Konesery

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver So, are crocodiles not animals?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver Animals are capable of understanding the sanctity of water, and there's a truce to drink. Meanwhile capitalists want to privatize water. Not sure about your argument mate.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver If your definition includes slavery, why shoud I care?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver I stand by the definition of anarchism. Go read it, and weep.

@KeithForLiberty Nation and state aren't the same. You are a victim of statist Propaganda

Libertarian Nationalism is an oxymoron.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Why is that too vague? Are there situations in which a forced association is justified? Or, to put it another way, which principle or value would you describe as fundamental?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver Depends on what you mean by that. It's too vague to be answered.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Man is the only being capable of creating value and truly rising above nature. The state of nature is brutal and cruel, and is in direct opposition to civilisation itself.

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver We're closer to ants than tigers. We're supposed to live in groups, as a collective. Wether you like it or not, nature doesnt care about your feelings

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver So you stand by your empty statements

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver Just because you dont like it doesnt mean it's any less true. Again, read some REAL anarchists and learn about the communes if you want to see why you're dead wrong.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Would you agree that freedom of association is one of the most fundamental human rights?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver There's no "collectivist anarchists" That's just anarchism, it's collectivist at its core. Like humanity is by the way: as gregarious animals, we're not supposed to live outside the collective.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver These are empty statements; what fundamental characteristic makes capitalism incompatible with anarchism?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver Both are antithetic. Anarchism cannot coexist with capitalism (that's why communes end in bloodbaths - capitalism preserves itself) And reciprocately, capitalism cannot coexist with anarchism

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver “Anarchism without adjectives” was merely an attempt by the collectivist anarchists to retain control over the definition of the term in the face of the individualist anarchists What insights have I specifically missed out on because I don't speak French?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver The argument is the definition of anarchism, and the 2 centuries of anarchism to this day. My authority is having read Proudhon, Louise Michel and others REAL anarchist in their original language.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver In what sense is it irreconciliable? You did not need coercion for the free exchange of goods and services

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver It has clear core beliefs. And they're irreconciliable with capitalism.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Says who? Anarchism is not a closed philosophy.

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver If you add any suffix or prefix to anarchy, you've lost. Easy.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver It's hard to argue against something if you don't present any arguments. Who are you referring to? Who or what is your authority on anarchism?😉

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver No, i'm against misusing the term anarchy.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Mutualism is a form of Socialism, and most left Market Anachist, whoud agree. Are c4ss not an Anachist Thinktank?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver "anarcho socialist Proudhon" I cant XD He was anarchist, but certainly not socialist.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver So you are against Voluntary participation, Self-organization, Freedom of contract and Freedom of Assoiation?

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver There are, and they're not that hard to get. Sadly they're completely opposed to your ideology. Might wanna drop the anarchist part, poser.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver No, you claim anarcho capitalist are anarchists. They are not, sadly for them anarchism existed before, and has a clear guideline that doesnt align in the slightest with Ancap's delusions.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Even if that were the case, it’s irrelevant to this discussion. After all, I never claimed there weren’t anarchists.

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver They were actual anarchists. And the violence came when the army killed everyone, not during the commune.

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver like CHAZ? Besides, that’s not true: from the Paris Commune all the way to the Catalan anarchists, it has always been a violent, lawless, and perverse affair. But I’m not claiming they aren’t anarchists; I’m just saying that this kind of anarchism isn’t desirable.

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver Look at any anarchist commune. They managed just fine until the army murdered them (every time)

@Inu_Loki @SandyResolver Any form of legal dependency constitutes a hierarchy. To prevent this entirely would make private action itself a criminal offense. Moreover, Blanqui was not a good anarchist, since he himself was quite elitist

@NAPocaly @SandyResolver It is. "Ni dieu ni maitre, sans foi ni loi" means "no god no master, no faith or law". It's not just the rulers that are banned, but every form of hierarchy.