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.
Cross-posted from "No, it's not 'normal'." by @DougHolland@lemmy.world in !aiop@lemmy.world
Don't you ever think, how is it possible most people does not realise how much better life could be? How good we all could be living right now.
But then how could they feel superior over those "lessor thans" especially race related issues. I swear we would have such a better life of the whites in power were not doing everything they could to keep poc down
It drives me insane tbh
Tell that to a farmer
1000%, these aren't new concepts that were invented alongside coinage.
Tbh humans have it better now than ever before. Making claims of "normal" is pretty silly, lol. Long life spans aren't normal. Retirement is not normal. Not living in fear of wild animals is not normal. Etc.
But yes, things can be and therefore should be better. That's the only real argument. Saying anything else just harms the cause.
Say it louder please.
There's 8 billion people on this earth and the competition is getting really tiring. It's not even merit based any more and I'm not sure when it last was.
Well, there's the issue, human lives have been cheapened way too much.
Humans need to be so precious, that people beg for babies again.
Which means we need to get rid of most of the people in the world but then how do you decide who deserves to go?
No one would have to go, we just have to stop having new people (aka no babies)
See who signs up for the Mars mission I guess.
Or just use a condom, and wait for the old people to die.
Not like you can save them anyway.
Wow.
Back right up.
All they said was humanity needed to be precious again.
We never stopped being human, we did stop viewing each other as human in a lot of circumstances.
Your instant move to "get rid of everyone" is a bit telling itself.
There is more than enough to go around even now, stop letting billionaires convince you otherwise.
I knew very well it would be interpreted that way 😈
Even better that I figured how to mitigate depreciation issues anyway.
1: End the purely materialist/transactional society.
2: Ironically, more local and less global communities.
3: Less unplanned children pooped out.
Agreed on all 3 points lmao.
Well played 😂
Humans aren't precious because there's like 8 billion of us. 300 years ago it was probably more like 600-700 million (highest estimates around a billion) and it took more humans to achieve less work.
Under capitalism, more people means cheaper workforce because more competition between workers. Individual worker is valued less. Under communism you don't put a dollar figure on a human the same way, but they're still more expendable when you can just get another one to do the same job.
I'm not advocating for mass genocide or eugenics, I'm just saying that's how it is and we better get used to it. Things are precious when they're scarce. We're not scarce.
No one is forcing you to feel that humans are or are not precious and this argument is very troubling..
If you cannot see why, please seek help.
I thought we were talking about society, i.e a collection of 8 billion humans, and how it values each of those 8 billion humans, not me personally.
Ahh, well maybe lead with this isn't what I believe rather than a strong statement lol.
Anyways yes what you said is a correct assessment of where we are, but not where we have to be.
All I'm saying is society has devalued and dehumanized itself.
How does having 8 billion people make them precious? You step on ants, yes?
I think the point was to choose to see them as unique vessels of beauty and consciousness and not as a pair of hands that can push buttons in the button pushing factory.
As you can see, we have succeeded in dehumanizing people so well, that they themselves will come on here and argue that they should also be a statistic. This is not ok.
Oh yes, do you also think the same of IDF soldiers as they bomb tents?
Ooh what about pedophiles who kill the child rape victims so they cant tell?
Piss off
We’re running hunter gatherer hardware with intense survival instincts designed to protect us from getting eaten by sabretooth tigers in the age of anxiety.
We pay in sabertooth tigers for sabertooth tigers, and hey, your sabertooth tiger boss would like to show you a sabertooth tiger, just scroll down on your mobile sabertooth tiger, skip a few sabertooth tigers, click the tiger, and then you should see a sabertooth tiger.
And do not sleep. There are tigers.
Appeal to nature is not a valid argument.
Can't believe this stupid shit is being upvoted. We are perfectly capable of designing our own social structures using our brains.
I understand that "normal" is a confusing term by nature and isn't the same as "natural". The norm is pretty much what we can observe (plus bias), which might be natural or not (plus bias).
Here, i suppose it's just a shortest way of saying "I think it doesn't have to be this way".
The post appears to be an overall response to the idea that modern society as we know it is "just how it is." The point isn't "be like our ancient ancestors" so much as "the system we have now isn't the only way things can be." That is, we've all grown up in this society with the work grind as our default. Some people will defend the way things are on the basis of it being some aspect of "human nature" to always compete and work hard, but societies of the past survived through co-operation and sharing resources. It's pretty much the opposite to what is expected today.
