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?

Cause I see 3 years

those are three years more than you can hope for though

also I won't be able to answer in the next hour or so

3 years is a sad record for an ideology that is 100+ years old

did free territory even get 3 years?

Think it did

catalonia did for 3 years iirc

but that's besides what we talked about anaway

also g2g now

It also depends on which kind of anarchism. Lots do not care about terriorites, or use it as a metric of success. It is a bit of a colonial hangover to just look at a map and judge ideology that way. We live in a different world nowadays.

"The truth of collectivism -

Collectivism, demonized as a form of intense authoritarianism and a ripping away of the individual, is not something that the normals would ever embrace to sit upon their shoulders. Neither upon their hidden skin or their most secret insides. They delude themselves into seeing themselves as just a being which must be first focused upon, that without being perfect they can not properly work within society to help it heal; in turn give them a helping hand to rise above their own faults.

They refuse to allow the crowd to do for them and in turn to do for the crowd. Even if they do so, they do so unknowingly or begrudgingly.

Little do they truly know the value of the collective, the crowd. It is all too true that the collective can be toxic, that the collective can push you down, that the collective can harm you much further then any singular predator. But, this is not the product of society in of itself. In it's nature. But instead, of a decaying and sick society.

Deforming and melting under the heat and the suffering. Molding people into disgusting figures of what they once were. Without soft heart if with any at all, without a sense of pure wrongness. Without their most basic spirituality. Until all of society is deformed, and no longer is the individual to blame whatsoever. Instead, it is society's. It was society as it is that deformed and twisted our flesh and bones, which obliterated our highest existence. Yet, it was not. It was our own failing that twisted society into a monster.

It was our loss of the most noble values. From abstinence to fearlessness. Which in turn made the society such. Into a deformed, whimpering mess of a once great creature.

The burning hot stars begin to dim. There is no longer a going back. Only a black sky by night and a red, blinding sky by morn'. It's over."~Me

"“The capitalist,” they say, “has paid the laborers their daily wages.” To be accurate, it must be said that the capitalist has paid as many times one day’s wage as he has employed laborers each day, — which is not at all the same thing. For he has paid nothing for that immense power which results from the union and harmony of laborers, and the convergence and simultaneousness of their efforts. Two hundred grenadiers stood the obelisk of Luxor upon its base in a few hours; do you suppose that one man could have accomplished the same task in two hundred days? Nevertheless, on the books of the capitalist, the amount of wages paid would have been the same. Well, a desert to prepare for cultivation, a house to build, a factory to run, — all these are obelisks to erect, mountains to move. The smallest fortune, the most insignificant establishment, the setting in motion of the lowest industry, demand the concurrence of so many different kinds of labor and skill, that one man could not possibly execute the whole of them. It is astonishing that the economists never have called attention to this fact. " Pierre Joseph Proudhon

from its earliest conception, Anarchism has requiered collectivism. Why? Becouse left alone, any one person would freeze and starve to death. Only in cooperation can any single indevigual survive. Even in modern times

There is a difference between collectivism and co-operation.

https://goo.gl/forms/1pB6fx8kafS7LOHE3

Do you know how many social studies are done every year? Hand picking one that vaguely conforms with your politics does not make you smart or convincing, much less when you spam it over multiple channels. We are not only unimpressed, but insulted..

"1 blocked message"

I wonder who it could be