Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300 - Revision history

Reversedragon: totality of non-aggressive activities

2026-06-27T10:13:58Z

totality of non-aggressive activities

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:13, 27 June 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374\|h4 = united nonviolence of special oppressions }} -> the motif that a country is composed of "[[E:White supremacy movements\|superior people]]" (social construct, bad) and a ton of endless categories of people who fail to function as perfectly as society's most elite people for some highly specific reason, that if you have any trouble getting into society there must be some highly specific reason you are specially oppressed which requires you to find other people who are specially oppressed exactly the same way and for all the highly specific groups to convince each other at length not to hurt {{em\|each other}} and oppress each other. I am so tired of this, specifically because of that last thing. it's clear that over time our basic assumptions about capitalism and Liberal-republicanism have simply ceased to be true, and the way the whole thing operates is a bit different from the way people think. it seems less that people inherently want to accept each other because they're different and more like there are many separate subpopulations of people shoving each other around all trying to fit onto an island too small to fit all of them.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374\|h4 = united nonviolence of special oppressions }} -> the motif that a country is composed of "[[E:White supremacy movements\|superior people]]" (social construct, bad) and a ton of endless categories of people who fail to function as perfectly as society's most elite people for some highly specific reason, that if you have any trouble getting into society there must be some highly specific reason you are specially oppressed which requires you to find other people who are specially oppressed exactly the same way and for all the highly specific groups to convince each other at length not to hurt {{em\|each other}} and oppress each other. I am so tired of this, specifically because of that last thing. it's clear that over time our basic assumptions about capitalism and Liberal-republicanism have simply ceased to be true, and the way the whole thing operates is a bit different from the way people think. it seems less that people inherently want to accept each other because they're different and more like there are many separate subpopulations of people shoving each other around all trying to fit onto an island too small to fit all of them.

			{{li\|I=S1/Ag\|tradition=Ag, DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374}}totality of non-aggressive activities / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-SquareOfNonAggressiveActivities}}) -> this absolutely baffled me until I found agorism, because I always wanted to just believe anarchists when they said they weren't right-Libertarians, but in practice I think there is actually not a lot of difference most of the time. there really is a section of blue anarchists that is indistinguishable from Libertarians.

	{{li\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=30,73\|Q2=3073\|h4 = united states of states of states }} / China full of Chinas full of Chinas / USSR of SSRs of SSRs / tribe of tribes of tribes -> the motif that a country is always just a voluntary link between demographics. that the United States is composed of Black women and White women spontaneously opting to be the same country, or Black women and White women opting to be women that then together with Black men opt to be the United States. etc.<br/>		{{li\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=30,73\|Q2=3073\|h4 = united states of states of states }} / China full of Chinas full of Chinas / USSR of SSRs of SSRs / tribe of tribes of tribes -> the motif that a country is always just a voluntary link between demographics. that the United States is composed of Black women and White women spontaneously opting to be the same country, or Black women and White women opting to be women that then together with Black men opt to be the United States. etc.<br/>

Reversedragon: Order is the mother of anarchism

2026-06-27T08:40:16Z

Order is the mother of anarchism

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:40, 27 June 2026
Line 71:		Line 71:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/A\|Q=30,76\|Q2=3076}}[[Ontology:Q3076\|Capitalism ends through many rounds of "Absolutely Not"]] / Capitalism ends through many rounds of "NO" / United States capitalism ends when we realize every protest is about "{{TTS\|tts=No!\|NO}}" / proposition No (hypothetical transition to anarchism) -> derived anarchist proposition. the claim that in the United States, specific-sense historical materialism revolves solely around protests that say "no" to something, while movements about actually creating anything in particular won't form any enduring connections. protests about gender identity or abortion or specific forms of racism or even pollution aren't actually protests <em>for</em> anything, they're solely protests {{em\|against somebody prohibiting or destroying something}}. there are an alarming number of examples for this. A) "Black Lives Matter": no police shootings. B) during COVID, there were more people than there should have been banding together across charcoal and rust factions to simply side with "no requirements". C) blanket resistance against "AI" without thinking about the origins of the problem in disorganization, conflation of products with individual Subjects, and the nonsense that is copyright disputes. "no AI". D) widespread negative sentiment against "social media", "phones", and The Big Guy that "greedily" devised them. these idle critiques are all "no" statements to merely take the thing away. E) "No Kings": it's in the phrase. arguments it could be true: this is the only kind-of convincing claim I've heard for how rival demographics could directly join together {{em\|because of}} their identities despite the pressures of Liberalism. it's consistent with the notion that nations begin as population-societies which must begin with links and outer boundaries, by suggesting the boundary directly forms the population. argument it could be false: this could lead to horizontal conflict of two or more factions mutually protesting each other, as already happens on things like abortion clinics. argument 2 for false: this feels like it clashes really badly with the history of Afrikaners I briefly outlined in another entry. feels like an Afrikaner model could be as useful for challenging some of these claims as the Trotsky model		{{li\|start=y\|I=F2/A\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Proudhonism is the mother of order / Anarchism is the mother of order (may imply particular anarchisms, and not all anarchisms) / "Liberty is the mother of order" (Proudhon) / Freedom from States is the mother of order / Charcoal-tinted anarchic social formations corresponding specifically to anarchism but never to Communism exist before States exist, and are the natural healthy order of things which is violated by the creation of States / [note: retrieve and reread quote again later. I need to see how many separate senses this proposition has within its original context] -> Proudhon's statement is so difficult to unpack because the more I think about it it's seemingly talking about five to ten different things at once, and the statement has totally different truth values depending on what things it's actually referring to. I think this iteration of the statement is false because it's backwards. I think that anarchism specifically emerges from conditions of people being herded into nation-states where they have little participation in politics and then forgetting that states exist, and outright believing that states interacting with people regularly and directly ("totalitarianism") is a thing that must immediately be dissolved and removed, while in actuality that can only be done through the colonial extension of particular nation-states across the world which retain state power over all the places whose governments they remove.

