Hello?

burgermemes are terrible.

Anarchotheism is the only good anarchism.

Coz while you can argue anfem and an queer are perversion of anarchism's ideal and philosophical basis (but it really like pic related) ancaps are the complete inversion of it

The scary thing is those beings exist

>no rulers in society!
>you can't own businesses tho because I say so
Why are anarchotards so stupid?
Don't call me an ancap, ananything is high school tier nonsense, but at least ancapitalism would just be feudalism which we already know works. What the fuck is 'green anarchism', how the hell would it be enforced?

>enforced
>works
Fuck off to reddit

>you can't own businesses tho because I say so
what workers self management and trade are key part of most anarchism
>What the fuck is 'green anarchism'
ecologically sound anarchism.
>how the hell would it be enforced?
it doesn't need to be enforced t function mutual cooperation and localized optimization of resources and development under the guiding hand of the lie sciences to keep from fucking everything up.
im too tired to explain this to someone with no uunderstanding of tthe subject

Feudalism survived for one thousand years, every attempt at an anarchist society has been an embarressing flop.
I'll give them credit that they haven't caused the deaths of millions of people the way communism did, they actually have had to have stood up for more than a few years on their own for that to happen.

>no rulers in society!
Ownership of capital leads to the formation of an elite class. But then again you admit than ancapism will devolve into feudalism, which may "work" but isn't anarchist at all.

>you can't own businesses tho because I say so
You can own a business in proportion to your labor contribution, and likewise profit from your labor. What you can't do is claim an entitlement to the fruits of others labor simply on the basis of "owning" property without making an ongoing investment of labor.

>it survived so its good
Fuck off back to r*ddit

Mainstream "anarchism" is just a really voluntarist, decentralized, and demotist government. Not an absence of government

Main issue with all forms of anarchism is that anarchy has no way of enforcing itself, its just creating a vacuum for power to fill

"Unlimited liberty leads to unlimited despotism"

>he doesn't follow anarcho-judaism

>No anarcho-transhumanism

Shit tier chart

ok then, can anybody give me a full shart for anarcho-whatever..

You stratificationists are so gullible. No, you won’t accept egalitarianism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of liberal democracy until you will finally wake up & find that you already have egalitarianism.

This is peak LARP. Moving away from class struggle has been the downfall of the left.

I don't have one but you can read about the judaism one here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_anarchism

For what it's worth, I thought the joke was funny, OP.

>pizza is un-healthier for you than ambrosia
Too bad the latter doesn't and can't ever exist.

>STEMsperg memes

>ecologically sound anarchism.
So, your meme ideology mixed with your pet fad social problem?

Do you not know what ecology is?
It's not 'muh oshuns muhfugguh'

>So, your meme ideology mixed with your pet fad social problem?
see
>im too tired to explain this to someone with no uunderstanding of tthe subject
although i have just woke from a good sleep. I still don't want to talk to you. study ecology, study anarchist economics.
>
true but
>muh oshuns muhfugguh
is a natural result of ecology and reason. Free life.

>Mainstream "anarchism" is just a really voluntarist, decentralized, and demotist government. Not an absence of government
this is true, it is the state and hierarchical authority we seek to destroy.
> anarchy has no way of enforcing itself
it doesn't enforce itself as anarchism functions properly in modality. People self govern based around shared libertarian and equality values. As far for a "power vacuum" there is no reason for this to exist unless the social system is destabilized. How can this be prevented? Well first the boundaries that stability emerges from must be in place. To take a concept from the field of synergetics as a slogan, order follows from parameters. Some major boundaries that can made to prevent power from accumulating are the expelling of capital[including private property(land that can be bought and sold)] from economies. This prevents people from being able to profit from work they did not do/ exploit land through financial means and along with workers self management, syndicalism, and unmentioned intricacies this makes hierarchical business entities impossible.
Another problem with stability in socio-ecological systems is entropy(undirected economic unrest, inter-group strife, foreign interference, ecological catastrophe(now unavoidable, but manageable). My solution, applying what i know from systems/network theory and dynamics is to organize or selves in a decentralized way where more or less local economies are compartmentalized in their functioning but remain connected through trade, mutual action, scientific collaboration, media and agents freely traveling between them, all of this is easy in the age of information. the trick is not to become overly connected and homogenized like what happened to the world with the global consumer economy. No capitalism and actually free markets with compartmentalized government self governed by the people make this a non issue, as systems emerge like this nature//

Anarcho-monarchism isn't even represented, shit chart. Memiest anarcho ideology, and yet the most sound out of all of them.

