/dead/ - Post-Left

>>4268
>Did some NGO start calling their publicity stunts "direct action" or what happened?
….They've been doing that for the last 40 years anon what fucking rock have you been hiding under lmao?

>>4312
I'm not from the Anglosphere so I only noticed it now.

>>4247
That's some really nice activities but I still don't see how do you "appropriate the world".

>>4257
They aren't. If they were, however, engaged in similar activities as a collective, they might begin to.

>>4257
That's prolly because you think of it as some grand, biblical event because of your social brain worm when in actuality it's pretty mundane, like most things in reality

>>4258
>>4264
That really sounds like lifestylism.

>>4265
Wow, crazy insight anon!
What kind of board do you think your on? Post-leftism basically came into existence when Bookchin cried about "lifestylism" in the 90's.

>>4195
idk if you want a world without nuns then murdering nuns does not seem to be against the unity of means and ends

>>4196
means and ends anarchists would argue that by killing nuns you are creating a anti-nun-hierarchy and therefore are unable to establish anarchy

>shadow-spawn from beyond the stars gfs
already have around 3 step up fedicucks

>>3972
Of course, Anon.

Its called BEING A FUCKING RETARD.

>>4197
I feel like the first and second criticisms would be:
- that is an inefficient way of stopping nuns from existing, since the church can just make more. Also nuns aren't even in a significant position of power so you aren't changing anything systemically.
- nuns are strapped with machine guns, swords, and of course nunchucks, so that's like choosing to do the challenge boss first.

Are there any actually good youtube channels to watch while at work?

>>3722
depends on your interests

>>3723
Anarchy

https://sub.media/system-fail-25-the-urge-to-destroy/
They are ending System Fail too? Why?

>>3564
Why did you tag Me?

>>3565
I think it's newfags mostly. I still highly respect McQuinn and Landstreicher. BTW, Landstreicher also wrote this to deal with these kinds of guys: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/apio-ludd-burn-all-bibles

ACCELERATION GANG

>>4231
Theres a difference between privacy and pride. Sposter is clearly proud of using wet wipes instead of toilet paper. Bidets are superior but bidets combined with tp is best i think.

>>4232
This pride is misplaced though.
Most wetwipes are laced with irritants and make regular toiletpaper unusable in the long term. They are literally made to be addictive.
A proper diet and posture also avoids the need to wipe most of the time. Hentai with anal sex rarely shows enemas, not only because they break up the action, but also because a naturally clean anus isn't rare outside the west.

>>4231
>>4224
Speaking of that moment, hey S poster, can you give us a tutorial on how you wipe?
Also, I'm a visual learner, so if you can record it that would help alot.

S poster girlfriend (male?)

>>3940
This is probably my favourite of him, reading this was like talking with him as a friend: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-anarchy-in-a-manner-of-speaking

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/daniel-colson-daniel-colson-anarchism-is-extremely-realistic-an-interview-with-ballast-review
< You put forward the idea that anarchism is not a way of life, a state of mind, but a real ontology. What do you mean by this?
> To speak of ontology is to speak of what is, of things, of facts - domination for example, hierarchy, exploitation, oppression, sadness (to stick to negative facts - but it is true that there are many). Contrary to what is often believed (including by some libertarians), anarchism is not an ideal or a utopia, "nice ideas" that we would see every day how unrealizable they are. Anarchism is extremely realistic. It speaks of things as they are: chaos, accidents, life and death, joy, but also pain and suffering, stress, relationships of force and power, the chance and necessity of our existence as well as of the world and the universe which are ours. In short, the "anarchy" of what is.
inderesting

>>3942
I bookmarked it. I'm thinking of getting the audio book version of Theory of Everything so I know I'll actually get to it, unlike the couple hundred unread books I'll never get to because I spend my free time veging out or playing stupid shit like bloodborne.

I read An apology for idlers, thinking that it would be some good anti-work text, but instead it just made me realize how much better off everyone around me would be without me. I already understood the objective, material benefits that my relatives would enjoy if I ended my life, but now I am convinced that, at least in the long term, their subjective and psychological state would drastically improve too.

>>4190
So what? Who cares about them? You should be focused on consuming them for your interests instead of worrying how you taste to them.

>>4170

>Bakunin argued that on the contrary it is the lumpen, the least advanced and most miserable segment that would actually go through with it.
But going through with it would make them the most advanced. The black panthers also thought lumpens were revolutionary, and with Mao it was the peasants. Which one is revolutionary is not a matter of opinion its decided by the material conditions of a given situation. Most advanced means class conscious and class conscious means understanding the necessity of revolution to solve the contradiction between the working and owning classes. Its been scientifically proven through the experiment of revolution that all of them are wrong or right in different cases. Thats the essence of materialist dialectics, which Bakunin and other Anarcho-Communists also agree with.

>Bakunin is talking about expertise.
no he is talking about the difference between voluntary authority and absolute authority imposed by legislation of a state

>>4157
ok then what do you call parent/child teacher/student doctor/patient? why do pirates elect captains in battle and why did anarchist Spain elect officers during the war? i think you are using a different definition of hierarchy that requires coercion. a voluntary hierarchy based on competence is still a hierarchy, like in team sports where players have different positions based on ability and decided by consensus. Its not a bad word the problem is with coercion by unjustified authority.