			{{li\|I=S2/A\|Q=30,76\|Q2=3076}}[[Ontology:Q3076\|Capitalism ends through many rounds of "Absolutely Not"]] / Capitalism ends through many rounds of "{{TTS\|tts=No!\|NO}}" / United States capitalism ends when we realize every protest is about "{{TTS\|tts=No!\|NO}}" / proposition No (hypothetical transition to anarchism) -> derived anarchist proposition. the claim that in the United States, specific-sense historical materialism revolves solely around protests that say "no" to something, while movements about actually creating anything in particular won't form any enduring connections. protests about gender identity or abortion or specific forms of racism or even pollution aren't actually protests <em>for</em> anything, they're solely protests {{em\|against somebody prohibiting or destroying something}}. there are an alarming number of examples for this. A) "Black Lives Matter": no police shootings. B) during COVID, there were more people than there should have been banding together across charcoal and rust factions to simply side with "no requirements". C) blanket resistance against "AI" without thinking about the origins of the problem in disorganization, conflation of products with individual Subjects, and the nonsense that is copyright disputes. "no AI". D) widespread negative sentiment against "social media", "phones", and The Big Guy that "greedily" devised them. these idle critiques are all "no" statements to merely take the thing away. E) "No Kings": it's in the phrase. arguments it could be true: this is the only kind-of convincing claim I've heard for how rival demographics could directly join together {{em\|because of}} their identities despite the pressures of Liberalism. it's consistent with the notion that nations begin as population-societies which must begin with links and outer boundaries, by suggesting the boundary directly forms the population. argument it could be false: this could lead to horizontal conflict of two or more factions mutually protesting each other, as already happens on things like abortion clinics. argument 2 for false: this feels like it clashes really badly with the history of Afrikaners I briefly outlined in another entry. feels like an Afrikaner model could be as useful for challenging some of these claims as the Trotsky model

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 109:		Line 111:
	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|class=field_exstruct field_LGBT\|Q=22,87\|Q2=2287\|h4 = Anarchism defines itself as Evil }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,87\|9k]]) -> this definition of anarchism applies to fields like non-normative queer theory.		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|class=field_exstruct field_LGBT\|Q=22,87\|Q2=2287\|h4 = Anarchism defines itself as Evil }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,87\|9k]]) -> this definition of anarchism applies to fields like non-normative queer theory.

	{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism ~~actually~~ seeks molecularization }} / Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model of all social interactions / Despite all the Idealist nonsense coming out of a lot of anarchist writers, the ultimate goal of anarchism is to become aware of all the small-scale interactions that occur between individuals or small groups of people and over time through some kind of gradual transition process put societies in control of all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]]) -><br/>		{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Order is the mother of anarchism }} / Charcoal-tinted anarchic social formations corresponding to anarchism and not Communism may be caused by the conditions of Liberal-republicanism, and in any case, the conditions of Liberal-republicanism falsely program all its inhabitants to forget Liberal-republicanism exists or creates their conditions and think that anarchism is a logical next step from these conditions when actually to attempt to create anarchism may abolish all conditions that make anarchism seem possible -> what I think is true for many but not all anarchisms. there are going to be a few anarchisms that resemble Molecular Marxisms where this manages not to be true. but each of those would have to have a very good existential materialism inside it descriptively modeling how human beings generally behave regardless of anyone's ideals or hopes. an anarchism that succeeds at being more than what is conditioned into people by living in Liberal-republicanism below the scales of politics — quite literally [[E:the colonizer attitude\|the colonizer attitude]] — can be termed a "molecular meta-anarchism", and the people who analyze it can be termed "meta-anarchists" if they are truly doing what is basically meta-Marxism but with solidly anarchist frameworks as their prototypical civilization to be improved and, very importantly, they allow workers' states to exist and only strive to construct anarchisms that will become their allies.