>e, as systems emerge like this nature/
/ You dont see hierarchical command structures form from the interactions of living agents(unless they are synthesized sensu: the construction of human social systems) because it doesn't work like that, they are enslaved to each other.
there are 'hierarchies' in nature but that is a completely different sense concerning the scaling up of natural processes through increased complexity. Their is no authoritarian chain of command, their is emergent properties upwards and downwards causation multiple realizability. The actors are autonomous only constrained by their boundaries, which are real boundaries not arbitrarily drawn by authority.
see journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/419172 for example
id be happy to explain managing externalities with ecology if anyone is interested. it can be said i am somewhat of a libertarian Luddite technocrat.

Actually, I'd argue that ancapism is closer to original anarchism than ancom is.

>not being an anarcho-fascist
come on guys

Just call it integralism.

does this seem like a pet fad social problem?
onlinelibrary.wiley.com.sci-hub.io/doi/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01558.x/full
I hope you realize that you are an illiterate fuck and submit to your anarchist intellectual superiors

feuadlisum is realy just the result of overdeveloped tribalism. And futher to the point its not about what has worked in the past, so far everything has been either terribly oppressive or completely abysmal, the industrialized world is in many ways seeing a new trend of consumptive-sedative practices which I think have some repercussions that we don't totally understand right now. the point of political theory and discussing things like anarchism and communism and fascism and blah blahb fucking idk Islamism or something is to argue for what needs to be done to improve the situation moving forward.

calling yourself tired has no bearing on this discussion, if you can't explain then keep your mouth shut. The problem is that "ecological anarchism" DOES need enforcing... if someone dumps his toxic waste in the river, who's going to stop him?

You forgot to put Anarcho-Gnosticism

Ancaps are statists.
Private Property and Propertarianism are inherently vile and predatory.

>calling yourself tired has no bearing on this discussion, if you can't explain then keep your mouth shut.
Being tired isn't why I decided to ignore you, that was a result of you being an idiot.
First of all nobody would do that because its wouldn't save them any money. Things like that are taken care of through mutual cooperation.
There being no state arbitrarily imposing rule of law doesn't mean that there will not be social repercussions for misbehavior. What do you think people would just get away with whatever they want? No, lmao. The rule is do whatever you want as long as you aren't hurting the world around you. I'm sure they would get brutalized and exiled. You can still have a judicial susystem without legislation , as long as it operates based on a logical system of equality and liberty, and has no authority to pass governing laws or infringe on natural rights.
All your problems with anarchism have to do with the fact that you are too stupidvUninformed to imagine how it would work.
>ecological anarchism doesn't work
You don't even know what it is, pull your head out of your ass. You can seeAswell it does not need enforcement, the science of ecology is used to as a paradigm for devolpment, the allocation of resources and production. It is used as a fiduciary to proactively keep things from being fucked up. It requires no authority or enforcement, only science and mutual cooperation. If someone isn't into mutual cooperation they will be promptly booted out for their selfish infringement on the liberty of the living world(including humans).
For example if someone was in a position to produce toxic waste it would be taken care to be ecologically sound before it was allowed. This is to take care of negative externalities in market anarchist economics.
It's a teleological process, it is not regulatory or retroactive.

This.

Nothing but a bunch of useful idiots

The "useful idiots" where the Bolshevik intellectuals that betrayed the anarchists to side with stalinists
Anarchism is more opposed and subversive to authoritarian communism than anything else. Stalin did not view anarchists as "useful" idiots he viewed them as dangerous enemies that where a major threat to his power and legitimacy. Capitalist corporate states view anarchism the same way, which is why everyone thinks anarchism means utter chaos and violence in the USA.

>anarchist superiors

really makes you think...

It's a joke

mhm

t. catalynua fanboy

Pick your side

>he isn't an anarcho-transhumanist

That's a good chart (I'm picking right though). Here's another good chart.

Is this accurate?

What is that some kind of tranny, boy?

...

>choose your fetish

Fuck you OP you spurred my curiosity and I spent a quarter a day researching Homestuck and I sorta liked it

This shit is all nonsense. Anarchism is the lack of a state. You can't have different types of it or "left leaning" or "right leaning" or "centrist" anarchy. Because anarchy is the lack of something to project politics onto.

...

...

No, everything before an cap is as far left as it gets. Everything past mutualism isn't anarchism at all. That's is if you are actually dumb enough to view left/right as a legitimate scale
t. Mutualist

...

