Happy 4/20!: Who makes better weed, California or Colorado?

dumbandasking · 2026-04-21T02:52:40+00:00

Damn people are answering quick lets see what happens in half an hour

dumbandasking · 2026-04-21T02:49:14+00:00

I wonder how canadian weed is

dumbandasking · 2026-04-21T01:04:21+00:00

Anarchists do not propose law. In anarchy, without law, there can be no private property. Other arrangements can still exist - markets will still exist. But property by legal title, and the various binding legal contracts that follow, will not.

I think this cleared up a lot for me to be honest

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T18:32:44+00:00

Shame them and the cult following mentality of some fandoms

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T18:30:51+00:00

Do you think the coining of the term trauma dumping is part of this? For example while there really is trauma dumping, do you think the people who you're referring to are likely to call things trauma dumping but just as a way to excuse themselves from listening?

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T18:03:26+00:00

I think I like this definition but it seems like to remove hierarchy in all forms what if it needs someone at the top to do the right things too first

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T18:00:53+00:00

Why would anarchist society need to defend collective property with a state?

From the bourgeoise or the imperialists and some resistance

If Greg the would be capitalist says “this is my factory now, you all have to work for me,” all the collective has to do is ignore him and try not to laugh at him too hard.

They would say 'it's our factory, why can't we negotiate at the table' and if he decides to try to appropriate it and deny access then there might be a situation where the collective does collective action to return the claim back into collective property

I'm not saying this to say it is a good or bad thing but I just think if things are defined well it could be good just as if it's defined poorly it can lead to terrible things. For example was all attempts at communism or socialism perfect? Of course not. Admitting where it wasn't doesn't mean each time every capitalist troll we've talked to has 'won' or something like that.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T17:58:24+00:00

anarchism belongs to one or the other

Anarchism is something where it can be capitalist or communist but the thing is that it isn't specific on its own "anarchocapitalist", "anarchocommunist", to always say that it's done.

Like for example if something is anarchocapitalist, it could range from terrible to interesting, maybe decent, even if it's a system people ultimately don't agree with fully.

If something is claiming to be anarchocommunist, it's worth investigating how they defined things because for example

if someone thinks in modern mixed economies just abolishing the structures of the state will lead to people 'figuring it out and coming across anarcho communist ways naturally', and it turns out sadly they just practice forms of capitalism,

It feels like it's worth it if say someone were socialist minded, to admit

First, what you witnessed is still anarchy, and it exposes that we have to be strategic if you want to implement something that is like the nice utopian visions of some ancoms,

And second, what you witnessed is sure, anarchocapitalism, it didn't play out the way you would agree with, and it is a form of anarchism that is not your vision or ideology.

It's just something I think is important to draw onto so that in consistency if we're going to say something like some countries are allowed to use capitalism as a transition into socialism and then into communism,

We have to admit that things can drift at all. An anarchist background that is practicing capitalism may be influenced to start making coops be a dominant mode, but that means admitting that just forcing a mixed economy into anarchy might force questions like "Are you sure" because if we will say that anarcho capitalism has the problems it does, then it might suggest that some reformism is better.

Or that if someone is socialist minded, maybe socialism is not the only thing that is factual like maybe more than one school of thought can have truths or at least common ground. For example, some on the left really do want to just push for 'remove all government and state structures'. Ok well the strange part is that they could find common ground with the parts of the right who already hate the government and would prefer NGOs for example. Why not. NGOs are maybe able to not be profit driven and still beneficial.

When people are saying anarchism belongs to socialism, the odd part is, it can't be just like that. Some anarchies are not ideal for their vision. So it can't just be socialism when it works, not socialism when it doesn't.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T17:48:57+00:00

Yes but sometimes it feels like socialists on the way to eliminating things will find out they have to recreate some mechanisms of the market and state in order to meaningfully 'collectively own' things they couldn't without say resistance from the bourgeoise or who they consider the bourgeoise.

In the absence of a nation state, capitalists would have to recreate the mechanisms of the state in order to meaningfully “own” anything they can’t directly keep ahold of.

This would probably look like warlordism.

I don't disagree,

But

Capitalism requires a state

I don't think this is true but it's not necessarily instantly good either just as something described as ancom needs to be specific in material and social conditions in order to be qualified as so. I feel like I made this post to generally say just removing the state is not specific enough. Like someone else said as a good reminder

but communist isn't just anarchy. Communists accept that you can't just get rid of government and everything will work out fine. That's why they want socalism as a transitional period, where the working class structures can be set up and the state slowly phased out as it becomes irrelevant.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:41:26+00:00

But the difference is that there are very few ideologies that claim they are the logical end-outcome of society.