			{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism really seeks molecularization }} / Anarchism actually seeks molecularization / Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model of all social interactions / Despite all the Idealist nonsense coming out of a lot of anarchist writers, the ultimate goal of anarchism is to become aware of all the small-scale interactions that occur between individuals or small groups of people and over time through some kind of gradual transition process put societies in control of all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]]) -><br/>
	this is one of the most good-faith interpretations I can pull out of anarchism, out of all the {{censor\|crap}} they say. anarchists really want to believe that history doesn't exist, that all historical periods are arbitrary, and that nothing in particular makes historical periods transition into other historical periods. ok.... but what if that {{em\|wasn't}} a terrible theory and it {{em\|did}} make sense? one of the possible outcomes if you take anarchism seriously is that anarchists have described a process of how individuals assemble from very fine-grained scales into larger historical periods, and how each collection of individual behaviors creates a historical period of a different "color". with one minimum change to anarchism, the recognition that different historical periods containing different repeated behaviors-of-individuals summing up to a particular color can actually transition into periods of other particular colors only from certain colors, you end up with a theory that actually isn't so bad. you've basically replaced the concept of [[E:sublation\|sublation]] with a more "timeless" theory that looks more like applied chemistry and recording or memorizing particular kinds of reactions that bridge particular kinds of molecules. but, again, that genuinely might be enough to carry an individual nation-wide movement in a particular country if somebody could only figure out the right transition from what to what. I genuinely believe you could teach anarchists [[E:meta-Marxism (applied)\|meta-Marxism]] if they were smart enough and they weren't so stubborn. like there is only so much of a difference between [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-EconomicProblemsStalin\|what Stalin said right before he died]] and the CPSU per-se was defeated, and what anarchists want to do. Stalin wanted to create a systematic study of how the small-scale elements of society transitioned into other small-scale elements; anarchists want to be in control of society's small-scale interactions. that's like, almost the same thing. if we could all just pry anarchists away from the concepts of Idealism and utterly mystifying the word "community" to create a strictly Materialist anarchism we'd be set		this is one of the most good-faith interpretations I can pull out of anarchism, out of all the {{censor\|crap}} they say. anarchists really want to believe that history doesn't exist, that all historical periods are arbitrary, and that nothing in particular makes historical periods transition into other historical periods. ok.... but what if that {{em\|wasn't}} a terrible theory and it {{em\|did}} make sense? one of the possible outcomes if you take anarchism seriously is that anarchists have described a process of how individuals assemble from very fine-grained scales into larger historical periods, and how each collection of individual behaviors creates a historical period of a different "color". with one minimum change to anarchism, the recognition that different historical periods containing different repeated behaviors-of-individuals summing up to a particular color can actually transition into periods of other particular colors only from certain colors, you end up with a theory that actually isn't so bad. you've basically replaced the concept of [[E:sublation\|sublation]] with a more "timeless" theory that looks more like applied chemistry and recording or memorizing particular kinds of reactions that bridge particular kinds of molecules. but, again, that genuinely might be enough to carry an individual nation-wide movement in a particular country if somebody could only figure out the right transition from what to what. I genuinely believe you could teach anarchists [[E:meta-Marxism (applied)\|meta-Marxism]] if they were smart enough and they weren't so stubborn. like there is only so much of a difference between [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-EconomicProblemsStalin\|what Stalin said right before he died]] and the CPSU per-se was defeated, and what anarchists want to do. Stalin wanted to create a systematic study of how the small-scale elements of society transitioned into other small-scale elements; anarchists want to be in control of society's small-scale interactions. that's like, almost the same thing. if we could all just pry anarchists away from the concepts of Idealism and utterly mystifying the word "community" to create a strictly Materialist anarchism we'd be set

Reversedragon: The actual principles of anarchism are completely orthogonal to not having a State ; created yesterday

2026-06-19T02:06:19Z

The actual principles of anarchism are completely orthogonal to not having a State ; created yesterday

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:06, 19 June 2026
Line 89:		Line 89:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/ES\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism swaps states for ethics }} / Anarchism replaces states with ethics / Anarchism is partly defined as a society where ethical codes replace The State -> this is what I think the categorical imperative teaches us about blue anarchisms and maybe {{em\|all}} anarchisms.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=\|Q=618}}The actual principles of anarchism are completely orthogonal to not having a State; this is implied by the fact that anarchists never take it as a serious challenge when told that anarchist civilizations contain a State, and do not appear to even know what a State is much less why they actually oppose it -> I think this is completely true of agorisms, because I know what they're actually based on: falsely equating markets without money with "community". as for other distinct categories of anarchisms, I'm not entirely sure what the "orthogonal to the State" principles actually are.