>past mutualism
Past individualism I mean.
Also mereotopologically speaking these catagories of anarchism are all parts of the same thing anarchism whose elements overlap, their boundaries cross. While it may be considered that all these anarchist political philosophies are interior parts of the Anarchism universe, the boundaries that make them so are realized by lines arbitrarily drawn by reductions of dissimilarities. What I'm trying to get at is that the various schools of anarchism are not actual entities in Anarchism, but just abstractions from the whole. In essence they are not dogmas to follow but are qualifiers, unfortunately in practice they are often seen as dogmas.
This post was pretty much just intellectual masturbation I'm trying to apply some new things I'm attempting to learn. I usually have to get concepts in natural language before I can understand them formally.

>flow chart that has two "No" branches when it could branch out after "Because..." instead
???

Stop putting mutualism. "Property is theft to all who are deprived" in the middle. All anarchism would test at the very bottom left

...

Why the fuck would IdPol SJW be Libertarian Left?
They are obviously Authoritarian. Look what they do, and how they fight leftist ideas like universal healthcare.
I mean damn, know your enemy at least

This is surprisingly accurate. Nobody likes the libertarian-left except the libertarian-left.

...

On the internet and mass media. IRL everyone likes me. When they say something I would call out for being retarded online they usually see they are wrong and look down at the ground in shame after a minute or so. Unless they are really indoctrinated and just start screaming, then I roast them for a couple minutes and they look down at the ground in shame.
I don't hate people with political beliefs outside of what I deem acceptable. I see them for the pathetic people that they are and try to understand where they come from.

This, the ultimate redpill

They hate us coz they ain't us

the fact that you spent so long typing up an unsupported list of your judgments proves that all anarchists are basement dwellers that live online as opposed to going outside and seeing how society works

>act that you spent so long typing up an unsupported list of your judgments proves that >all anarchists are basement dwellers that live online as opposed to going outside and seeing how society works
o really? what about me here
As an ecologist i am very familiar with the way society works

Welcome to Heck

>id be happy to explain managing externalities with ecology if anyone is interested.

Do it, but also explain how and why human hierarchy is "unnatural" (or at least this is my impression with this idea of "panarchism")

>Anarcho-Pacifism
Aka, Carteland, the land where you too can write laws if you come with a gun.

>Anarcho-Mutualism
AKA, capitalism with a (A) stamp on it.

>Anarcho-Syndicalism
>Anarcho-Individualism
How is it even supposed to work?

>unironically being an anarcho-(insert leftist buzzword here)
At least socialism is practically implementable, anarchy is impossible to implement and maintain

>anarcho-monarchy
>anarcho-fascism
kek

Anarchic-Collectivism/Communism literally implies the opposite of a central state, it calls for separated individual communes.

Anarchy is socialism you idiot

Socialism is when the state owns the means of production you fucking retard, the state cant own the means of production if there is no state

>Socialism is when the state owns the means of production you fucking retard
good god, the condition of Veeky Forums

>entering a thread when you don't understand basic definitions

...

>>Anarcho-Mutualism
AKA, capitalism with a (A) stamp on it.
>no private property
>no capital
>capitalism
Either you don't understand mutualist economics or you don't know what capitalism is.

mutualism has private property tough, it's just collectivized.

Nope

Marxism is just non-anarchist Socialism, it is a sect.

Wrong again. Mutualism has personal property, if you live there it is yours, property can be collectivized in mutualism say mutual ownership of the means of production like a worker owned factory or farm.
Not even close to private property
Read Proudhon's; "What is property?"

any ownership of land by non-governmental legal entities is private property. just because there isn't one landowner who leaches off all the workers it doesn't make it not private property.

>it is a sect.

Those fucking heretics I swear

>Marxism is a sect

Pure ideology

No, private property means it's is privatized, I.e. capable of being bought and sold, this leads to absentee ownership/ capitalization of land. It's inherently authoritarian and requires authority to implement. Personal property is property that is you personally occupy (literal possession, as opposed to legal possession). 'Property is theft! To all who are deprived.' Is a famous mutualist slogan. Read "what is property"

Mad because they got BTFO every time they talked to an anarchist intellectual.
Marxists should have picked better friends, maybe socialism wouldn't be synonymous with totalitarian governments and breadlines in the hubs of global culture. then again, they are power hungry idiots in the first place.

this

>anarchist
>intellectual.

Also nice meme, anarkidies want communism right now like the little children they are. but they get beated every time by statists (capitalists or not). this is why the proletariat needs to control the state firts to build socialism.

and how would the proletariat "control" the state?
is that what you call the USSR? Maoist China? a state controlled by the workers? don't make me laugh.