this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
686 points (94.8% liked)

solarpunk memes

2823 readers
949 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 238 points 3 months ago (35 children)

I reject the premise that right-wingers can be anarchists. I don’t care what they call themselves. Anarchism is a left-wing movement, fundamentally.

[–] [email protected] 149 points 3 months ago (2 children)

anarcho-capitalism is actually corporate fascism

[–] [email protected] 54 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A bit debatable on the individual level but that’s likely what it would lead to. Some ancaps are weirdly anti-corporate though. They think somehow big powerful corporations were created by the state. Which is true in some cases but clearly not in others.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 3 months ago (7 children)

All corporations are created by the state. Corporations only exist because of the laws that create them. Without that special legal status it’s pretty much impossible to grow to the sizes most corporations do.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 3 months ago (29 children)

The same is true for private-property and capitalism in general, which is why "anarcho-capitalism" is so absurd.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

I wholeheartedly agree!

load more comments (28 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I’m not sure I fully agree… some corporate entities are large enough to be self reinforcing. In practice they may end up recreating the state, but I don’t think it’s necessary impossible for large corporate structures to emerge in a stateless society. Of course, the nature of the stateless society is a very important variable here. A society that is hostile to accumulated wealth and social domination would make this much more difficult.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A corporation is a legal construct. While it’s theoretically possible for a single business to grow very large, most of the exploitation and legal cover provided by the simple act of incorporation becomes nearly impossible.

Plus without a state to push down competition, it becomes a lot harder to monopolize a market. Ideally there wouldn’t even be a market to monopolize, but that’s a different discussion altogether.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

Incorporation is just a formality required by law. Corporations could still exist through internal cooperation without that, as long as there is no outside force that disrupts them.

In the absence of the state, a corporate structure can pursue its own coercive methods to maintain market dominance. And of course, some markets are naturally prone to monopoly due to the barriers to competition.

Anything the state can do, a large enough corporation can do as well. So this logic just doesn’t add up.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

But without a state above them to reinforce laws the corporation would have to enforce them. So they don't have to follow their own laws, and thus become something else. More like a warband of kingdom or junta.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Are large street gangs (Crips, etc.) not an example of a huge corporation operating outside the benefits of the law?

[–] Bertuccio 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

A corporation by definition benefits from the law.

Corporations are businesses that have been given the the legal rights of a person. As if they had a body. Or corpus, if you will.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

No. Not all organizations are corporations.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

Same with pirates. They have an internal structure and share profit, but are very illegal.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago

It's just latter-day feudalism. Their program is to Make Landlords Lords Again.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 3 months ago

If they didn't blatantly steal ideas from the left and twist it to support rich people, where would they get ideas? Have you stopped and considered how mentally bankrupt they are?

[–] [email protected] 31 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes, and I think that’s the joke here.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Kind of seems like that’s what they’re getting at but I find this linguistic deception so irritating that I can’t even tolerate the implicit suggestion here that the top dude might be some kind of anarchist.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

The people the meme is referring to call themselves anarcho-capitalists, it's not even implicit. It's why they have the blue line flag and Gadsden flag, where normally these would be contradictory they lack the critical thinking skills to not polish boots with their tongue.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Back The Blue supporters jamming to Rage against the Machine for decades then suddenly getting upset at the band.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Same vibes as when they got mad at Green Day for trashing Trump. Like they never paid attention at all.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But a punk band trashing a right-wing president? That's never happened before!

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It’s not like their most widely recognized song was written to trash a right-wing president /s

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Having "less government" eventually crosses a threshold into having "no functional macro government at all".

What you do after that threshold is entirely open ended.

Anarchism is not owned by one political group, the ideation of what comes next is. (In leftist groups, collectivism via willful participation, focused on meeting the needs of all members of the group. In right groups, what amounts to libertarian bartering and more insular communing.)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (10 children)

Anarchism is about opposition to all oppression and unjust hierarchies. If you are pro-capitalism, pro-patriarchy, pro-white supremacy, or pro-nationalism, you aren’t an anarchist. Sorry.

And if you aren’t any of those things, what affinity do you have with the political right?

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Having “less government” eventually crosses a threshold into having “no functional macro government at all”.

What you do after that threshold is entirely open ended.

I think that is where you leave what anarchists define as anarchism. It doesn't end there, it's not open ended. If you end up with some town or camp that is ruled by a leader and/or a priesthood and police force to keep law and order, it's not anarchism. If you can own land and impose your vast property rights so others don't have anything, you're not anarchist.

Exactly how a voluntary collaboration of anarchists is supposed to work to avoid quickly growing small systems of power again (chiefs or warlords) I never figured out so don't ask me. Best answer is that "because the people already overthrew the existing power structures they will have an easier time preventing future power structures". So I think they assume the belief system is powerful enough so that once people are indoctrinated, they would reject any systems of control again. How such an indoctrination is achieved and maintained would be my next question.

Of course there are theories like anarcho-syndicalism. And I think in generally anarchism is understood as merely being of a mindset that any authority has to justify itself or be abolished, but necessary authority is not. So you'd still pay taxes for roads and schools.

more ramblingsPersonally I believe that without AGI and a powerful and benevolent and incorruptable mind a la "The Culture" any ideology is just window dressing and temporary. If humanity wants someone to watch the watchers, we need to build the perfect watcher that can do that.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

The terms "right wing" and "left wing" are quite nebulous, anyways.

load more comments (29 replies)