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/ES\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism swaps states for ethics }} / Anarchism replaces states with ethics / Anarchism is partly defined as a society where ethical codes replace The State -> this is what I think the categorical imperative teaches us about blue anarchisms and maybe {{em\|all}} anarchisms.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/ES/A\|Q=618}}Anarchists won't listen to any proposition which isn't phrased in terms of ethics / Anarchists won't listen to any proposition about reality which isn't phrased in terms of individual ethics / ([[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory\|9k/...]]) -> this requirement is really steep, but... as a challenge, is it really unworkable? ... maybe the true power of [[EC:9k/RD/Q92\|violet Marxism]] is yet to be seen		{{li\|I=S2/MX/ES/A\|Q=618}}Anarchists won't listen to any proposition which isn't phrased in terms of ethics / Anarchists won't listen to any proposition about reality which isn't phrased in terms of individual ethics / ([[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory\|9k/...]]) -> this requirement is really steep, but... as a challenge, is it really unworkable? ... maybe the true power of [[EC:9k/RD/Q92\|violet Marxism]] is yet to be seen

Reversedragon: If human individuals have free will then non-arborescent social structures are impossible

2026-06-17T23:01:26Z

If human individuals have free will then non-arborescent social structures are impossible

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:01, 17 June 2026
Line 115:		Line 115:
	<ol class="hue clean terse">		<ol class="hue clean terse">

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto A \|Q=33,89\|Q2=3389\|h4 = Anarchism can oppress people }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto A \|Q=33,89\|Q2=3389\|h4 = Anarchism can oppress people }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto ES\|Q=51,91\|Q2=5191\|h4 = Post-structuralists effectively hate China }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto ES\|Q=51,91\|Q2=5191\|h4 = Post-structuralists effectively hate China }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])
Line 123:		Line 123:
	{{li\|I=M3/MX\|Q=618}}Why do anarchists have to get their goods from China (China, Vietnam, Thailand, etc) if they naturally generate enthusiastic communities full of volunteers? -> I'm not calling out anarchists morally for pulling a Robin Hood, but I am going to judge them for relying on Third World countries to make the scheme work.<br/>		{{li\|I=M3/MX\|Q=618}}Why do anarchists have to get their goods from China (China, Vietnam, Thailand, etc) if they naturally generate enthusiastic communities full of volunteers? -> I'm not calling out anarchists morally for pulling a Robin Hood, but I am going to judge them for relying on Third World countries to make the scheme work.<br/>
	case of: logical contradiction in anarchism		case of: logical contradiction in anarchism

			{{li\|I=S2/DG/MX\|tradition=\|Q=618}}If human individuals have free will then non-arborescent social structures are impossible / ({{9k\|RD/Q86}}) -> this one is specifically aimed at schizoanalysis, which to be fair is not representative of every anarchism.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: The function of spatial hierarchies is to create anarchies

2026-05-26T03:50:01Z

The function of spatial hierarchies is to create anarchies

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:50, 26 May 2026
Line 49:		Line 49:
	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== Attacking division ==		== Attacking division itself ==
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

Line 135:		Line 135:
	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Anhierarchies incidentally birth anarchies }} / Anhierarchies incidentally contain anarchies / Anhierarchies are in actuality [[E:named anarchy (meta-Marxism)\|anarchic]], not {{em\|because}} they lack a particular kind of [[E:hierarchy (meta-Marxism)\|hierarchy]] but specifically because they happen to contain new methods of connecting and building things that are [[E:molecularized models of society (meta-Marxism)\|molecularized]] relative to the perhaps-hierarchical [[E:amorphous models of society (meta-Marxism)\|amorphous]] formations that existed before; molecular-scale physical processes of society can give rise to things that [[E:Q92\|meta-Marxism]] considers [[E:named anarchy (meta-Marxism)\|named anarchies]] -><br/>		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Anhierarchies incidentally birth anarchies }} / Anhierarchies incidentally contain anarchies / Anhierarchies are in actuality [[E:named anarchy (meta-Marxism)\|anarchic]], not {{em\|because}} they lack a particular kind of [[E:hierarchy (meta-Marxism)\|hierarchy]] but specifically because they happen to contain new methods of connecting and building things that are [[E:molecularized models of society (meta-Marxism)\|molecularized]] relative to the perhaps-hierarchical [[E:amorphous models of society (meta-Marxism)\|amorphous]] formations that existed before; molecular-scale physical processes of society can give rise to things that [[E:Q92\|meta-Marxism]] considers [[E:named anarchy (meta-Marxism)\|named anarchies]] -><br/>
	this is going to sound like absolute word salad to somebody who has never heard of the discussions that led to it. which is not a thing I enjoy. but you really do have to get this absolutely down into the weeds to successfully argue with anarchists. you have to make the most precise terms imaginable which are not the least bit confusing, you have to show up with a list of definitions for them, and you have to prove your point practically in another language just to get around all their incorrect models of real things and misleading word definitions.		this is going to sound like absolute word salad to somebody who has never heard of the discussions that led to it. which is not a thing I enjoy. but you really do have to get this absolutely down into the weeds to successfully argue with anarchists. you have to make the most precise terms imaginable which are not the least bit confusing, you have to show up with a list of definitions for them, and you have to prove your point practically in another language just to get around all their incorrect models of real things and misleading word definitions.

