LWDT V: Completing the Five Thread Plan

[West Leas Oros]

Anarchy: The state can’t oppress you!

Also Anarchy: Other People are allowed to violate your rights because laws are statist!

Ah. There's the strawman I was waiting for.

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights. For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

[Zrhajan]

Ah. There's the strawman I was waiting for.

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights. For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

Ah yes, I too, remember the mobs and rights violations of the Free Territories of Ukraine. This is definitely well-established fact.

[Torrocca]

Ah. There's the strawman I was waiting for.

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights.

Gib proofs because I have the fine example of Revolutionary Catalonia working just fine and dandy until it was invaded by reactionary traitors to the Republic :^)

For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

Bourgeois laws designed to protect the bourgeois are still inherently oppressive to the proletariat :^)

[Pilarcraft]

Ah. There's the strawman I was waiting for.

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights. For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

I'm not doing a strawman against it tho. The Constitution doesn't have any body of judicials to enforce it. The Regular law is enforced by the State, because the State has the authority to enforce laws. People (who are the body in charge of enforcing a constitution) don't have the authority to enforce laws, because that would be (by definition) anarchy.
What part of that is even remotely close to strawman (especially a strawman as big as 'anarchists say the people should oppress you'?')

[Proctopeo]

You can have individual liberty and have a functioning state at the same time. Shocking, I know.

inherently false as shown by all of written human history :^)

for ever Adams there's a Jefferson, my guy

[Ostroeuropa]

If you're on the left you have some degree of disdain for and diagreement with the existing order. You must have a bit of backbone and spark in you to get anything done. None of us are without edge and the Reverse Edge Olympics is a very silly place.

I was about to pretend i'm not at all an edgy person but then realized i'm listening alternately to a podcast on hyperviolent literature and political extremism music while sat here wearing shades indoors writing a book on how feminism is dumb.

Oh well.

[Torrocca]

inherently false as shown by all of written human history :^)

for ever Adams there's a Jefferson, my guy

Jefferson is inherently very spooky tho

[Pilarcraft]

for ever Adams there's a Jefferson, my guy

Jefferson is inherently very spooky tho

Everything is spooky, that's not a surprise.

[West Leas Oros]

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights.

Gib proofs because I have the fine example of Revolutionary Catalonia working just fine and dandy until it was invaded by reactionary traitors to the Republic :^)

For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

Bourgeois laws designed to protect the bourgeois are still inherently oppressive to the proletariat :^)

1. Republican Spain as a whole was doomed to fail. Catalonia would’ve collapsed. That b*tch Franco always wins. :^)

2. TIL that the concept of government by and for the people is bourgeois, and revolting against monarchies and executing nobles to create democratic republics is siding with bourgeois elites.

[Ostroeuropa]

Gib proofs because I have the fine example of Revolutionary Catalonia working just fine and dandy until it was invaded by reactionary traitors to the Republic :^)



Bourgeois laws designed to protect the bourgeois are still inherently oppressive to the proletariat :^)

1. Republican Spain as a whole was doomed to fail. Catalonia would’ve collapsed. That b*tch Franco always wins. :^)

2. TIL that the concept of government by and for the people is bourgeois, and revolting against monarchies and executing nobles to create democratic republics is siding with bourgeois elites.

I disagree. I think republican Spain was destined to thrive and succeed but that they'd inevitably form some kind of government while denying that's what it was. It only failed because of soviet traitors and the moronic idea that Nation was evil that led to Syndicalists fighting eachother and killing eachother by the millions until there weren't enough to actually form a syndicalist society.

The anarchists did not prioritize syndicalism and compromise with the nationalists and consequently got nothing at all.

Even before the end of the war the "Anarchist" syndicalists had started taking government positions and using them properly, but they refused to admit anarchism was dumb and didn't work and kept shooting their fellow syndicalists over it while terrifying people into joining Franco.

They managed to shoot enough syndicalists that the newer members of francos regime and army weren't syndies anymore.

If anything it just proves that the Anarchist violence is the death blow to our chances at left wing governance.

If anarchists hadn't ruined syndicalism and stopped killing their comrades and calling them reactionaries over and over, society might be vastly different by now.

[Torrocca]

Gib proofs because I have the fine example of Revolutionary Catalonia working just fine and dandy until it was invaded by reactionary traitors to the Republic :^)



Bourgeois laws designed to protect the bourgeois are still inherently oppressive to the proletariat :^)

1. Republican Spain as a whole was doomed to fail. Catalonia would’ve collapsed. That b*tch Franco always wins. :^)

Republican Spain, especially the revolutionary sectors, was the closest example of a truly free, stateless society regardless. Society was amazing until Franco took over :^)

2. TIL that the concept of government by and for the people is bourgeois, and revolting against monarchies and executing nobles to create democratic republics is siding with bourgeois elites.

I mean, it literally is. Do you think the revolution in France was done by the peasantry and not the liberal middle classes?

[Torrocca]

1. Republican Spain as a whole was doomed to fail. Catalonia would’ve collapsed. That b*tch Franco always wins. :^)

2. TIL that the concept of government by and for the people is bourgeois, and revolting against monarchies and executing nobles to create democratic republics is siding with bourgeois elites.

