Anarchist Thread

The workday ain't gonna shorten itself.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=B32lZsrJ_aQ
youtube.com/watch?v=_pqC563bX_w
strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

...

youtube.com/watch?v=B32lZsrJ_aQ

Enjoy your triggering.

...

>Chomsky
Good, I hate him for being a shitty linguist.

>muh language acquisition device

Yeah, I've been told his linguistic theories have been debunked. But what should I know? Here in France we still worship Saussure.

Except that it has continually been shortened by increasing real incomes leading to workers preferring more leisure time, not anything you violent idiots have done

Whenever the state isses a mandate concerning labor standards it's only after it's already been adopted throughout most of the private sector

It's hilarious to watch anti-capitalist anarchists taking credit for good things that capitalism has done, that the state has made mandatory

National Socialism will though.

Hitler banned all trade unions and wages fell 25% in real terms in his reich.

I'm not familiar with Saussure.

To be fair Chomsky did a fair bit of good work in the field of generative grammar but the language acquisition device theory was just really shitty.

National socialism results in a dictatorship that crushes the creativity of the people. By defintion they seek to create a large army and military junta to rule everything.

This creates a huge burden on the workers (producers) to suport the military (non-producers). I sure as hell didn't sign up to pay for a generals cigars and wine. And do you think a miltary dictatorship would go along with spending cuts down the road? No they wouldn't they would view any politcal party suggesting this as inflitrated by foreign elements. They probably wouldn't even allow other politcal parties to exist.

Reporting.

Do you want to contribute to the conversation or not?

You have any particular points you want to discuss?

Nah.

So what kind of anarchist are you?

Anarcho-communist, I reckon. I'm more of a "leave me alone" person though.

Yeah, it was definitely the plutocrats who ended child labor, not socialists. The workday was shortened and wages were hiked in the 30's because of MARKET MAGIC, not labor unions.

Literally retarded.

Cool, I'm more of a Anarcho-syndicist myself.

I hate state communists though. Alot people don't know how hard anarchists fought against the rising soviet threat.

>leave me alone

lol that's not going to happen under any form of communism

You'll be expected to work and socialise, in case you're alienated/bourgeois plotter/capitalist roader.

>It's hilarious to watch anti-capitalist anarchists taking credit for good things that capitalism has done, that the state has made mandatory

To me it's funny to watch a capitalist take credit for what anti-capitalists have done.

Do you really think that capitalists just cut the day from 10-16 hrs to 8hrs while paying the same amount from the goodness of their hearts?

I used to be an anarcho-syndicalist, too. Ironically, my views began to soften after I started working in a union shop with stellar wages and benefits.

Fair enough, you're free to hate all you want.

Not if I'm innawoods.

Chomsky's political views are worse than his linguistic ones.
>deterministic understanding of human nature
>teleological view of history
>muh hummn natur

>Not if I'm innawoods.

Good luck getting the commune to let you go. After all, if you're innawoods, you won't be living by the maxim of "from each according to his ability".

The CNT is a qt
A QT

...

>Good luck getting the commune to let you go
But I thought that communes were voluntary?

It seems to me that anarcho-syndicist focus on the means of production being used to support the workers at that factory/production site.

The anarcho-communists incorporate the means of production in their plan but they seem focused on building communes that may not nessesarily be connected with specific sites of production.

Anarcho-communists want to create a network of communes.

Anarcho-syndicists want to create a network of the means of production (and leaves it at that).

>mfw no anarcho-syndicalist militant gf

If you are a human you are a capitalist, or you are a self-hating capitalist, or you are confused, or some combination of the aforementioned

>If you are a human you are a capitalist
wot?

morality is a spook

Can you please present a point of contention and an argument to support it, and try again.

What you wrote isn't an argument.

He said Captain, I said, "wot?"

youtube.com/watch?v=_pqC563bX_w

>morality is a spook
It's fine to be an egoist if you can support it, but please don't parrot shitty stale memes and pretend it's politcal debate.

I throw no pearls before swine.

An absolute banger of a tune mate

Creativity is a spook

>drowning in essentialism
Nice try, faggot

hey

beep beep

I saw them at Brixton Academy in 1989. They said it was their last show. But clearly it wasn't. But Captain took his pants off so there was that =)

>I throw no pearls before swine

I'm ready to have a non-shitposting debate with you.

Can you try it without the ad hominem this time?

>"""""Anarcho"""""" Capitalism

If I am a caveman in what will become Canada after you have kicked all of your aboriginals peoples out and I improved a stick into a club and you tried to take it I would show you the benefit of my technology. Boom! Capitalism is born.

>anarcho-capitalism

Why do you feel that big buisness has your best interest at heart? Capitalists view their countries as host for their profit schemes. They are more than willing to import third world workers to drive down the cost of labour.

>But I thought that communes were voluntary?
>It seems to me that anarcho-syndicist focus on the means of production being used to support the workers at that factory/production site.
>The anarcho-communists incorporate the means of production in their plan but they seem focused on building communes that may not nessesarily be connected with specific sites of production.
>Anarcho-communists want to create a network of communes.
>Anarcho-syndicists want to create a network of the means of production (and leaves it at that).

In theory, sure.

But when plenty of socialists say "he who does no work does not eat", it's hard to determine to what extent it can be voluntary

That was a very poorly written and thought out arguement.

