That's true. Populism gets you no where.

@Deleted User You have to give them credit however, at least they will get a response from the whitehouse and will get to know what they are thinking.

Idpol never changes. You just change the noun.

https://crimethinc.com/2000/09/11/your-politics-are-boring-as-fuck

egoist anarchism has been tried, see the colapse of the roman empire

anarchism is nothing more than a small period before another system anyway

And for good reasons, even a shit system beats anarchism

no there are coherant phillosophies of anarchism, see Kropotkin

but egoism is not one of them

coherent is subjective, has it been tried?

Anarchism seems completely unable to implement

https://librivox.org/the-conquest-of-bread-by-peter-kropotkin/

judge for yourself, i asm nothing more of anyone then that

https://discord.gg/gTwRbb

and i see the conversation has come full circle back to the period immedeatly following the collapse of the roman empire.

here is a clue, if you had read Proudhon you would know that in order for the most basic level of survival to occur, cooperation between indevigual producers (IE workers) is nessesary.

One does not simply try Egoism. It just is. It is never supposed to be a coherent system. That is your ideological bias showing. It is the absence of a system.

Anarchism is essential to the reboot of a system

yes

@Deleted User Anarchy is always temporary.

I am not convinced of this. Historically, prominent anarchist movements have fallen to outside forces. Who knows how long they'd survive if they didn't have that threat

Also, depending on what you mean by "temporary", I do believe anarchism can reproduce it's material conditions.

Thing is outside forces won't ever go away

you're right and that does serve as an argument as to why it won't be the revolutionary path. But let's say it was allied with the world's superpower

or that the superpower didn't want to engage with them for whatever reason

@Sampuka What is the point in even theorizing when those circumstances will never exist?

@Deleted User they might, imagine if USSR didn't attack the mahknovists and the mahknovists weren't retarded

that's not unthinkable

That is very hard to imagine.

why?

Why wouldn't a neighboring country just invade?

They seem to do so every time

the ussr didn't attack the free territory for quite some time iirc, it was mostly because of makhno's retardation and some other realpolitical stuff that they did attack

to my knowledge

"every time". Anarchism hasn't been popular

I can only name a few and I only like one

How long is for quite some time?