What's a valid argument in favor of today's system? Wouldn't that be a recency bias?
And yet we never designed a leisure society with all the resources we have.
I beg to differ.
An anthropologist should know about food scarcity. For thousands of years the family unit, tribe or village was under extreme competition from neighboring people and animals for resources.
There is a video from cameras on monkeys. They literally spend their whole day looking for food. Or in other words, every waking hour is spent in the pursuit of sustenance. Pre-tractor man was the same. Without modern capitalist agriculture you would be toiling on the farm tending to sheep, chickens, plowing fields, milking cows and all the myriad of tasks needed to fulfill the food groups you so nonchalantly stuff your face with. It be non-stop work for all the variety you currently take for granted.
The world, with low life-expectancies, was hazardous with no medicines, protections from the weather or modern law. Which i think brings a bit of stress when a festering carbuncle could mean your death. But thanks to innovation, it can now be easily cured by companies who seek monetary reward. I’ll take this normal over the other one.
Serfs also had to pay like 2/3 of their produce to their lords. When was the last time, humanity really had to struggle for food (and not because they had to enable a wasteful upper class)? Before we settled down, invented agriculture?
The invention of agriculture didn’t end the struggle for food. Early agriculture was a much harder way of life than hunting and gathering at the time. The first agriculturist peoples were severely malnourished compared to their h-g neighbours. They had a very poor diet of limited variety, and a lot less available meat.
Early agriculturists were also easy pickings for hunter gatherers to raid their food stores and plunder everything. Between the poor soil, poor variety of crops, poor nutrition and low protein, infestations of mould and vermin, and constant attacks by raiders, life for these folks was an extreme struggle.
Looking at that situation, it should be a lot easier to see why agriculturalist societies soon developed militaries and became warlike. And why local lords demanding 2/3 of your produce was a fair trade for having a military that would drive its enemies hundreds of miles away from your farm.
Because that’s the foundation of a civilization? When humanity was able to produce more per farmer than they could eat is when society flourished the most. That allows other people to live off the farmer’s back and do other things. That might sound like they were taking advantage of them, but if Pythagoras and Archimedes and everyone else had to spent their days in the field, we wouldn’t have all that we do now. And I’m sure the farmers didn’t mind when those non-farmers came up with the tractor.
You're severely underestimating the emiseration that happened under capitalism. Yes, peasant work is hard work. But living standards for the proletariat plummeted during the industrial revolution. Peasants didn't have 14 hour shifts in the factories.
And you conflate technological progress with capitalism.
Also: if your environment can sustain a hunter-gatherer mode of production, you actually have quite a lot of leisure time.
monkeys. They literally spend their whole day looking for food
Makes me a bit less proud to be their descendant. Why couldn’t we descend from the stately raven. Corvids consistently show that they have a lot of free time. Same with parrots.
You could have agriculture without modern capitalism.
We have people who treat Eve online optimization like a full time job for example. If their needs were met, I think they’d work happily on optimizing tractor schedules and crop rotation plans
I would probably do my job for free if I didn’t have to think about retirement and keeping my house and filling my belly. I just like what I do and I find it rewarding. The problem is still resource allocation.
No, I don’t think centralizing power and central planning will solve this either, I’m just saying people will be productive even without money.
I would probably start 30 unfinished projects.
I’ve learned that some people hate starting projects but really like taking something that’s already been planned out and working it out to completion.
Made me feel better about getting my pleasure from planning and starting projects then losing interest once things started coming together.
Dr. Agro doesn't reference ancient history. Her work centers contemporary cultures as well as those historically concurrent with capitalism. E.g. within those few hundred years.
Buddy, I grew up in the south where most of our food came from a vegetable garden and canning. We cut firewood for heat and had water from a spring. I can tell you it absolutely does not take all the waking day to tend to all that.
This is true, but I think that it might also be true that capitalism has gone a bit overboard lately.
And I live in the EU!
Nobody cares if you beg to differ if your examples are all about farming. Farming was historically a last resort when you couldn’t live off the land by foraging and hunting. It was more common in less fruitful locations. Read some anthropology before you speak on it. Or learn more about modern agriculture and how shitty its returns are for the investment. Which is unsurprising considering modern agriculture is just shoving 3-5 crops in a bunch of places where they don’t want to grow and praying there’s enough nitrogen in the soil this year.