I disagree. I think republican Spain was destined to thrive and succeed but that they'd inevitably form some kind of government while denying that's what it was. It only failed because of soviet traitors and the moronic idea that Nation was evil that led to Syndicalists fighting eachother and killing eachother by the millions until there weren't enough to actually form a syndicalist society.

The anarchists did not prioritize syndicalism and compromise with the nationalists and consequently got nothing at all.

Almost like they were in the middle of a civil war with a nationalist group that also had fascists aplenty in it, including literal bonafide Nazis and Italians. Hmm.

[Dumb Ideologies]

If you're on the left you have some degree of disdain for and diagreement with the existing order. You must have a bit of backbone and spark in you to get anything done. None of us are without edge and the Reverse Edge Olympics is a very silly place.

I was about to pretend i'm not at all an edgy person but then realized i'm listening alternately to a podcast on hyperviolent literature and political extremism music while sat here wearing shades indoors writing a book on how feminism is dumb.

Oh well.

[a distant fedora begins tipping back and forth so quickly that the very fabric of time starts to distort]

[West Leas Oros]

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights. For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

I'm not doing a strawman against it tho. The Constitution doesn't have any body of judicials to enforce it. The Regular law is enforced by the State, because the State has the authority to enforce laws. People (who are the body in charge of enforcing a constitution) don't have the authority to enforce laws, because that would be (by definition) anarchy.
What part of that is even remotely close to strawman (especially a strawman as big as 'anarchists say the people should oppress you'?')

Supporters of constitutional democracy don’t say the state should oppress you either. The very concept of a constitution is to limit the governments power, and the legal system that we currently have is among the fairest. The people have rights that the government cannot infringe, and the government promises to protect the rights of its people from other people. The elected officials (elected BY THE PEOPLE) make the law, interpret the law, and execute the law. The people influence the legal system, this is why we have due process, the 5th amendment, and other nice things.

[Ostroeuropa]

I disagree. I think republican Spain was destined to thrive and succeed but that they'd inevitably form some kind of government while denying that's what it was. It only failed because of soviet traitors and the moronic idea that Nation was evil that led to Syndicalists fighting eachother and killing eachother by the millions until there weren't enough to actually form a syndicalist society.

The anarchists did not prioritize syndicalism and compromise with the nationalists and consequently got nothing at all.

Almost like they were in the middle of a civil war with a nationalist group that also had fascists aplenty in it, including literal bonafide Nazis and Italians. Hmm.

JONS was initially a radical syndicalist organization and the anarchists shot them all over anarchism and wouldn't accept socialism and a state could co-exist (Despite being forced to eventually adopt a state themselves toward the end of the war). It was nothing to do with socialism, they shot their fellow socialists over anarchism. They slaughtered enough that they simply got replaced by fascists over time. ("New Shirts").

If Anarchists hadn't been around, Spain would be a Nationalist and Syndicalist society.

The leadership of the Falange suffered 60 percent casualties in the early days of the civil war, and the party was transformed by new members and rising new leaders, called camisas nuevas ("new shirts"), who were less interested in the revolutionary aspects of National Syndicalism.

The fascist help only arrived after that when fascists led JONS and replaced the earlier members. It was the anarchists who fucked up EVERYTHING about that war. Let's not forget their anti-clericalism and how that caused loads of people to join JONS.

Anarchism cost us that war and handed it to fascists. Anarchists are the enemy of the left imo. Anarchists shot everyone who was a potential ally until there was nobody left to help them fight the fascists, then cried and said fascists were the only reason anarchism didn't work. No mate, it was because Anarchism inevitably means fighting almost everyone and killing them because nobody wants anarchy except anarchists who are a ridiculously small part of the population, and will immediately set up a government when you try to impose anarchy on them, meaning constant murders.

Notably the anarchists focused on killing "Reactionaries." (Mostly other left wingers who didn't like anarchy) instead of killing fascists, then got butthurt when they lost to fascists.

But go ahead and pretend it wasn't like that.

Anarchists are the equivalent of a country who decides to declare war on the entire planet for each and every countries flaws at the same time and then thinks this is a viable plan.

[Chestaan]

Anarchist societies inevitably lead to mobs, chaos, and violations of your rights.

Gib proofs because I have the fine example of Revolutionary Catalonia working just fine and dandy until it was invaded by reactionary traitors to the Republic :^)

For all your talk of straw men, you do quite well with straw men against constitutional democracy.

Bourgeois laws designed to protect the bourgeois are still inherently oppressive to the proletariat :^)

Anarchist Catalonia committed several atrocities and murdered thousands of non-combatants as part of the Red Terror...

[Torrocca]

Almost like they were in the middle of a civil war with a nationalist group that also had fascists aplenty in it, including literal bonafide Nazis and Italians. Hmm.

JONS was initially a radical syndicalist organization and the anarchists shot them all over anarchism and wouldn't accept socialism and a state could co-exist (Despite being forced to eventually adopt a state themselves toward the end of the war). It was nothing to do with socialism, they shot their fellow socialists over anarchism. They slaughtered enough that they simply got replaced by fascists over time. ("New Shirts").