			{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}The function of spatial hierarchies is to create anarchies -> anhierarchy (warring states period); disorganized heterogeneous elements > hierarchy (kingdom); unstable combination of heterogeneous elements > anarchy (republic, combination of provinces); stationary combination of heterogeneous elements

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: Authoritarianism is when identities are sketched out and then othered

2026-05-26T03:19:02Z

Authoritarianism is when identities are sketched out and then othered

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:19, 26 May 2026
Line 49:		Line 49:
	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== ~~Freedom from governments~~ ==		== Attacking division ==
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/A\|Q=30,76\|Q2=~~3076~~}}~~[[Ontology:Q3076\|Capitalism ends through many rounds~~ of "~~Absolutely Not~~"~~]] / Capitalism ends through many rounds~~ of ~~"NO" / United States capitalism ends~~ when ~~we realize every protest~~ is ~~about "{{TTS\|tts=No!\|NO}}" / proposition No (hypothetical transition~~ to ~~anarchism) -> derived anarchist proposition. the claim~~ that in the ~~United States, specific~~-~~sense historical materialism revolves solely around protests~~ that ~~say "no"~~ to ~~something~~, ~~while movements about actually~~ creating ~~anything~~ in particular ~~won't form~~ any ~~enduring connections. protests about gender identity~~ or ~~abortion~~ or ~~specific forms of racism or even pollution aren't actually protests <em>for<~~/~~em> anything~~, ~~they're solely protests~~ {{em\|~~against somebody prohibiting or destroying something~~}}~~. there~~ are ~~an alarming number of examples for this. A) "Black Lives Matter": no police shootings. B) during COVID,~~ there ~~were more~~ people ~~than there should have been banding together across charcoal~~ and ~~rust factions to simply side~~ with ~~"no requirements". C) blanket resistance against "AI" without thinking about the origins of the problem in disorganization, conflation of products with individual Subjects, and the nonsense that~~ is ~~copyright disputes. "no AI". D) widespread negative sentiment against "social media", "phones", and The Big Guy~~ that ~~"greedily" devised them. these idle critiques are all "no" statements to merely take the thing away. E) "No Kings": it's in the phrase. arguments it could be true:~~ this is the ~~only kind-~~of ~~convincing claim I've heard for how rival demographics could directly join together~~ {{em\|~~because of~~}} ~~their identities despite~~ the ~~pressures~~ of ~~Liberalism. it~~'s consistent with the notion that nations begin as population-societies which must begin with links and outer boundaries, by suggesting the boundary directly forms the population. argument it could be false: this could lead to ~~horizontal conflict~~ of ~~two or more factions mutually protesting each other, as already happens on things like abortion clinics~~. ~~argument 2 for false:~~ this ~~feels like it clashes really badly with~~ the ~~history of Afrikaners I briefly outlined in another entry~~. ~~feels like an Afrikaner model could be as useful for challenging some of these claims as the Trotsky model~~		{{li\|start=y\|I=F2/A\|Q=50,54\|Q2=5054}}Anarchy is not anhierarchy / Anarchy is the absence of a warring states period, a civil war that occurs when a country breaks into pieces, a locus of conjoined patriots or retainers forming a government to protect themselves, or in general, of a collection of free-floating populations in an unregulated and ungoverned division of people into multiple hostile competing or warring populations that may be termed "anhierarchy"; because anarchy has gotten rid of anhierarchy, when anarchy exists it will never in and of itself produce anhierarchy; this is to imply that if international war exists or a Cold War exists anarchy does not exist; this is to imply that if Trotskyism existed in the form of approximately 100-150 countries linked together it would be inherently closer to anarchy ... just because it would not have hard borders; this is to imply that freedom and anarchy are inherently opposed to each other, because if any country such as North Korea or Cuba tries to claim freedom for an entire nationality against the onslaughts of other nationalities, thereby dividing country populations from each other, then it cannot contribute to creating anarchy; this is to imply that Trotsky creating a Trotskyist party in a particular country or small cluster of approximately 10 countries is an incorrect path to anarchy but simultaneously that achieving Trotskyism in 150 countries at once {{em\|without}} first creating a Trotskyist party over any smaller area with particular spatial borders or extent would be an acceptable step toward anarchy, or would be much closer to acceptable / ({{9k\|RD/Q50,54}})