What you described was technological development. It was neither capitalism or any other economic theory.

I own the means of production. You suffered the consequence. This is why you are Canada.

Who's this dude?

>I own the means of production.

Are you saying that clubs are means of production?

>You suffered the consequence. This is why you are Canada.

More shitposting.

Thanks, I feel like I really argued the finer points of capitalism vs anarchism. You should post here more often, a person of your rare caliber is hard to find.

It's a chick dont know who she is but she's would of been a member of the Mujeres Libres

i don't understand
how the fuck is that capitalism

I'm nonplussed.

Here, have a picture of Gou

So if a bunch of shit skins want to settle on your land, you're going to let them use your farm land? If you tell them to farm elsewhere, they'll say all the surrounding land is crap and they want to farm on this area. What do you do?

if they're on your personal property then you kick them out using force

If the land is collectively owned by a syndical then they would have no right to settle on it. In fact if anything they'd most likely get chased out with weapons.

>Mujeres Libres

cunts have to go and ruin anarchism

>want to settle on your land

The syndicate or commune would treat them as invaders trying to plunder the means of production from your group.

>If you tell them to farm elsewhere, they'll say all the surrounding land is crap and they want to farm on this area. What do you do?

Militia time. Tell them to keep moving. Chances are you would have a mutual defence agreement with any communes/syndicates in the area.

I thought anarchists welcome the struggling. These are poor rapefugees we're talking about. Also what's this about personal property? Are you allowed to build fences around your 100 acre farm and kill anyone who walks in?

>Mujeres Libres

I honestly don't like anarcho-feminists. Their arguments are pointless because all of their complaints are about abortion rights. It's pointless because anarchists already address the issue of the state trying to assert a claim of authority over a persons body.

I think them educating children and providing medical services was good but yeh I agree.
The modern ones are nuts and a complete parallel to those of the 1930s

So you're going to force outsiders to walk around your property? What happened to freedom of movement? What gives you the justification to uphold borders, but not for the state?

sure that is good, don't see why that needs a women's movement though

The state works in a top down manner that provides no direct democracy. This means that they can open and close borders on their own will and not on the will of the society.
Yet within a anarchist society the group who collectively own said "property" decide together mutually who should not be allowed to simply just walk in. Here the people make the decision.

>Also what's this about personal property?

Private property exists at the level of personal belongings.

When it comes to housing and equipment this exists at the level of the collective.

>Are you allowed to build fences around your 100 acre farm and kill anyone who walks in?

If the commune needs the land for grazing cattle and another group enters it you would be entitled to defend the property if you have put it to use. You would probably already know most of the surrounding areas communes though, and you wouldn't want to start a conflict.

So what are these new jobs, precisely? A recent report comparing employment in the US between 1910 and 2000 gives us a clear picture (and I note, one pretty much exactly echoed in the UK). Over the course of the last century, the number of workers employed as domestic servants, in industry, and in the farm sector has collapsed dramatically. At the same time, “professional, managerial, clerical, sales, and service workers” tripled, growing “from one-quarter to three-quarters of total employment.” In other words, productive jobs have, just as predicted, been largely automated away (even if you count industrial workers globally, including the toiling masses in India and China, such workers are still not nearly so large a percentage of the world population as they used to be).

But rather than allowing a massive reduction of working hours to free the world’s population to pursue their own projects, pleasures, visions, and ideas, we have seen the ballooning not even so much of the “service” sector as of the administrative sector, up to and including the creation of whole new industries like financial services or telemarketing, or the unprecedented expansion of sectors like corporate law, academic and health administration, human resources, and public relations. And these numbers do not even reflect on all those people whose job is to provide administrative, technical, or security support for these industries, or for that matter the whole host of ancillary industries (dog-washers, all-night pizza deliverymen) that only exist because everyone else is spending so much of their time working in all the other ones.

These are what I propose to call “bullshit jobs".

>So you're going to force outsiders to walk around your property?
Yes

>What happened to freedom of movement?
Just not on the commune's land.

>What gives you the justification to uphold borders, but not for the state?
A state doesn't deserve to exist.

Look at present day Europe.

All those borders did almost no good against the locust horde of refugees. When a commune has a border it's defending the communes property for the good of it's members. When a government has a border it's marking out a line and saying every worker inside it has to pay money.

It’s as if someone were out there making up pointless jobs just for the sake of keeping us all working. And here, precisely, lies the mystery. In capitalism, this is exactly what is not supposed to happen. Sure, in the old inefficient socialist states like the Soviet Union, where employment was considered both a right and a sacred duty, the system made up as many jobs as they had to (this is why in Soviet department stores it took three clerks to sell a piece of meat). But, of course, this is the very sort of problem market competition is supposed to fix. According to economic theory, at least, the last thing a profit-seeking firm is going to do is shell out money to workers they don’t really need to employ. Still, somehow, it happens.

The answer clearly isn’t economic: it’s moral and political. The ruling class has figured out that a happy and productive population with free time on their hands is a mortal danger (think of what started to happen when this even began to be approximated in the ‘60s). And, on the other hand, the feeling that work is a moral value in itself, and that anyone not willing to submit themselves to some kind of intense work discipline for most of their waking hours deserves nothing, is extraordinarily convenient for them.

strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/