Skip to main content


I feel myself sliding further to the anarchist side, which I don't actually like, but it feels like the best option actually available. Choose between various kinds of powermonger or hope that people can self-organise well enough to outlive them. I don't know. I would rather have a trustworthy state, but that is not on the menu. Even in countries I've spent time in where the state is more or less not corrupt, that's only a contingent thing. And it's a minority of places, and a microscopic one if you weight it by population.
in reply to серафими многоꙮчитїи

At the same time I don't want to become an anti-society drop out, sending my kids to private schools, getting private health insurance, and avoiding as much tax as possible. Because not everyone can do that. It's about critical engagement with any structure that helps.
in reply to silverwizard

@silverwizard I mean, you say that, but I'm not highly impressed with non-capitalist states and I feel like there's a lack of established supporting evidence of that happening in a modern context. The difference between something theoretically working and actually happening in practice matters to me!

Plus we're not going in ab initio, we've got to start from here. Which includes adversaries with nuclear weapons.

All I really care about is people and practical outcomes, and I'm honestly pretty pissed off that that puts me outside of mainstream politics. But we are where we are.

in reply to серафими многоꙮчитїи

@серафими многоꙮчитїи I'm honestly personally of the opinion we need to see a good endgame if we are to push toward it. This means we should start working on the problems that exist, and building for-now systems like unions, but understand that single locuses of power are really bad!
in reply to серафими многоꙮчитїи

anarchism, uspol-adj

Sensitive content