They're killing that tree
this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2025
72 points (89.1% liked)
Flippanarchy
1791 readers
5 users here now
Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.
Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.
This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.
Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Rules
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
-
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
How so?
They removed about 25 percent of bark. And cut deeply. That tree is going to have way too little nutrients and water up top. Just wrecks the whole organism. It could still live, but that's really severe.
Deep, and widespread bark removal also makes it vulnerable to other life.
Edit: in case the reader didn't know, trees circulation is almost exclusively close to the bark. The Heartwood is dead and only provides support.
Edit: reading https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girdling https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bark_(botany)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girdling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bark_(botany)
There's the link without the m as the browser decides for itself if it needs it.
As for the rest, thank you so much, we were unaware of that, so we appreciate your sharing of it!
Not unless it gets infected.
They disconnected the roots from the leaves around almost a quarter of the circumference of the trunk. It'll probably survive, but it's significant damage that could kill some roots and branches
Looks like old damage or just traffic wear–but I do not have my contacts in right now.
that are cutting way too deep, and way too big, isn't that killing the tree?
Aw man I liked my gender identity, now I gotta give that up to be anarchist?
Time for Taco Bell and a cop car I guess
Once we change the definition of something to not be tied to a physical fact, everything can be a social construct!
I hope we do individuality next, I'm pretty sure there's more than a few people inside my head
Doesn't this kinda breeds complacency? By framing it as just a social construct, aren't we indrectly telling ourselves, in order to fix gender inequality, we just need to change the social discourse? Which completely ignores the politico-economics reality.
IMO most people already believe gender i equality is bad (atleast in west that is) but inequal gender practices still persist today.
Not to mention the economic forces (like elon musk) uses political forces (like MAGA or AfD) to further such inequalities for their own benefits.
Dogma is the central issue driving social stigma. There is no reason or justification for marginalizing any group here.
It's the opposite. Patriarchy is rooted in essentialism, seeing men and women as two irreconcilable types of beings and men being the biologically and spiritually superior. Recognizing that gender is just a social construct dissolves that illusion.
Okay so I know this server doesnt love stirner, but, he did at least get social constructs right–even if he maintained a weird taboo about applying that same logic to the concept of the self.
Everything you mentioned is mostly social constructs.
If we all agreed to not with money tomorrow and did something else, all this gross paper would just be a weird historical artifact.
If we really believed it deep down–lived by it. The same is true for most of this bullshit.
It's difficult because we've tied play acting and fantasy bullshit numbers to things like 'having food' and 'sleeping inside', but its no less fake bullshit nonsense we made up.
Laws and states may as well be men with guns who ride around murdering you if you can't answer their randomly administered 'harry Potter' trivia quiz.
Holy shit look at a judge–really look at them without context, and tell me you can take them seriously after with a straight face. Look at the predictions bourgeoise economists have made before things happened and the insane contrivances they make–compare that to priests of any religion you care to reference, and tell me the priest doesnt come out looking better. Show me an electoral platform that it's advocates and evangelists understand better than the sports team they cheer for–I'll wait.
It's no more or less nonsense than gender. People are mostly just playing pretend and taking it way too seriously.
If I ever see this hetero Norm fella, I'll pass on your message.