this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2024
1200 points (98.5% liked)

Microblog Memes

5903 readers
3822 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 51 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

There's a good retrospective on the mass protest movements of the 2010s called If We Burn. The main takeaway I got was that leaderlessness and horizonalism do not work.

If you don't pick your leaders, they will pick themselves.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Anarchism is the worst social order, except for all others that have been tried.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Anarchism can't defend itself. That's the point. Either it gets coopted and recuperated under capital, or it gets hijacked by reactionary forces for their own purposes.

[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

While Marxism-Leninism gets hijacked by reactionary forces for their own purposes and gets recuperated under capital after that.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The USSR lost the Cold War, but there's plenty of ML counties still around. I'm sure you'll whine they aren't paradises, but they're all generally progressing and developing in a positive direction (when they aren't being strangled to death like Cuba)

Not a lot of anarchist spaces by comparison. There's the Zapatistas and they're pretty cool, but like, the record is pretty clear.

[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And before the end of the cold war, USSR was a reactionary country governed by an elite for its own interests. It's the same in China. The same in Vietnam, the same in Cuba (but at least there they have the excuse of the unjust US politics against them).

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Eliminating homelessness, eliminating illiteracy, eliminating hunger, increasing life expectancies, increasing graduation rates, increasing quality of life, actually existing socialist countries accomplish incredible things (some more than others, admittedly). They're not perfect utopias, but you can't ignore the context they exist within (i.e. they're still developing countries and they exist within US global hegemony)

I'm sure you have some specific criticisms of China or Cuba or whatever, but they're doing pretty fucking good considering what they're up against.

While you keep on dreaming of utopia, I'm more concerned with defeating than US empire in the real world. Anarchism can't.

[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Capitalist countries did the same thing without building walls to stop their population to flee…

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not a single capitalist country has eliminated homelessness. Why is that? Why are life expectancies falling in the US?

Also, Berlin is in the middle of East Germany.

The wall was to separate what was basically an island of Western control from the rest of East Germany. It was kind of a weird political situation.

[–] zloubida@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

USSR “solved” homelessness putting people in prisons and psychiatric hospital… and even then there still was homeless people. Authoritarianism doesn't work.

And Berlin west was a weird political situation, but my argument still holds. People flee DPRK or China…

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The US puts more people in prison than the USSR ever did, yet its homeless population is huge.

And there isn't a giant wall around China lol

[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Authoritarianism doesn't work, whether capitalistic or communist.

And travel is very restricted in China.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Seems to be working so far. 🙄

China's life expectancies have recently surpassed the US. Did you know that?

[–] Derp@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I mean, anarchism was the initial state, so it has been tried. It seems that it is not very resilient against being replaced by other systems, so it can't really be the best system in the real world.

[–] GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

The anarchists love to come out of the woodwork whenever democracy is having a bad day, then they disappear whenever someone mentions medicine being more of a global effort.

Yes, I'm sure an entirely fragmented world full of companies protected by privatized militias would be extremely cooperative, with the added bonus modifier of there being no borders.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Unlike the resilient anti-capitalism of Marxist states amirite.

It's almost like you need to learn and evolve from the mistakes of the past to create systems that work in the present.

For example, when white colonizers land on your shores, don't ignore them and start an escalating series of tribal wars to sell them war-slaves.

Also, maybe don't have slaves.

See? We've already improved on proto-anarchism.