			{{li\|I=S2/A\|Q=618}}Authoritarianism is when identities are sketched out and then othered; when there is authoritarianism gay people must be sketched out and quantified into a bordered group distinct from or perhaps competing with other groups; this is to imply but not require that this is actually part of the essence of authoritarianism {{YouTube\|blmpOM_EDIo}} -> from the start of this year I'm not going to let a single explanation of "fascism" go if I detect anarchism in it. this statement did not pass the [[EC:9k/RD/Q50,54\|Bellegarrigue]] test.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	=== Don't trust ~~capitalism =~~==		== Don't trust business territories ==
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

Line 63:		Line 65:
	{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618}}"State capitalism" is an anarchist complaint, and does not properly belong to Trotskyism<br/>		{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618}}"State capitalism" is an anarchist complaint, and does not properly belong to Trotskyism<br/>
	Amazon is creating anticommunist anarchists + ?? = this.		Amazon is creating anticommunist anarchists + ?? = this.

			</li></ol>

			== Freedom from governments ==
			<ol class="hue clean">

			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/A\|Q=30,76\|Q2=3076}}[[Ontology:Q3076\|Capitalism ends through many rounds of "Absolutely Not"]] / Capitalism ends through many rounds of "NO" / United States capitalism ends when we realize every protest is about "{{TTS\|tts=No!\|NO}}" / proposition No (hypothetical transition to anarchism) -> derived anarchist proposition. the claim that in the United States, specific-sense historical materialism revolves solely around protests that say "no" to something, while movements about actually creating anything in particular won't form any enduring connections. protests about gender identity or abortion or specific forms of racism or even pollution aren't actually protests <em>for</em> anything, they're solely protests {{em\|against somebody prohibiting or destroying something}}. there are an alarming number of examples for this. A) "Black Lives Matter": no police shootings. B) during COVID, there were more people than there should have been banding together across charcoal and rust factions to simply side with "no requirements". C) blanket resistance against "AI" without thinking about the origins of the problem in disorganization, conflation of products with individual Subjects, and the nonsense that is copyright disputes. "no AI". D) widespread negative sentiment against "social media", "phones", and The Big Guy that "greedily" devised them. these idle critiques are all "no" statements to merely take the thing away. E) "No Kings": it's in the phrase. arguments it could be true: this is the only kind-of convincing claim I've heard for how rival demographics could directly join together {{em\|because of}} their identities despite the pressures of Liberalism. it's consistent with the notion that nations begin as population-societies which must begin with links and outer boundaries, by suggesting the boundary directly forms the population. argument it could be false: this could lead to horizontal conflict of two or more factions mutually protesting each other, as already happens on things like abortion clinics. argument 2 for false: this feels like it clashes really badly with the history of Afrikaners I briefly outlined in another entry. feels like an Afrikaner model could be as useful for challenging some of these claims as the Trotsky model

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: "State capitalism" is an anarchist complaint

2026-05-25T22:32:03Z

"State capitalism" is an anarchist complaint

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:32, 25 May 2026
Line 55:		Line 55:

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

			=== Don't trust capitalism ===
			<ol class="hue clean">

			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/A\|Q=618}}Amazon is creating anticommunist anarchists {{YouTube\|f0OLyvX8Xf4\|rem=comment\|lc=}}

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618}}"State capitalism" is an anarchist complaint, and does not properly belong to Trotskyism<br/>
			Amazon is creating anticommunist anarchists + ?? = this.

			</li></ol>

	=== Bellegarrigist / Proudhonist anticommunism ===		=== Bellegarrigist / Proudhonist anticommunism ===
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">
Line 100:		Line 111:

	{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618}}Most anarchists are egocentric / ... anarchism cannot claim to have separated itself from an egocentric view of reality and in fact almost all anarchisms revolve around the power of any particular individual mind or ego to spontaneously dictate and declare without limit what all other people will do and be / ({{9k\|RD/Q53,19}})		{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618}}Most anarchists are egocentric / ... anarchism cannot claim to have separated itself from an egocentric view of reality and in fact almost all anarchisms revolve around the power of any particular individual mind or ego to spontaneously dictate and declare without limit what all other people will do and be / ({{9k\|RD/Q53,19}})

