It looks like Mutualism is the only good form of anarchy

It looks like Mutualism is the only good form of anarchy

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_syndicalism
anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secI8.html)
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Agreed. Without the use of any kind of state apparatus or monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, it's the only form of anarchism that can even make any sense.

That still dosnt make it good compared to other ideologies though.

nope, that would be syndicalism

I'm ignorant on this.

Dosnt syndicalism rely a lot on reformism? And is therefore gay?

State socialism based on direct democracy of workers in a workplace and organizing in a federation of delegates from work places
I think it would be difficult to organize that as production for use without a state (if you don't consider the structure itself a state)

*Socialism based in direct democracy

Anarchism doesn't have "reformism" because it isn't a dogmatic pseudo-religious circlejerk like marxism.

Collectively run farms did not fail!
An anarchist is someone who kicks economics to the curb and does the impossible!

Tbh I'm surprised state syndicalism isn't a thing, although I suppose that would basically just be left/council communism wouldn't it?

Is the Ancom one trying to reference Stalin's forced collectivization? lol

All the ones about anarcho-communism suck and fail to actually address anarcho communism. I've been waiting for over a week for someone to make one that actually bites into anarchist socialism but almost all of them are, like in the OP, just going "lol socialism doesn't work" and might as well be "Human nature :^🍀🍀🍀"

The ancap ones actually are about the fact that anarcho-capitalism has some very serious questions about how far you're allowed to pursue property rights. Is it okay to fine people a trillion dollars for unwittingly walking on your unmarked territory and then put them into a labor camp until they pay off that debt? If so, that's fucking horrific. If not, well, why not? It's your property.

The an-prim ones go into asking just how much primitivism really is anti-technology. Are spears technology that needs to be stopped? How about bows? Crossbows? Technology wasn't just some singular happenstance that suddenly started alienating us from the world and to go against technology means that there is no serious dividing line between banning a car and banning using a stick for a spear.

Some of the other ones suck (an-transhuman in particular is just "lol deus ex XDDD") but the ones about an-coms are completely fucking worthless.

The ones about MLs are pretty good tbh.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_syndicalism

I know, but I've been waiting for one that makes me grumble in annoyance because I can't quite come up with a fitting reply. It's just not fun being made fun of when the person doing it sucks at it.

If you're ignorant on it, how can you agree with what OP says?

If you think it's reformist, then it really shows how you don't know what the hell you're talking about with respect to anarchism.

Isn't that some kind of pseudo-fascist socdem bullshit though?

Bi-weekly reminder that anarcho-capitalism allows all forms of anarchism as long as it doesn't physically aggress against the lands of the other varieties.

Agreeded.

Reminder that you're a naive idiotic liberal.

That's just not constructive in any way.

Yeah, that's not nice.

Time to make him
APLOGIZE

Reminder communist anarchism allows any other form of anarchism as long as no one is using unjustified violence (including murder over a private property claim)
So we'd have to defend ourselves against propertarians unfortunately

Why would collectively run farms inevitably fail?

...

The aynclap pics demonstrate actual flaws in their ideology, but this one just says "it sucks because it just does"

Not even a fan of ancom, but that's pathetic

I'm amazed by how much anticommunism propaganda works still to that day.

It's not like any of the others are above meme tier.

usually because outside states impose sanctions on them

...

If everyone work only a hard as he he willing to do but we all share the common production, eventually, there is not enough willing workers left to feed everyone.

The alternative is to force them, but you can hardly call that anarchism then.

what about anarcho-individualism op?

Honest question: could liberalism or anarcho capitalism lead to communism?

Reminder that eliminating every other option besides work and giving someone liberty to make that choice is a form of force/aggression

Propertarian faggots who use terms like negative and positive rights don't seem to understand this but putting someone in a situation where they can either do A or die is aggression. It's like going up to a man dying of thirst in the desert and saying suck my dick or you'll die. Is that aggression? Of course it is

...

Yes.


Why would you have to work in Ancapistan? If you own the land, live in the tropics, and have a bunch of mango and avocado trees, you're set for life. You won't even need water; you've got the makings of a commune. Invite your friends to live there.

How is this mutualism?

"While the collectives had existed, there was a 20% increase in production (and this is compared to the pre-war harvest which had been "a good crop" [Fraser, Op. Cit.p. 370])"

(anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secI8.html)

Wut?