mimichuu_

joined 1 year ago
[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you truly believe anarchism is not against the state, I genuinely have no idea what to tell you. I seriously hope this is a conscious attempt at gaslighting and you're not THAT confidently incorrect.

In the remote case you are actually interested in anarchism, I'll leave something here for you.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-state-its-historic-role

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/mikhail-bakunin-what-is-authority

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anark-the-state-is-counter-revolutionary

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-an-anarchist-programme

You should, if you intend to keep thinking yourself an authority on anarchism to actual anarchists while also keeping any sense of integrity, at the very least, read this one, it's only 50 pages.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-anarchy

ing me. I will leave with this:

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Hey folx, I have to move houses, will not have internet for a while, so I'mma disengage. Despite the usual smug and mocky tone, I thank you for actually engaging and not just banning me. I will leave with this:

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-post-scarcity-anarchism-book#toc27

This chapter and the one after it are only slightly longer than On Authority. Read it if you are interested.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

"Both 'anti-tankie' and anti-statist" is redundant. You cannot be anti-statist and not "anti-tankie", because "anti-tankie" is opposing socialist states. Anarchists only criticise socialist states more often when they're talking with people who defend and excuse them, which is why you see the assymetry. In a regular anarchist community of mostly anarchists, both online and especially in real life orgs, it's actually quite the opposite.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have nothing to prove to you, and it's clear you aren't listening and just repeating all the memorized talking points ingrained inside. Believe whatever you want.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

anarchism has its own history with its own principles and theoretical foundation embedded in either a historically utopian or marxian conception of capitalism

This is what I'm talking about. You don't get to say what "trve anarchism" is because you don't actually know it. Anarchism has nothing to do with Marxism, not even ancoms. They're entirely separate philosophies that view the world in different ways, both use material analysis and both stand against capitalism, but that does not mean they share a common goal, or have common ancestry. Have you actually read any anarchist theory? Or just On Authority and Anarchism or Socialism?

if a so-called anarchist advances politics that preserves capitalism

This once again proves you have no idea what you're talking about. Anti-marxist anarchists are treated as actual terrorists by the state and capitalism. They're among the most militant anti-capitalist groups on earth. The italian FAI bombs prisons while the italian ML party writes about needing critical support for ISIS in a 1998 looking ass website. Not to bring up the FARJ and the anarchists in Iran literally risking their lives as we speak. But you, from the comfort of your chair, disregard them to delude yourself into thinking what makes you comfortable.

But sure, carry on after talking to me, thinking you stand for left unity, and don't worry your pretty little head about all of these groups and people that have done more against capitalism than you or I ever have. They're not real, I assure you. They are surely just LARPing. You and the people you agree with are the one true and only based socialism bringers.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a more fair claim, excuse me for misunderstanding.

Can you elaborate a bit more on what specifically are you asking about? Do you mean how to resist agression from states? How to avoid being co-opted or hijacked?

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

If an anarchist is entirely willing to drop the anti-statism why should they even call themselves anarchist? This isn't some obscure niche issue, this is literally the entire core of the philosophy. Would you call a marxist entirely willing to drop the call for a DotP or materialism a marxist?

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Not voting for Biden is a vote for Trump!"

Are you a nationalist? Why the fuck should you even care? Two bourgeois states going to war to destroy themselves, and the only ones harmed in the process are the proletarians of both countries. You should be supporting and helping them instead of LARPing state worship on the internet. I don't condemn the Russian state resisting NATO, but I am not going to support capitalists in their shitty capitalist wars. If that makes me some buzzword you feel very angry about, you are free to call me that.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What are you on? Revolutionary states killing anarchists is just an objective historical fact. I'm not even talking about the common stories brought up about Makhnovshchina or Kronstadt, every single revolutionary state has done it. You can look it up. Is part of the "left unity compromise" to blind yourself to actual things that happened?

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

This is the usual tactic of attacking your use of specific words instead of the essence of what you're actually saying. Use inspect element and replace "statist" with the word you'd like me to use instead. I'm not gonna do that for you.

Anarchism isn't baseless or pulled out of anyone's ass. You can disagree with it, but to claim literally no material analysis of the state and/or its consequences, or the relations and dynamics of power and hierarchy exists, is just plain ignorance, no different from a conservative feeling the authority to look down on marxists when they have only skimmed the communist manifesto. If you are interested I can link you to some things, if you are not, just own up to it and say so.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

it’s usage is always a signal that its user is either a delusional liberal or an online sectarian not remotely interested in real world politics

That's just what you want to believe.

The proof is in the fact plenty of ML groups successfully organize alongside street level anarchist groups all over the US, which isn’t exactly a country kind to socialists of any kind

You don't have to stop being hostile to MLism to work with MLs. If there are common short term goals, it's most often pragmatic to, especially in countries where there isn't an active leftist threat at all like the US. That does not mean the anarchists are just perfectly fine being buddies with the MLs, nor that when the collaboration is over they won't criticise and call them out again.

Using terms like tankie is a clear cut signal that person is terminally online and as a result couldn’t define anarchism to save their lives

Once again, that's just what you believe. That's nothing but a preconception. You're telling yourself that so you can give yourself a free pass to blindly disregard anyone who says a word, and not have to listen to what they have to say. I've actually organized in real life both with pluralist orgs and with directly anti-marxist groups, full of people who despise all of you. Whether the real life anarchists I've done shit with say "authoritarian" "statist" or "tankie" or just "ML" has no bearing on their understanding of philosophy. Some are very new and don't get things yet, some have been anarchists for longer than I have been alive, and have actually gone to jail for their anarchism.

You can disagree with and even condemn the actions of anti-marxist anarchist organizations just fine, but to try to say that they somehow aren't "the TRUE ones" is just delusion.

[–] mimichuu_@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

That is nothing but an assumption then, given that, once again, I have never spoken about MLism in this thread.

 

Hello everyone. I'm going to build a new PC soon and I'm trying to maximize its reliability all I can. I'm using Debian Bookworm. I have a 1TB M2 SSD to boot on and a 4TB SATA SSD for storage. My goal is for the computer to last at least 10 years. It's for personal use and work, playing games, making games, programming, drawing, 3d modelling etc.

I've been reading on filesystems and it seems like the best ones to preserve data if anything is lost or corrupted or went through a power outage are BTRFS and ZFS. However I've also read they have stability issues, unlike Ext4. It seems like a tradeoff then?

I've read that most of BTRFS's stability issues come from trying to do RAID5/6 on it, which I'll never do. Is everything else good enough? ZFS's stability issues seem to mostly come from it having out-of-tree kernel modules, but how much of a problem is this in real-life use?

So far I've been thinking of using BTRFS for the boot drive and ZFS for the storage drive. But maybe it's better to use BTRFS for both? I'll of course keep backups but I would still like to ensure I'll have to deal with stuff breaking as little as possible.

Thank you in advance for the advice.

view more: next ›