			{{li\|I=M3/MX\|Q=618}}Why do anarchists have to get their goods from China (China, Vietnam, Thailand, etc) if they naturally generate enthusiastic communities full of volunteers? -> I'm not calling out anarchists morally for pulling a Robin Hood, but I am going to judge them for relying on Third World countries to make the scheme work.<br/>
			case of: logical contradiction in anarchism

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 123:		Line 137:

	{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=32,99\|Q2=3299\|h4 = [[E:Q3299\|assertion something is an anarchism]] }} / ({{9k\|RD/Q3299}})		{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=32,99\|Q2=3299\|h4 = [[E:Q3299\|assertion something is an anarchism]] }} / ({{9k\|RD/Q3299}})

			{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=618}}logical contradiction in anarchism -> you can get out of this accusation by actually proposing a historical transition process that separates one prong of the contradiction from the other in time.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: assertion something is an anarchism

2026-05-11T02:18:17Z

assertion something is an anarchism

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:18, 11 May 2026
Line 118:		Line 118:
	<ol class="hue clean terse">		<ol class="hue clean terse">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/A\|Q=~~618~~}}~~horizontal revolutionary methods~~ {{~~YouTube~~\|~~ZRJgYCi1vvY~~}}		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/A\|Q=53,19\|Q2=53,19}}secular animism / ({{9k\|RD/Q53,19}})

	{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=~~32,99\|Q2=3299\|h4 = [[Ontology:Q3299~~\|~~assertion something is an anarchism]]~~ }} ~~-> seems a little random, but is oddly useful for defining silly fan theories like "Snufkin is an anarchist".~~		{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=618}}horizontal revolutionary methods {{YouTube\|ZRJgYCi1vvY}}

	{{li\|I=S2/A\|Q=32,98\|Q2=~~3298~~\|h4 = ~~Snufkin~~ is an ~~anarchist~~ }} ~~-> apparently anarchists do not seriously believe this is true.~~ {{~~YouTube~~\|~~70ZKnaANBdg~~}}		{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=32,99\|Q2=3299\|h4 = [[E:Q3299\|assertion something is an anarchism]] }} / ({{9k\|RD/Q3299}})

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== Ideology codes ==		== Ideology codes ==
	* ~~(none)~~		* A / anarchism

	== Subpages ==		== Subpages ==

Reversedragon: Most anarchists are egocentric

2026-05-11T01:06:11Z

Most anarchists are egocentric

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:06, 11 May 2026
Line 95:		Line 95:
	<ol class="hue clean terse">		<ol class="hue clean terse">

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto A\|Q=33,89\|Q2=3389\|h4 = Anarchism can oppress people }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto A \|Q=33,89\|Q2=3389\|h4 = Anarchism can oppress people }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto ES\|Q=51,91\|Q2=5191\|h4 = Post-structuralists effectively hate China }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX onto ES\|Q=51,91\|Q2=5191\|h4 = Post-structuralists effectively hate China }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q33,89\|9k]])

			{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618}}Most anarchists are egocentric / ... anarchism cannot claim to have separated itself from an egocentric view of reality and in fact almost all anarchisms revolve around the power of any particular individual mind or ego to spontaneously dictate and declare without limit what all other people will do and be / ({{9k\|RD/Q53,19}})

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: Anarchists won't listen to any proposition which isn't phrased in terms of ethics

2026-05-07T04:40:12Z

Anarchists won't listen to any proposition which isn't phrased in terms of ethics

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:40, 7 May 2026
Line 70:		Line 70:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/ES\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism swaps states for ethics }} / Anarchism replaces states with ethics / Anarchism is partly defined as a society where ethical codes replace The State -> this is what I think the categorical imperative teaches us about blue anarchisms and maybe {{em\|all}} anarchisms.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/ES\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism swaps states for ethics }} / Anarchism replaces states with ethics / Anarchism is partly defined as a society where ethical codes replace The State -> this is what I think the categorical imperative teaches us about blue anarchisms and maybe {{em\|all}} anarchisms.

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/ES/A\|Q=618}}Anarchists won't listen to any proposition which isn't phrased in terms of ethics / Anarchists won't listen to any proposition about reality which isn't phrased in terms of individual ethics / ([[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory\|9k/...]]) -> this requirement is really steep, but... as a challenge, is it really unworkable? ... maybe the true power of [[EC:9k/RD/Q92\|violet Marxism]] is yet to be seen

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=56,43\|Q2=56,43}}Anarchism is partly defined by the claim that progress can only be described through the sheer assertion of human moralities as a fundamental layer of material reality -> this seems common to both charcoal anarchism and blue anarchism, as well as to some forms of Western Marxism. and as far as I know, it's absent from Stalin's Marxism. <s>as it ought to be!</s><br/>		{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=56,43\|Q2=56,43}}Anarchism is partly defined by the claim that progress can only be described through the sheer assertion of human moralities as a fundamental layer of material reality -> this seems common to both charcoal anarchism and blue anarchism, as well as to some forms of Western Marxism. and as far as I know, it's absent from Stalin's Marxism. <s>as it ought to be!</s><br/>

