This a weird post

The op of the anarchism thread

So if we are bootlickers for (and I’m just using this phrasing for the sake of the argument, obviously there is tons of work to be done to better society) wanting to keep the status quo, what does that make you, someone who reaps the benefits of licking the boot while actively being against it?

And no I’m not making the “you can’t use a computer if you’re a communist” argument that I’ve ignorantly made in the past, I’m genuinely asking, if you consider those who benefit from capitalism and praise it, bootlickers, what do you consider yourself?

Damn I didn’t know that nigga was serious

They're a great poster/person and it's a great thread

That's not what a bootlicker is

I posted in it once I’ll check it out again

You and I probably have vastly different visions of what anarchism should look like though lmao

So help me understand, because I’ve been called a bootlicker more times than I can remember on KTT and I’ve never advocated for anything which I thought could intentionally hurt lower class people.

Keep in mind that anarchists and socialists have had beef with each other since day 1

I like the idea of anarchy. But just like communism I don’t think human nature would allow for a sustainable society under such a system. But I don’t understand the notion that anarchism is in any way a opposition to capitalism that some of these socialists make. Anarchism is basically the same thing as an unregulated free market, except even worse, there’s no government to even represent the people lmaoo.

Socialism directly requires authoritarianism so this makes sense thinking about it

That is not what anarchism is

Bootlickers are staunch defenders of the capitalist/ruling class

no it doesnt

So what is anarchism?

Both socialists and anarchists recognize that any state is built upon violence (courts, police, army) and is inherently dangerous.

Socialists say that this power must be used for the benefit of the masses. The state cannot be abolished overnight and is necessary to protect the people and their achievements. The state will naturally wither away once economics are advanced enough. State violence will gradually disappear as the economy progresses and conflicts lessen.

Anarchists claim that a state can be abolished very quickly and replaced with different structures that are built more on voluntary participation than state coercion.They don't believe in a transition period the way socialists do.

Socialists believe they can use the state to further their goals, anarchists believe the state in itself is harmful. Different mindsets

Elaborate please.

How does the implementation of a socialist state not require the participation of the entire population including those who don’t wish to participate?

You could say the same thing about capitalism.

twitter.com/ArashKolahi/status/1256288796414361600

jacobinmag.com/2016/03/socialism-cold-war-tyranny-democracy-authoritarianism

See I would argue not though, because you can still live in a capitalist society while living a completely autonomous self reliant lifestyle. Many people do it in the States independently. I don’t see why this couldn’t translate over to larger communities built on these principles as it’s been tried before in the States too. Especially with the access to technology we have today. It’s not impossible to start a little autonomous community. Plus isn’t that pretty much what Native Americans already do on reservations? (Correct me if I’m wrong I’m really not sure).

I would think it’s virtually impossible to practice a capitalist lifestyle under a socialist national government.

So socialists believe that eventually the power will truly be one of the people and there won’t be a need for elected officials to represent us in government?

we are veering into "accidentally left wing" territory

an end goal of communism - stateless society