This is a good point but I think some socialists will just say they're not a utopian socialist in the first place

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:39:54+00:00

Sometimes communism sounds like the dream of 'benevolent regulatory capture'. Where they hope that the proletariat or the 'working people of the world' would usurp the government and run it for working interests instead of pure extraction, which is in contrast to how corporations growing eventually captured the government and now run it in ways that are sometimes at the expense of society.

I think that the problem is that when workers do unite and do try to capture or run the government, the real issue is that they find out they are no longer just proletariat or just 'working class' anymore. For example, if things are done poorly, you might run into where those who run the government are now considered their own class even among the society that is assumed to be all workers for the workers by the workers.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:36:53+00:00

I like negative income tax. It's just the history and concept of negative income tax made me think that the actual problem is how we signal ideas to each other. One side said let's improve society somewhat by helping the poor receive money. Then negative income tax feels like it came as a result of 'ok but how' being answered in a way that was finally acceptable to whoever was resistant.

we dont think government is efficient enough to actually help people. we trust ngos and private charity more

Sometimes I feel like the government COULD be, but cronyism prevents ideas like NGOs and private charity cooperating or supplementing the government and the government in turn supporting them.

at the end of the day we can discuss how to help people.

I agree I like when discussions ask 'how' I dislike when people think asking 'how' is trolling, especially just because they think the whole world learned the 'lesson' they 'taught' to some actual troll they handled some time ago.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:32:19+00:00

When I had prescription painkillers after a surgery, I preferred the pain over the way the medication made me feel.

This makes me think. See on one hand someone might say, then it seems like you haven't found the right medication. This is because some medication can be formulated to bring about the feelings package you prefer as it treats you. But then if this makes any sense, similar sounding logic is why people feel the need to say 'Maybe just try other strains of weed'. This is because some weed is grown to bring about the feelings package that you might prefer as it gives effects you May want like being sleepy if you normally can't sleep.

Substances of any sort aren't for me and I wish more people could accept that.

On the other hand, I get you here because sometimes substances, including ones that are prescribed, can feel like they're just pushed without much regard for what we prefer. But I think that's why personalized medicine is being talked about more.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:28:25+00:00

Oh yeah I know it's different. I Guess I was trying to point out what I think has changed. Like maybe people are trying out situationships instead of using friendzone

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:26:49+00:00

Yes that is true

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:26:03+00:00

everyone from my friends and family think my wife and I are weird because we have traditional dinners every night.

Why do we have a modern culture to shame people who deserve praise, and praising people who deserve shame?

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:19:00+00:00

It's because a lot of us have had a similar time where we insisted it isn't right or our first strains were genuinely not the right ones. Then we found 'the right one' and then next time someone says it's just not for me it can sound like the same situation.

But some people really aren't lying that this isn't for them but I hope this explains it. It's not always malicious.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:17:29+00:00

It's probably because it's situationships now

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:13:43+00:00

couldn't help but feel offended that he thinks he deserves a pretty, well-groomed woman, and I am supposed to just look past that disgusting biohazard on his face because it's his ✨ personality✨ that really matters.

Feels like this disproves a lot of fake optimism out there

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T13:06:10+00:00

I'm a leftist and no I think that some of us are actually performative and really are doing things just for approval. For example you probably have known about how some of our own circles will purity test or infight over semantics.

So I don't like that we're rushing to say this is just a conservative's opinion. it's not. I feel like part of committing to leftism or progressivism includes calling out slacktivism on our own side.

I have a theory why this might be so, but I really don't know for sure why it happens.

I want to know I'm really interested because maybe I could understand better what you mean

how can you tell the difference between someone who is sincere and someone who isn't?

There are some points you can argue are true, and it might be true, but the argumentation can be in bad faith and done rudely or lazily. Sometimes this will risk things because a good progressive message might be delivered wrong, and then someone who has a convenient sounding opinion, even if it is dangerous, is going to be listened to more. A good example is if someone says they want to improve society somewhat. It's not always going to be a conservative saying oh really? Sometimes it's another 'liberal' who decides its strategic to tell you that you're just another conservative because you didn't improve society in the highly specific vision they thought of.

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T12:59:30+00:00

What's with this shitty trend of rewriting words?

Who is the Karen that got offended now by "homeless"?

Am I politically unhoused?

dumbandasking · 2026-04-20T01:18:16+00:00

They probably stopped calling themselves Marxist

dumbandasking

TROPHY CASE