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:13, 27 June 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374\|h4 = united nonviolence of special oppressions }} -> the motif that a country is composed of "[[E:White supremacy movements\|superior people]]" (social construct, bad) and a ton of endless categories of people who fail to function as perfectly as society's most elite people for some highly specific reason, that if you have any trouble getting into society there must be some highly specific reason you are specially oppressed which requires you to find other people who are specially oppressed exactly the same way and for all the highly specific groups to convince each other at length not to hurt {{em\|each other}} and oppress each other. I am so tired of this, specifically because of that last thing. it's clear that over time our basic assumptions about capitalism and Liberal-republicanism have simply ceased to be true, and the way the whole thing operates is a bit different from the way people think. it seems less that people inherently want to accept each other because they're different and more like there are many separate subpopulations of people shoving each other around all trying to fit onto an island too small to fit all of them.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374\|h4 = united nonviolence of special oppressions }} -> the motif that a country is composed of "[[E:White supremacy movements\|superior people]]" (social construct, bad) and a ton of endless categories of people who fail to function as perfectly as society's most elite people for some highly specific reason, that if you have any trouble getting into society there must be some highly specific reason you are specially oppressed which requires you to find other people who are specially oppressed exactly the same way and for all the highly specific groups to convince each other at length not to hurt {{em\|each other}} and oppress each other. I am so tired of this, specifically because of that last thing. it's clear that over time our basic assumptions about capitalism and Liberal-republicanism have simply ceased to be true, and the way the whole thing operates is a bit different from the way people think. it seems less that people inherently want to accept each other because they're different and more like there are many separate subpopulations of people shoving each other around all trying to fit onto an island too small to fit all of them.

			{{li\|I=S1/Ag\|tradition=Ag, DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374}}totality of non-aggressive activities / ({{9k\|RD/Q618-SquareOfNonAggressiveActivities}}) -> this absolutely baffled me until I found agorism, because I always wanted to just believe anarchists when they said they weren't right-Libertarians, but in practice I think there is actually not a lot of difference most of the time. there really is a section of blue anarchists that is indistinguishable from Libertarians.

	{{li\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=30,73\|Q2=3073\|h4 = united states of states of states }} / China full of Chinas full of Chinas / USSR of SSRs of SSRs / tribe of tribes of tribes -> the motif that a country is always just a voluntary link between demographics. that the United States is composed of Black women and White women spontaneously opting to be the same country, or Black women and White women opting to be women that then together with Black men opt to be the United States. etc.<br/>		{{li\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=30,73\|Q2=3073\|h4 = united states of states of states }} / China full of Chinas full of Chinas / USSR of SSRs of SSRs / tribe of tribes of tribes -> the motif that a country is always just a voluntary link between demographics. that the United States is composed of Black women and White women spontaneously opting to be the same country, or Black women and White women opting to be women that then together with Black men opt to be the United States. etc.<br/>

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:40, 7 May 2026
Line 70:		Line 70:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/ES\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism swaps states for ethics }} / Anarchism replaces states with ethics / Anarchism is partly defined as a society where ethical codes replace The State -> this is what I think the categorical imperative teaches us about blue anarchisms and maybe {{em\|all}} anarchisms.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/ES\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism swaps states for ethics }} / Anarchism replaces states with ethics / Anarchism is partly defined as a society where ethical codes replace The State -> this is what I think the categorical imperative teaches us about blue anarchisms and maybe {{em\|all}} anarchisms.

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/ES/A\|Q=618}}Anarchists won't listen to any proposition which isn't phrased in terms of ethics / Anarchists won't listen to any proposition about reality which isn't phrased in terms of individual ethics / ([[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory\|9k/...]]) -> this requirement is really steep, but... as a challenge, is it really unworkable? ... maybe the true power of [[EC:9k/RD/Q92\|violet Marxism]] is yet to be seen

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=56,43\|Q2=56,43}}Anarchism is partly defined by the claim that progress can only be described through the sheer assertion of human moralities as a fundamental layer of material reality -> this seems common to both charcoal anarchism and blue anarchism, as well as to some forms of Western Marxism. and as far as I know, it's absent from Stalin's Marxism. <s>as it ought to be!</s><br/>		{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=56,43\|Q2=56,43}}Anarchism is partly defined by the claim that progress can only be described through the sheer assertion of human moralities as a fundamental layer of material reality -> this seems common to both charcoal anarchism and blue anarchism, as well as to some forms of Western Marxism. and as far as I know, it's absent from Stalin's Marxism. <s>as it ought to be!</s><br/>