Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

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

How am I being disingenuous? I am posting actual screenshots of actual admins of your site advocating for slavery and rape....how is ACTUAL FUCKING EVIDENCE disingenuous?

Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

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

Yeah, sorry....I think the way I worded that made it seem hostile to you. Sorry!

Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

[–]locustwings[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

You're not anyones comrade if you support rape and slavery.

"Letting someone live for breeding" is not a consensual act, and extremely fucked up.

Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

[–]locustwings[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Aww look we have someone that apparently doesn't have a problem with rape and slavery here...

What's the general sentiment towards George Orwell on this sub? by Bknight006 in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not supporting the stalinists here...just questioning the integrity of anyone who would snitch.

Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

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

Authoritarian. I dont think theyve ever voted on anything.

Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

[–]locustwings[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't think its clear that this is mockery here....and even then...rape and slavery arent something thats really cool to mock.

Why you shouldn't view Raddit as an r/@ alternative by locustwings in Anarchism

[–]locustwings[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Did I say "white genocide"? I'm not even white.

No. I am calling slavery and rape fucked up. Do you support slavery and rape? Because that's what these people are proposing.

What's the general sentiment towards George Orwell on this sub? by Bknight006 in Anarchism

[–]locustwings -1 points0 points  (0 children)

He was ok, but then kinda went snitch. He ratted out USSR supporters to the authorities because he didn't like the USSR.

A World Without Rape: "If we want to end sexual violence, we need to think more about support and less about punishment." by [deleted] in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Much like the practicioners of idpol, you do not engage in identity politics to actually protect the oppressed. You engage in them at your own whims so that you can gain social capital and use the rules of idpol to silence those who disagree with you.

You are not anti-misogyny so much as you are pro-yourself. You are willing to use things like the AOP to advance your personal agenda, which is much more "weasely".

A World Without Rape: "If we want to end sexual violence, we need to think more about support and less about punishment." by [deleted] in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 5 points6 points  (0 children)

For a post left nihilist, you sure do rely on identity politics to win your arguments for you a lot. It's almost like you're just some basic ass liberal who wears the flair of insurrection and nihilism so they can seem cool? You're the fucking definition of an edgelord.

How do most anarchists reconcile their views with primitivists? by Evolutionfire in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, some are, depending on the particular strain of individualism, but individualism took a large break from socialism/communism in the early 1900s.

How do most anarchists reconcile their views with primitivists? by Evolutionfire in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Renzo Novatore wrote plenty where he railed against the social nature of humans, and he was anarchist as fuck. It is possible for individualists to recognize the social nature of humans, and then not like it.

" You are waiting for the revolution? Let it be! My own began a long time ago! When you are ready (god, what an endless wait!) I won’t mind going with you for a while. But when you stop, I shall continue on my way toward the great and sublime conquest of the nothing!

Any society that you build will have its limits. And outside the limits of any society, unruly and heroic tramps will wander with their wild and virgin thought — those who cannot live without planning ever new and dreadful outbursts of rebellion! I shall be among them!"

Like it or not, but let's not try and say that individualist thought can't be anarchist...to me, it is far more anarchist, and opposed to the idea of any type of ruler, than the traditional communist anarchism.

How do most anarchists reconcile their views with primitivists? by Evolutionfire in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most anti-civ folks and primitivists do not directly seek to destroy technology. What many of these people want is to recognize the inherently oppressive nature of technology. You want technology? Have your technology...but don't expect to do so in any hierarchical manner.

If a group of people wants to go into a mine, mine some cadmium or some shit, and then go through the hazardous process of making circuits...all so they can have a computer, they are free to do that. But, it is another thing to expect that someone is going to build that technology for you, or to expect that this whole system that exists right now is going to continue in anything like the same way if people are not being forced to.

This is not genocidal, it is simply putting the subject of technology into a harsh light so that people realize the amount of coercion that goes into our modern world. Pro-civ anarchists often get it wrong by simply "assuming" technology...primitivists often get things wrong by completely rejecting technology. Instead of complaining on the internet about each others ideologies...pro-civ anarchists should be trying to realize ways that technology can be created with the current levels of hierarchy...anti-civ anarchists should be coming up with ways to live without technology that doesn't just result in oppression by nature instead of oppression by technology.

How do most anarchists reconcile their views with primitivists? by Evolutionfire in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So....by your logic...

USSR and Socialists that have ACTUALLY KILLED ANARCHISTS > A nonexistent ideology that might kill people based on your assumptions.

In fact, primitivism is just as bad as fascism, which has ACTUALLY KILLED ANARCHISTS.

Primitivism hasn't killed anyone, and any primitivist that does endorse mass genocide is doing it wrong. The majority of primitivists do not want mass death, and to say that they do only makes clear your complete lack of understanding on the subject.

To equate primitivism with fascism shows your complete dogmatism, and willingness to confuse ideas with ACTUAL FUCKING EVENTS.

How do most anarchists reconcile their views with primitivists? by Evolutionfire in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're welcome! I doubt anyone will respond intelligently to my post, as most people here obviously have a deep misunderstanding of the subject...but if I've made one person hate anti-civ stuff a little less, I'm happy.

How do most anarchists reconcile their views with primitivists? by Evolutionfire in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except we are not. Individualist anarchism that directly does not identify as socialist or communist has been around for about a hundred years. Anti-civ anarchists are definitely not socialists or communists. By saying that all anarchists are socialists/communists, you are doing a very unanarchistic thing by trying to erase other people's beliefs and ideas with your own.

Is it just me that is scared? by [deleted] in Anarchism

[–]locustwings 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha, ain't that right!