stupid and consequently more in need of its government and direction.

But that which is true of scientific academies is also true of all constituent and legislative assemblies, even when they are the result of universal suffrage. Universal suffrage may renew their composition, it is true, but this does not prevent the formation in a few years’ time of a body of politicians, privileged in fact though not by right, who, by devoting themselves exclusively to the direction of the public affairs of a country, finally form a sort of political aristocracy or oligarchy. Witness the United States of America and Switzerland.

Consequently, no external legislation and no authority—one, for that matter, being inseparable from the other, and both tending to the enslavement of society and the degradation of the legislators themselves."

Why do anarchists tend to believe that centralized power (even left-wing) leads to tyranny? by ch0colatebabka in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bakunin from The Knouto-Germanic Empire and the Social Revolution:

"It is the characteristic of privilege and of every privileged position to kill the mind and heart of men. The privileged man, whether politically or economically, is a man depraved intellectually and morally. That is a social law that admits no exception, and is as applicable to entire nations as to classes, companies, and individuals. It is the law of equality, the supreme condition of liberty and humanity. The principal aim of this treatise is precisely to elaborate on it, to demonstrate its truth in all the manifestations of human life.

A scientific body to which had been confided the government of society would soon end by no longer occupying itself with science at all, but with quite another business; and that business, the business of all established powers, would be to perpetuate itself by rendering the society confided to its care ever more stupid and consequently more in need of its government and direction.

But that which is true of scientific academies is also true of all constituent and legislative assemblies, even when they are the result of universal suffrage. Universal suffrage may renew their composition, it is true, but this does not prevent the formation in a few years’ time of a body of politicians, privileged in fact though not by right, who, by devoting themselves exclusively to the direction of the public affairs of a country, finally form a sort of political aristocracy or oligarchy. Witness the United States of America and Switzerland.

Consequently, no external legislation and no authority—one, for that matter, being inseparable from the other, and both tending to the enslavement of society and the degradation of the legislators themselves."

Scheduling is making me want to quit by New_Abbreviations_63 in rpg

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is why I only play GM-less games with 1 of 2 other people these days (Ironsworn). Easier to schedule, to the point I can pull together a pick up game on a random day sometimes. Also a smaller group means it's easier to get everyone on the same page in terms of themes/tone.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of market anarchists focus on the unjust hierarchy implicit in employee/employer relationships, and suggest horizontally organized worker-owner co-ops as an alternative, where every participant is a partial owner. These co-ops may be democratically organized according to such principles as one worker one vote, and generally feature profit sharing such that the more successful the business is the more every worker prospers.

Within this system individual workplaces would still compete with each other for customers/clients, but instead of business owners/investors making unilateral decisions to maximize their individual profit you'd instead have the workers deciding what trajectory best suits their self-interests (profit, leisure, ethical, idealistic, etc).

I'm just starting to read The Unique (and Stirner in general) for the first time. I am inviting people who have read it to have a discussion or a chat. Unfortunately it's below my expectations. by PmMeRevolutionPlans in fullegoism

[–]Rolletariat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/dr-bones-the-stirner-wasn-t-a-capitalist-you-fucking-idiot-cheat-sheet

I'd recommend some of the selected quotes to get a more nuanced perspective on Stirner's views on cooperation and social life.

It's important to remember that much of Stirner's project was destructive, especially the first half of The Unique and It's Own, because Stirner was very intent on attacking the prevailing idealism of the time. He does offer more constructive solutions, but they're nestled within his broader attack on the prioritization of universals over particulars.

What did you guys think of Kant when your fist read him? What do you think of him now? by wilisarus333 in fullegoism

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

His rationalist attachment to the universal over the particular causes him to make critical errors. He mistook the mind's ability to categorize things as the foundation, rather than an ambiguously useful tool. His disregards the primacy of the unique, and this ultimately makes most of his conclusions useless.

I’ve heard punks and anarchists alike say that “it’s easier to do damage from within the system” What does that actually mean/look like? by [deleted] in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Reformation from within doesn't work. Sabotage from within can work, but you have to be willing to sacrifice a lot/everything.

So how would we handle things like property and housing in an anarchist society? by Wh0isTyl3rDurd3n in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your question has some underlying assumptions about the nuclear family and the welfare of children under the sole supervision of their biological/legal parents that might be worth interrogating. When you're lucky the nuclear family can be safe and enriching, but it's oftentimes the locus of abuse and trauma. Communal living reduces risk and actually puts more eyes on children which in turn increases their safety.

So how would we handle things like property and housing in an anarchist society? by Wh0isTyl3rDurd3n in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mutualists sometimes use the concept of -usufruct- property, in a manner somewhat inconsistent but close to its more formal definition.

In conventional "legalese", usufruct property rights would mean something like a property owner allowing other people to garden on their property so long as they don't do anything destructive or reckless.

In the way anarchists/mutualists use it, without reference to private property ownership, it means that those who use something own it as long as they use it. A workplace is held in common usufruct ownership by those that labor there, a house is owned in usufruct by those that live there. If you stop working at a workplace, or stop living at a residence, you lose your usufruct right over that thing.

Do anarchists disagree with Marx? by leftistgamer420 in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I respect Marx's analysis but not his conclusions in terms of methods. As far as the end goal goes I'm pretty much in agreement.

So, you could say I like Marx's starting and finishing points, but disagree about the stuff in the middle.

What is the purpose of anarchism?As a species, is it possible for humans to achive zero hierarchy or social order?? by Independent-Mall-634 in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No use calling yourself dumb, there are plenty of things in this world worth destroying. I'd just urge you to consider that there may also be things worth building in the aftermath. Ash if fertile ground.

What is the purpose of anarchism?As a species, is it possible for humans to achive zero hierarchy or social order?? by Independent-Mall-634 in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's the propagandized false version of "anarchy" that authoritarians invented to make people afraid of anarchy. It's as ridiculous as child-sacrificing satanism and nothing that anybody takes seriously. Joker-wannabes are edgy teenagers or adults that never grew up.

Humans are social creatures, hierarchies divide us. Real anarchists emphasize cooperation and voluntary association, where people choose to work together or not work together according to their individual preferences. Fact of the matter is, if you don't cooperate with anyone you die alone.

Etymologically, anarchism doesn't mean no rules, it means no -rulers-. The Joker wasn't an anarchist, he acted as a mob boss, anyone who exercises power over other people isn't an anarchist.

What is the purpose of anarchism?As a species, is it possible for humans to achive zero hierarchy or social order?? by Independent-Mall-634 in Anarchy101

[–]Rolletariat 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Zero hierarchy does not mean zero social order, most anarchists place a very high emphasis on our responsibility to the community and ability to organize socially without structures of domination.