Or some Bitcoin software…
1 Like
I suspect it might just be.
1 Like
thank you
No, I’m not. I’m saying, as did the Metropolitan police, that going into Syria, taking up arms and engaging in combat, and then returning is going to spark an investigation. Working on a form of currency designed to cross borders is going to be a component of that investigation. Stating that you are working on a currency that can sidestep current embargoes, and with the intent to facilitate that sidestepping of embargoes, is going to play into that investigation.
It sounds like Taaki is doing good work, so I hope they will finally conclude the investigation and let him go on his way. But I think a lengthy investigation is to be expected in these circumstances.
If anyone is interested in Rojava, Libcom have a series of articles about them.
https://libcom.org/tags/rojava
Some people there are sceptical because of worries about potential nationalism, but Rojava do seem to be trying to reject that kind of politics
Their biggest problem right now is Turkey. Rojava has already been deliberately bombed by them, despite supposedly being “allies”.
Turkey really doesn’t want this spreading to “Turkish” Kurdistan.
They’re doing a good enough job governing themselves so far. They have colleges running in their territory
First of all, the Randians aren’t anarchist, they fail on the no rulers thing HARD. The same applies to most of the libertarian-capitalists.
Secondly Rojava is left wing and collectivist, ie what anarchism used to be in the US and still is in the rest of the world.
So why isn’t Erdogan considered to be a terrorist?
6 Likes
Context?
Part of the problem, joe, is that the investigation will be used as a pretense to imprison and interrogate the guy for unspecified and indefinite amounts of time.
For the next year or two, as the system drags it’s feet, Taaki has been disappeared.
1 Like
He’s not disappeared, though. Wired just interviewed him. He was previously under house arrest, living with his mom. The article sort of makes it sound like that’s behind him, and they’re just waiting for his passport to be returned.
I think a lot of folks here didn’t bother to read the article.
1 Like
There’s such a thing as anarcho capitalists, though, so I would say there are left and right anarchists. But @M_Dub is intentionally conflating the two for shady rhetorical purposes, so I would say you are more in the right in this discussion.
Anarcho capitalists aren’t real anarchists. They’re basically weird Libertarians.
5 Likes
The terminology can get pretty confusing…according to the ExWorker:
“In general, libertarians and anarcho-capitalists believe in a free market and private property as the fundamental basis of society, and see the state as antagonistic to those values.”
“Few anarchists would accept the ‘anarcho-capitalists’ into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice… [so] even if they do reject the State, [they] might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists.”
- Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible
“To anarchists it seems bizarre that “anarcho”-capitalists want to get rid of the state but maintain the system it helped create and its function as a defender of the capitalist class’s property and property rights. In other words, to reduce the state purely to its function as the gendarme of the capitalist class is not an anarchist goal.”
- The Anarchist FAQ website
1 Like
Turkeys new bad guy terrorist is Gülen and his followers. PKK is full of Gülenists if you want to believe AKP officials.
Shown here with some other dude a few years ago …
2 Likes
Yeah yeah yeah, and No True Scotsman wears pants.
Individualist schools of anarchism are just as old as the social forms. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon was a mutualist. Godwin was what we’d now call a minarchist.
Must because anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism are louder doesn’t somehow turn the other anarchists into statists.
Frankly, I’ve heard enough of both social and individualist anarchists claiming the other side is statist because they end up being practically non-voluntary. You’re all utopians so who really cares how the other side lies to themselves about how repressive force won’t exist?
2 Likes
The quickest way to find out if anarcho-capitalists are really anarchist is to ask them if their workers should be allowed to use a rival companies product, then watch as they tear themselves apart over what level of authoritarianism is acceptable.
19th century individualists were also anti-capitalist, but it gets forgotten as the USA usually focuses on them being anti-socialist.
2 Likes
The quickest way to find out if anarcho-capitalists are really anarchist is to ask them if their workers should be allowed to use a rival companies product, then watch as they tear themselves apart over what level of authoritarianism is acceptable.
I could however just as easily ask a social anarchist what should be done to prevent someone from hoarding too much property - especially limited natural resources - and watch the exact same discussion about what level of coercion is acceptable.
The fundamental problem with anarchy in all its forms is that it is based on the idea that either bad actors will simply cease to exist or that they’ll be limited to anti-social, incompetent, common criminals.
19th century individualists were also anti-capitalist, but it gets forgotten as the USA usually focuses on them being anti-socialist
They were all over the place. You had plenty of individualist anarchists who were simply arguing for labor reform.
I have seen both debates. The left anarchists didn’t do what you said would happen (One person explicitly asked what would happen if they started hoarding), yet the capitalist ones did exactly what I said.
This is going to have to stay as hearsay though, I can’t spare the time looking though old discussions where I can’t even remember the exact word that were used.
It is worth noting that the anarcho-capitalists have absolutely no success when they start their own states. I don’t think any have lasted as long as the Paris Commune did, never mind anarchist Catalonia or Rojava.
The fundamental problem with statism is that the government will repeatedly betray you to capitalism, and those in power won’t give a fuck as long as you keep voting for them.
Maybe if someone had sorted that out years ago then I wouldn’t be looking at anarchism as a valid alternative.
5 Likes
The fundamental problem is that pretty much every system of economics uses a model of human incentive which is backwards - that it can somehow be all about providing for the needs of each individual first, and then maybe worry about the supersets of society and ecology later. Despite the obvious fact that the former depend upon the latter to exist.
1 Like
The fundamental problem with statism is that the government will repeatedly betray you to capitalism, and those in power won’t give a fuck as long as you keep voting for them.
Your fellow man will betray you no matter what. That’s the human condition.
Some people want to lead and a shockingly large number of others want to follow. Absent truly cohesive re-education/propaganda systems and a eugenics program to try to breed that trait out of humanity, anarchy will be betrayed by those same people.
States, especially the horribly inefficient and slow Democratic kind, are really just the least awful way we’ve come up with to try to keep the worst of humanity’s instincts in check.
And in my experience they have failed. My aim is a redistribution of power, to avoid it concentrating in any one person or group (Including me. Especially me).
Maybe it is impossible, but that isn’t enough reason for me to stop trying.
1 Like