Again,
1) Deleuze is not an anarchist
2) Anarchists are not against voluntary authority
3) Anarchists are not against vanguards - they are against vanguards seeking state power
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>4176
Their relation to the class struggle makes them bourgeoi. Just like the police they act in the bourgeoisies class interests as long as they are part of a bourgeoi state.
also the proletariat is a spook

>>4178
stop using spook wrong you dumb faggot it makes you look like an idiot.

>>4177
>Anarchists are not against voluntary authority
I'm not sure this is universally true. There are definitely insurrectionary anarchists like the Firey Nuclei that at least say they are against all forms of authority and control. Historically it's only really anarchists that engaged in direct warfare e.g Makhno, Durruti, maybe certain syndicalists in LatAm as well, that will justify 'voluntary authority' because they view it as a necessary, temporary action.
>Anarchists are not against vanguards - they are against vanguards seeking state power
Again, not a given. The only anarchist I can think of that historically has justified vanguardism is Bonnano. If you could point me to a text by an actual anarchist (not this negation bullshit) post-20th century where someone argues in favor of a vanguard please do.
>The difference between Marxists and Anarchists is in what happens after the revolution - whether or not there is a state under the dictatorship of the proletariat
Nope.

>>4102
No one says this. The reason used by Marxists is false consciousness, which Deleuze elaborates on and demonstrates that desire can be subverted against one's material interests.
>PMC
>CIA
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>4179
The correct usage of spook is a spook

>>4097
>>4098
This is much more lucid than what I expected from Dolce and Gabbana, honestly.

Anyway, if I'm reading into this correctly the "argument" is something along these lines.
>class society exists because of surplus
>surplus value is necessary to have a "ruling" apparatus
>a person is born into a class society
>unconsciously they pick up on economic class relations
>they form their subconsciousness and make into unconscious acts of reproducing class society
>those who realize this become class conscious and these are always fewer in number than those unconscious
>when history permits a breaking point up to the breaking point everything seems "rational"
>this breaking point isn't even obvious btw
>when the breaking point happens "everything" can happen, not just what was "necessary"
>the clearly determined relations are also prone to breaking
>the vanguard becomes the new apparatus inasmuch it becomes the Will of revolutionary subject which is then objectified in a single person?

>>3985
Is bell hooks even anarchist? I tried reading one of her books once but I really disliked it because it was full of religious nonsense.

>>3986
It is not
Here have an anarchist book
They get a book you get a book
Everybody gets a book

>>3958
>I feel like anarchist theory has kind of stagnated,
You look under your chair and find a book

You get a book
You get a book
Everybody gets a book

Does David graeber count? He was pretty based.

>>3900
Any more critiques of class consciousness specificly?

>>3583
Glasses, pace-makers, hearing implants , artificial limb replacements and so on are working out pretty well.
Pick the good aspects but avoid the cyborg distopia.

Free cyborg bodies for everybody

>>3583
transhumanism in a collectivist or anarchist sense seems pretty neat but it inevitably gets corrupted by profiteering.
also medicine and drugs in general are already transhumanist, transhumanism isnt just cool robot arms and brains in jars. :^)

>>3776
>also medicine and drugs in general are already transhumanist, transhumanism isnt just cool robot arms and brains in jars. :^)
Medicine is, in fact, not transhumanist, because the goal of apllying medicine isn't the improvement of a human towards a goal of something more than human, transcending humanity, but only to improve the condition of a single, sick human towards the goal of a single, healthy human.
Drugs are also not really transhumanist as far as recreation goes, to trip is to be human. However, taking drugs to increase performance in general or in a certain field is transhumanist - and again shows why transhumanism is bourgeoi dreck! Cause the improvement functions only as an improvement in productivity!
It's impossible for transhumanism to imagine improving a persons artistry, because art does not follow capitalist logic. You might add 300 arms to a painter so that they might paint 100 works in the amount of time it usually takes him to create 1, or develop specific painting extremities that are able to wield a brush at a significantly more precise level - that's not gonna improve the art. What makes art good is not quantifiable, it's the artist revealing themselves in their work - and all transhumanism does is quantifying productivity.
The only class that would benefit from a transhumanist catalysation of humans abilities is the bourgeoisie - cause it would mean more workers can make more commodities in a smaller amount of time - and those "improvements" that werent related strictly to performance enhancement, would only be available to the rich anyways.
In a classless society in turn transhumanism would be utterly useless. Without the pressure of class hierarchy there is no sense in increasing ones productive capabilities, since you dont need a certain level of (economic) performance to ensure your survival. The means of survival would already be available to you. Why would anyone strive to become a machiene when they are able to freely develop themselves by unfolding whats already inside?
fuck transhumanism

Transhumanism can never be given to you

It can only be made by the self for the self

Youre going to trust botnetted implants?

Its gotta be FOSS software and hardware

Get soldering

Transhumanism is already here, trust me, you just don't want it.