I also dont care in general if we get the ussr back

yikes are we not on the same page or even in the same book..

I'm not the type of anarchist who believes there can ever be such a thing as a 'free society'. I see anarchy as a constant fight against domination. I'm not an anarchist because I believe anarchy will create a perfect utopia, I'm an anarchist because when I see domination and oppression, it infuriates me into action. Here's my ode to anarchy: https://raddle.me/wiki/what_anarchy_means

Consensus has to come with freedom of association. When people don't agree on a course of action, they don't need to work together on the project. They can go their separate ways and come back together later on a project where their interests and needs better align. More here: https://raddle.me/wiki/friendship

Accepting structures of domination with the reasoning that compromising our ethics is justified in the service of "a better tomorrow" is how you get the USSR. Ethical compromises don't lead to freedom, they lead to tyranny. I don't have it in me to accept forced obedience in the name of collectivity.

On the other hand, I'm all for adapting methods to fit each unique situation. But I won't personally participate in methods that force conformity.

I mean you can easily look and see for yourself:

https://old.reddit.com/user/ChanceHappening/

Raddle being prominently linked in r/anarchism's sidebar is another indication they're spreading disinfo.

As an anarchist, I don't think it's harsh to throw out systems of domination. It's basically my whole reason for being.

1. Don't gender me.

2. I was not banned from r/anarchism.

3. Raddle's moderator log is completely transparent, you can look at it and see I openly moderate it everyday. I have no reason to use a 'sock puppet' to mod.

4. If I want to comment anywhere anonymously, I'll do so. I don't need to show you my passport to post on the internet.

it's foss, go ahead and add it. i don't have the skills to.

It says "most anarchists are in favour of direct democracy" i.e. majoritarianism. We're in favour of reaching consensus, not forcing the will of the majority on minorities. That's Bookchin who insists we all obey the will of the majority.

Yeah, I made an account because someone told me your site was being used to attack me and the FAQ I started.

I'm not against postmill joining the fediverse, I'm against lemmy.

Don't believe every bitter and resentful internet commenter. They're talking about 8 year old drama where I used several accounts to speak out against the politics and behavior of other users (almost all of them tankies) and then told them I did it and apologized. Hardly 'caught red handed'.

I started the new FAQ, I can provide direct quotes from the old FAQ to outline its biases if you want. But biases aren't really a problem, that's to be expected in any project, the problem is the vicious smears it directs at anarchists of different schools, and the way it's tries to assert monolithic thought onto anarchy, especially the author's ideology of majoritarianism which he borrows from Murray Bookchin's theories.

Hi, I'm the one who started the new FAQ. I started it specifically because the old FAQ repeatedly claims anarchy is dedicated to majoritarianism i.e. direct democracy, and because of how readily it smears and dismisses green anarchy, while praising non-anarchists like Murray Bookchin. You can see some examples here: https://raddle.me/wiki/A_New_Anarchist_FAQ_Instructions

I didn't post this, don't attack random people for linking to anarchist literature because of whatever ancient drama you're fixated on.