Between a monarchy and the most democratic republic there is only one essential difference: in the former, the world of officialdom oppresses and robs the people for the greater profit of the privileged and propertied classes, as well as to line its own pockets, in the name of the monarch; in the latter, it oppresses and robs the people in exactly the same way, for the benefit of the same classes and the same pockets, but in the name of the people’s will. In a republic a fictitious people, the ‘legal nation’ supposedly represented by the state, smothers the real, live people. But it will scarcely be any easier on the people if the cudgel with which they are beaten is called the people’s cudgel. (Bakunin)
And how do you believe things are to be decided between multiple people without voting?
Person with the biggest stick?
Person who’s fastest to react?
Person with the loudest voice?
I can understand being against FPTP democracy, I can understand being against party politics, I can understand being against representative democracy, but democracy itself? That’s not very anarchist. How do you propose to determine consensus without democracy?
Bakunin’s quote there isn’t against democracy, but the nation state. The republic part of his quote is his complaint, not the democratic part.
If everyone is playing the game of democratic elections but you’ve decided it’s above you to go along with it, how do you propose to get society to pivot to anarchism? Especially when fascists and authoritarians are brazenly putting their names on tickets and getting voted into power.
Join the IWW, join your local left wing party, get involved in democracy, because you’re not going to change anything by insulting strangers on the internet.
Revolution isn’t a thing that happens overnight. It’s not a thing that - the orgasmic storming of Buckingham palace and everything’s alright in the morning, we’ve got a revolutionary society. We’ve got to realize that as things get harder - when we have a revolution, when we’re headed towards a revolution things’ll be harder still - And when we’ve obtained our revolution it doesn’t stop-it continues on and on and on - It continues on until WE are the moderates. Right? When we are the moderates that’s when we have a revolution. When ordinary people say "Anarchists? Ah, fuck - they’re a load of fuckin’ liberals-they don’t believe in revolution at all, ah , fuckin’ hell they’re useless, like, you know - Yeah, that’s what I wanna see. That’s what I’m fuckin’ fighting for.
no shit you fucking twatwaffle, I’m an anarchist.
And how do you believe things are to be decided between multiple people without voting?
Person with the biggest stick?
Person who’s fastest to react?
Person with the loudest voice?
I can understand being against FPTP democracy, I can understand being against party politics, I can understand being against representative democracy, but democracy itself? That’s not very anarchist. How do you propose to determine consensus without democracy?
Bakunin’s quote there isn’t against democracy, but the nation state. The republic part of his quote is his complaint, not the democratic part.
If everyone is playing the game of democratic elections but you’ve decided it’s above you to go along with it, how do you propose to get society to pivot to anarchism? Especially when fascists and authoritarians are brazenly putting their names on tickets and getting voted into power.
Join the IWW, join your local left wing party, get involved in democracy, because you’re not going to change anything by insulting strangers on the internet.
https://youtu.be/avqDzIAqcts
consent and consensus
what is this quote from