I don't consider it possible for any anarchists to be heroes. They are just people who say message. This is the reason I like V. They even say who I am isn't important, just a person in a mask, not to hide their identity but to erase it.

This is the same reason I still like listening to anti-flag. The message behind the songs remains the same no matter how horrible the person singing them is, although I anyone wants to make a cover version I would probably like that more.

With media you could go even further and put a sarcastic twist on a message and make it mean the complete opposite of what the artist intended.

I'm in a mood to be social for a bit. I don't really have any IRL outlet so this will have to do.

Also it seems hexbear took intrest in my post and for better or worse I've decided to engage them: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/59334692

Of course anarchists "do class analysis" and want to abolish capitalism. But that's just because those are examples of oppression in our everyday lives. What I mean is that it is secondary to the actual goal of creating anarchic spaces which will could eventually replace both class and capitalism. Class analysis really isn't useful for that because the only thing it offers is a vague "The bourgeoisie are the enemy". Until someone points a gun at me or punches me I don't have any enemies.

And like I said this is just my version of anarchism. A combination of Pluralism, Pacifism, Apolity and being sooo fucking tired of the endless discussions that lead nowhere.

Oh I absolutely could spend a lot of mental effort trying to explain "marxism bad" (It would actually be Vanguardism bad, marxism ancient) but I just don't care enough. I have no interest in being antagonistic (except maybe for a couple of quips), cause it's not going to change anything.

Production and distribution (henceforth economy) is necessary there isn't a magical grace period where people stop needing food. For any anarchist system to work they need to have an economy. The anarchist systems that exist right now solve this by relying on donations and members having jobs. As more and more anarchist systems start popping up (although this is probably never going to happen) this would transform to a more independent/self-sustaining system. But what that system looks like doesn't really matter, because whatever it is will be determined by the ones who make it.

This is the ultimate difference between anarchism and everything else, and the reason why I think so many people bounce off it. Anarchism requires belief in people. That whatever system they come up with will work and compliment others who will be able to build their own systems: Economic, social or political.

Anarchy is a process of creating social structures that defy oppression, control and manipulation, and believing that these structures will be able to solve the problems they face. It's not just about economy but about the connections people form. When I look at communists I see only economic analysis: Class, Production, Ownership. Concepts which are secondary to the thing that actually matters: eliminating oppression and exploitation, not just economic, but also social and political.

Here's another analysis for you: Anarchism is about creating social structures and improve the lives of those in these structures. There is no end goal or concrete structure to these structures. They change and adapt as the people within them change, leave or enter.

Anarchy is not about resources or class or opposing archists. But about creating spaces and communities in which people can safely exist as themselves. About creating social structures that are based on mutual aid and human connection instead of ability or need. Anarchy isn't about making a single system that everyone follows. It's about creating many overlapping systems doing many overlapping things. Different cells are not some distinct group of people with their own flags and names where you need to apply to join. It's just a name for a group of people that have something in common. The same person will belong to different cells as every cell represents some part of society. They cannot form states because a state needs to have polity and anarchists should reject polity wherever possible.

But that's just how I see it. other anarchists will disagree and that is the most anarchist thing ever.

I really like this quote, always reminds my of this song: https://evangreer.bandcamp.com/track/surveillance-capitalism.

Reverse image search gives out this: someone by the name of toosphexy on instagram

• https://www.instagram.com/p/CMNQ7eNh9ai/
• https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/952420974

According to the post they were commissioned by a book publisher for a t-shirt.
heres the link: https://pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=1219
and this was written in the description:

About the Illustrator:
Roger Peet is an artist, printmaker, muralist etc. etc. living in Portland, Oregon. He coordinates the national Endangered Species Mural Project, and helps to run the cooperative Flight 64 print studio in Portland. Check out his other work HERE(https://www.bonfire.com/store/toosphexy/).

Yeah. It's incredible how stupid some comments can be when you're tired and not really paying attention to the words you say. Lesson learnt: Always re-read every word in your post.

Accidentally read Ancap as Ancom. Shouldn't post when Tired.

Decided to have a go myself:

Or a vertical one:

And a NB one:

Ok. I think I'm done.

except screen readers can't read it because the alt isn't the text in the image, and you can't search for it since it also doesn't get indexed, but yeah it's no big deal.

Two things:

1. I don't really get what posting this as an image gets. I would understand if the image was related or incorporated with the message but this is just some vague space motif.
2. The lord that "owned"¹ the pitchforks couldn't use them to spy on and control his subjects. And the lords opportunities to enrich himself with the sold pitchforks were very limited compared to computers. However while the analogy is a bit scruffy it is ultimately valid. We are limited by the tools of the current regime, even if we want to overthrow it, as not using them would make us invisible.

¹: how much ownership of an object do you really have if it's in the hands of someone else?