Funny how I just looked into JONS and can't find anything on them getting shot by Anarchists, but how I can definitely see that they were far-right from the beginning and merged with the Falangists two whole years before the Civil War began.

If Anarchists hadn't been around, Spain would be a Nationalist and Syndicalist society.

As opposed to the Nationalist society it became under Franco? :^)

The leadership of the Falange suffered 60 percent casualties in the early days of the civil war, and the party was transformed by new members and rising new leaders, called camisas nuevas ("new shirts"), who were less interested in the revolutionary aspects of National Syndicalism.

The fascist help only arrived after that when fascists led JONS and replaced the earlier members. It was the anarchists who fucked up EVERYTHING about that war.

From what I'm reading, JONS were a bunch of fuckers who voluntarily supported Franco's Nationalist reactionary movement (and that there's nothing speaking ill of the Anarchists, either on the NatSynd or JONS pages on wiki). Hmm.

[Ostroeuropa]

As opposed to the Nationalist society it became under Franco? :^)

Yes, as opposed to that.

[Pilarcraft]

Supporters of constitutional democracy don’t say the state should oppress you either. The very concept of a constitution is to limit the governments power, and the legal system that we currently have is among the fairest. The people have rights that the government cannot infringe, and the government promises to protect the rights of its people from other people. The elected officials (elected BY THE PEOPLE) make the law, interpret the law, and execute the law. The people influence the legal system, this is why we have due process, the 5th amendment, and other nice things.

You're still not getting it. The fact that The Constitution does not have an legitimate body to enforce it means that we, as the people, only enjoy the freedoms given to us by it so long as the State wishes so. All it takes for a constitution to go to dogs is an illiberal monarch (Charles of England, for example), or a bit of panic (The Patriot Act... or pretty much the entirety of The Terror).
If you don't understand this, there isn't much I can tell you.

[Torrocca]

Gib proofs because I have the fine example of Revolutionary Catalonia working just fine and dandy until it was invaded by reactionary traitors to the Republic :^)



Bourgeois laws designed to protect the bourgeois are still inherently oppressive to the proletariat :^)

Anarchist Catalonia committed several atrocities and murdered thousands of non-combatants as part of the Red Terror...

Fair enough, but that doesn't mean social order broke down in Revolutionary Catalonia.

[Torrocca]

As opposed to the Nationalist society it became under Franco? :^)

Yes, as opposed to that.

So basically it would've been essentially the same because the NatSynd groups happily and voluntarily supported Franco's endeavors in dissolving the Republic and destroying actual leftist movements.

Righto then.

[Ostroeuropa]

Anarchist Catalonia committed several atrocities and murdered thousands of non-combatants as part of the Red Terror...

Fair enough, but that doesn't mean social order broke down in Revolutionary Catalonia.

If people are fleeing your area because they're afraid of getting shot and only ideological zealots are sticking around, that's a social breakdown of society. You're basically arguing something akin to the idea that Germany post-holocaust wouldn't have anti-semitism.

Yes, as opposed to that.

So basically it would've been essentially the same because the NatSynd groups happily and voluntarily supported Franco's endeavors in dissolving the Republic and destroying actual leftist movements.

Righto then.

No, because it would have meant workplace democracy if the NatSynd groups weren't weakened so catastrophically in the civil war.

[Chestaan]

Anarchist Catalonia committed several atrocities and murdered thousands of non-combatants as part of the Red Terror...

Fair enough, but that doesn't mean social order broke down in Revolutionary Catalonia.

Well I wouldn't say that vigilante mobs committing summary executions is "working fine and dandy".

Tbh, I'm not even opposed to anarchism, Free Territory was pretty beast. I'm just a bit more torn on Revolutionary Catalonia.

[Ostroeuropa]

Fair enough, but that doesn't mean social order broke down in Revolutionary Catalonia.

Well I wouldn't say that vigilante mobs committing summary executions is "working fine and dandy".

Tbh, I'm not even opposed to anarchism, Free Territory was pretty beast. I'm just a bit more torn on Revolutionary Catalonia.

In terms of economics, it's great proof that syndicalism works wonders. In terms of its social, cultural, and national policy, it was an utter trainwreck, but that trainwreck only makes the economic success more impressive.

[Torrocca]

Fair enough, but that doesn't mean social order broke down in Revolutionary Catalonia.

If people are fleeing your area because they're afraid of getting shot and only ideological zealots are sticking around, that's a social breakdown of society. You're basically arguing something akin to the idea that Germany post-holocaust wouldn't have anti-semitism.

Weird, people flee areas experiencing civil war and/or revolution. Who'd'a thunk?

So basically it would've been essentially the same because the NatSynd groups happily and voluntarily supported Franco's endeavors in dissolving the Republic and destroying actual leftist movements.

Righto then.

No, because it would have meant workplace democracy if the NatSynd groups weren't weakened so catastrophically in the civil war.

Reminder that Anarcho-Syndicalist groups were doing exactly that, especially in Revolutionary Catalonia, while also not merging with literal Fascists.