User:RD/9k/leaping State process (Q33,77)
Main entry
leaping State process
(meta-Marxist term; meta-Marxism onto Toryism) -> possibly attested in other things under other names. the motif that all populations of people, as soon as they are clusters of friends containing particular Bauplan elements, a group of frontier farmers with fences or whatnot, generate a State from inside their Group Subject because they are a socially-linked group of people, and if they come in contact with another group of people whose structure, development, or goals drastically conflicts with the way they administer their own group of people, they will leap their own State over the other group of people and attempt to conquer them or at least wilfully destroy their government and 'make them create a new one'.
this concept is well known with the United States and workers' states, or various Third World countries perceived as not having 'democracy'. but the really interesting thing is you can see it happening with the Soviet Union and Trotskyism.
it may also be possible that it happens with industrial empires and tribal populations. there is a strange new phenomenon of tribal populations getting weirdly insistent that anarchism is the only correct way of being human and they have the right to break open republics and tell them what to do, which wouldn't even be offensive except that none of the stuff they say actually makes sense. like, to be perfectly honest, I'm really tired of the United States so if you break it up I'm not sure I'd even care, like I want to be out of here and go to another country so it's not really skin off my nose. but what bothers me is they're telling people to urgently do a bunch of garbled nonsense toward no particular goal that nobody could possibly actually succeed at; that's where it gets insulting. I also don't like when theories from tribal populations inside First-World countries seem to infect First World people and possess them to talk more about cracking open Third World countries.
I feel like there are eventually going to be human rights investigations into whether tribes actually have the right to crack open Third World countries if it would cause them to fall to First World empires and become colonies. because that has absolutely never felt right to me.
Related
If two tribes break each other's rules, whose rules apply?
/ If two tribes (tribal populations, free-floating populations, indigenous populations; anarchist populations; not Liberal parties, does not include Liberal-republican populations) break each other's rules by following their own rules, then whose rules apply to defuse the conflict? / (9k) -> I don't think anarchists can answer this. they love to talk about how if you "respect people's inherent boundaries" everything will be fine, but they don't really stop and think about the fact that some inherent boundaries are hugely arbitrary and can still be inherent to a person or group of people. this is the problem. neurotypical people hate autistic people because autistic people operating normally shatter their boundaries and break their rules and "fail to respect them". the same goes for almost any group of people somebody hates. somebody hates Arabs? an Arab army attacking a place once failed to respect White people's boundaries therefore Arabs are Bad Immoral People that deserve to be punished. somebody hates trans people for supposedly breaking the rules of Christianity? those were the actual rules that person had to follow to not get kicked out of town, so the person is offended that non-Christians get to break the rules and they don't. if they turned around and tried to change Christianity then Christians would be offended that they weren't being "equally respected as living beings" and allowed to have their own set of rules. whenever anyone hates anyone it's generally a horizontal conflict of two pre-existing sets of rules that simultaneously try to enforce themselves onto each other. ...- leaping State process -> I feel like there are eventually going to be human rights investigations into whether tribes actually have the right to crack open Third World countries if it would cause those countries to fall to First World empires and become colonies. because that has absolutely never felt right to me.
Sociality distorts human beings' view of material reality
/ (9k) -> ... anarchism doesn't really pass the veil of ignorance with flying colors. ... if anarchists are correct that the natural state of humans and human psychology is in tribes then all the current destruction of the environment ultimately came from the characteristics of tribes. tribal populations are not wholly innocent for all the horrors of global empire and ecological destruction if at the end of the day we're all still tribes and they're the only ones trying to disclaim that there are bad things about that. really, as crazy as it sounds, they might be accidentally benefiting from a corrupt system that has killed great numbers of people. of course, if humans don't have a seemingly eternal resting state of being in tribes that we have no choice but to return to that would in turn imply that we are currently tribes in denial and will still be tribes for the next hundred thousand years, then tribal populations carry no blame for what industrial societies have done.
Ideology codes
- MX / meta-Marxism