An anarchist revolution won’t happen until we have enough people doing anarchist praxis anyway. My point is that material circumstances quickly radicalize people. I don’t necessarily think there’s much hope for the US to avoid civil war at this point, but in any case if the radicalization happens to be towards anarchist praxis, then you won’t get another leader on top.
I don’t know what you tell you mate, I don’t have an answer to your nihilism. Either perform and agitate for an anarchist praxis to avoid a new dictator, or passively vote and wait for the inevitable fascist decent. It’s your choice in the end.
First paragraph: Agree, except I believe anarchism is unstable and will lead to another leader eventually anyways.
Second paragraph: That’s a false choice and you know it. There are so many possibilities for political organization-- see, for example, every country in the world. I’m not interested in arguing with someone who makes bad faith arguments like this.
I’m sure if you take a moment to analyze your behavior in this thread with an unbiased view, you’ll come to agree with me. If you cannot do that, you should learn how-- not a dig, it’s unironically very useful for finding holes in your views.
Who’s “we”? <1% of the population? Good luck enforcing your views, we can’t even enforce democracy with a majority (debatably) that believes in it.
An anarchist revolution won’t happen until we have enough people doing anarchist praxis anyway. My point is that material circumstances quickly radicalize people. I don’t necessarily think there’s much hope for the US to avoid civil war at this point, but in any case if the radicalization happens to be towards anarchist praxis, then you won’t get another leader on top.
I don’t know what you tell you mate, I don’t have an answer to your nihilism. Either perform and agitate for an anarchist praxis to avoid a new dictator, or passively vote and wait for the inevitable fascist decent. It’s your choice in the end.
First paragraph: Agree, except I believe anarchism is unstable and will lead to another leader eventually anyways.
Second paragraph: That’s a false choice and you know it. There are so many possibilities for political organization-- see, for example, every country in the world. I’m not interested in arguing with someone who makes bad faith arguments like this.
See also:
I’m not arguing in bad faith, nor am I passively waiting for “society to collapse”. You project your own behavior onto me and then complain about it.
I’m sure if you take a moment to analyze your behavior in this thread with an unbiased view, you’ll come to agree with me. If you cannot do that, you should learn how-- not a dig, it’s unironically very useful for finding holes in your views.
So then the social order we get depends more on economic forces than it does on what the majority wants.
It’s a bit of both