where is the chapter of antifa that isn't into communism and obssessed with transgenderism? where's the chapter of maga that isn't into military surveillence states and obsessed with the christian god?
from both extremes and all the way through the middle, political discourse in america is suffused with statist, coercive, collectivist mind viruses of one form or another.
voluntarism and stateless free market anarchism has no marketing nor mass-appeal game - more or less intrinsically and necessarily.
if fate is determined by memetics and collectivist mindshare, it doesn't look too rosy for individual freedom.
...then again, a free market #anarchist association doesn't need "mass adoption", it only needs willing exchange partners, strong opsec and defenses, and wealth. no matter if there is 1 adopter or 1 million. it is merely a permissionless, exit-preserving set of norms for interacting with others; anyone is free to participate or opt out any time. its a pattern of behavior. an open protocol.
you can run your own instance or join another that will have you.
i didn't know where this note was going when i wrote the first two sentences
Replies (17)
I think it's by design that the extremes of both sides have bizarre facets that they prioritize above just fixing the money. As long as we're fighting culture wars then we don't notice who's picking our pockets. It's frustrating and dumb 😮💨
It makes sense that the people who don't believe in collective coercion don't gather into large groups to try to violently force their philosophy onto others.
It makes sense that the people who do believe in collective coercion do gather into large groups to try to violently force their philosophy onto others.
This is why building and using agorist tools to opt out even though their systems of control exist is more effective than expecting to build a truly free society.
It's a goid note though 👌
People who don't belong to groups have usually been eradicated by those that do throughout human history. This is why we are a social species. We don't survive alone and in the age of the nation state it won't be long before the fascists forces gain enough momentum to come and get all of us. Opting out sounds good in theory but don't underestimate the states' power of oppression
This is how my thinking has evolved. I would rather live in an open society with agorist pockets with due process provisions than live in an a fascist society with an AnCap dictator.
Yes. I watch digital open protocols as a "simulation" signal - if we can build viable digitally voluntarily-associating sub networks, then that to me is a bit of signal that the concepts are feasible and attractive. There remain problems to solve for transitioning the good parts of that to meat space (as necessary; maybe much can remain online), but at least there becomes a model and the problem space can be chipped away at.
Unsurprisingly, Bitcoin (and nostr) have been strong positive signals for me in that regard. Should be said, though, I've seen countless failures in the digital space too. So I hope that we can all do - in real-time - the analysis of what works/doesn't and keep on implementing the good parts.
If you ever see me fighting online, this is nearly always why.
If you think anarchy and agorism mean no groups you don't understand those philosophies.
right, quite the contrary: the most competent and fit antifragile groups.
What specific failures?
I probably have a **lot** of work to do to digest my experiences, but the quickest answer that is probably both most complete and most vague is: most problems were connecting to funding. either too much or too little, or problems stemming from the source of the funds.
Yet again a reason why I'm cautiously optimistic about the ecosystem that is attached to Bitcoin. The "physics" of the funding situation here is entirely different. For one stupid example: you could have a weirdo freedom tech genius who was never able to attract VC money for his whole career because his work wouldn't 100x an initial investment. He buys a ton of bitcoin in the early days out of pure ideological alignment. He can now self-fund or fund others like him - and he didn't get the money via some cantillion pipeline or by manipulating and vampiring off anyone, so chances are marginally better that he's not a piece of shit. Hard to predict exactly what's downstream of that, but it also seems hard to imagine it would be worse than the current landscape.
I know what those words mean. The IWW were anarcho-syndicalists and they were absolutely crushed by the US government. Their leadership was murdered, jailed, and deported until it was nothing but a husk. It exists today mainly as a hobby for the children if the professional managerial class.
You must be one of the violent coercion lovers who got lost.
The literal purpose of this place is building the tools to allow people who truly love freedom to be free without a show of violence.
I know about the IWW and other early anarchosyndicalist movements. I use the knowledge of how they were beaten to know how to do it better today.
If you think the lesson was to lick boot instead of choosing different tactics in the fight for freedom, you and I are not going to be friends.
Finding some shared common ground between left and non-left anarchists is low-hanging fruit.
It seems like it should be easier to get buy in to anarchist groups since they are naturally single purposes.
Somehow we still get this obsession with single mega groups that cover every opinion like it actually makes sense that my opinions on fiscal policy and gays must be aligned.
Both of humanity's two main interaction domains: meat space and networked society; are bad at facilitating hyper-contextual relationships. on traditional social media, you either FOLLOW or UNFOLLOW or MUTE or REPORT, wholesale, treating the other user as a monolith. In meat space you have to share borders and physical resources and while it's currently a little more generous wrt interacting with people contextually and not as monoliths, it's still bad, relative to the possibility space.
SCWoT - Subjective, Contextual WoT - (currently in the earliest of days on nostr with GrapeRank) is the first viable shot we have at exploring the alternative. Like I've said hundreds of times, I very seriously think it's our best chance at survival as a species, if we want to be free.
I need to be able to loathe 99% of a person, but love 1% of him and do mutually-beneficial business and computing with him within that 1%.
Bitcoin: money for enemies
Nostr: protocols for enemies
SCWoT: society for enemies
And yes, I'm Squatting the term SCWoT
I never advocated violent coercion and was a member of the IWW when I was younger. I'm simply pessimistic about being able to escape tyranny. I have never and will never lick any boots sir. I grow my own food, live in the country, and mind my business.
