If anarchism became the dominant political ideology, minorities would almost certainly face violence and discrimination, or form their own communities predominantly made up of people falling into that minority group.
It's like these retards think survival of the fittest means everyone is sharing.
Nope, it means tribalism and I'm going to kill everyone that's outside my tribe because they have stuff and I need stuff and who are the weakest links? The minorities that don't have the population to defend themselves.
The idea is that the entire species is the same tribe. And I was unaware that nothing bad ever happens now that we have Big Brother holding our hand. You're just saying you prefer the illusion of safety over freedom.
Also, I have zero clue what survival of the fittest has to do with anarchism. You seem to be confusing the alt-right with anarchism. I'm pretty doubtful you even have a grasp of what anarchy is, probably just going with the company line, "Anarchy is chaos!" like a good statist.
Seriously though, this sub seems like it sucks more boot than Quentin Tarantino.
Do you really thing cro magnon thought the same way as you do? They fucked anything they could because we acted like the animals we are.
The tribes that were successful were tribes that were the best.
Oh, and what sucks about QT? I mean he's got QTπ in half his name. It's quite normal.
Remember, when I say the tribes that were successful I mean the ones that were able to kill or scrounge for the most food and prevent the other tribes from taking it.
Do you really thing cro magnon thought the same way as you do?
Are you all high on PCP or something? Anarchy has nothing to do with cro magnon or our edge lord animal instincts. That's the past. You're an animal with or without the government. You seriously think that the only thing keeping people in modern society from going on a murder/rape rampage is the threat of punishment? You think punishment can eradicate suffering or will you realize it only spreads it?
The tribes that were successful were the tribes that were the best
No shit. Here's a little fact for you. We live on a small, blue dot that floats through a vast space filled with mostly nothing. Out in that nothing is the future. It's the room we need to expand, to stay alive. If we stay on Earth, we will die. If we keep killing one another over this "tribe" bull shit, then we're just wasting time until something happens that we can't stop that eradicates us.
Oh, and what sucks about QT? I mean he's got QTπ in half his name. It's quite normal.
It's a pretty well known fact about QT that he has a foot fetish.
Remember, when I say the tribes that were successful I mean the ones that were able to kill or scrounge for the most food and prevent the other tribes from taking it.
Why do you all idolize prehistoric people so much? You understand that's the past right? We work FROM that point, not back to it. What is your all's obsession with people able to inflict their will on any and everyone? Are you too weak to stop them? Are you afraid? Or do you wish you were brave enough to be the killer?
Yes, the only thing preventing me from just killing my neighbor and taking his stuff is the threat of punishment. It's all 100% opportunity cost and risk/reward calculations. The value of the things I would obtain by doing so would not exceed the value of my freedom and there are very few things that would exceed that value. Hence why I'm a productive member of society instead of a marauding rapist murderer.
No, you're a beast. You're a monster wearing the mask of a human being. This is the thought process of psychopathy. You place more emphasis on your own freedom then the lives of others because you don't, by choice or inability, identify with them. You are only capable of thinking about yourself.
You've yet to get to the part of your point where that matters. Most sociopaths are integrated into society perfectly, the ones you see on the news are the ones who have no idea how to control themselves and are put down like the rabid animals they are.
Besides, we are animals and a dime a dozen one at that.
A socio or psychopath can integrate into society, but now we let them run everything. This has led every "normal" person who only has socio/psychopathic traits instead of being dominated by them to attribute success to things that the "deranged" seek- power over others primarily.
And I concur that we are animals. But we are deeper in the meta, so to speak. We think, we feel, we build. We think about how we think, we feel, and we build. We should never forget our origins, but we as a species should realize that we are the Goku of our universe. We set limits just to overcome them. It's what we do. Everything that has ever been possible was impossible until it was proven possible.
And we've obtained that level of technology because we have rule of law that society came together and agreed upon, dismantle one form of government and another pops up because people like me exist who only look at things from a very analytical point of view wherein I will take the path of least resistance to get what I need and will prey upon the dimmer and weaker parts of the herd. The only difference between that scenario and right now is I have to do it within the bounds of our legal framework so instead of just cutting the brake lines of my neighbor before he goes into work then taking everything from his house I instead convince him to let my brokerage manage his money and bleed him dry that way.
Takes longer but the end result is still the same except he lives his life happy and more importantly, lives his life.
My one time excursion into this cesspool will certainly taint my character to some degree, but I'm not sure I'd go so far.
Tell me though, since you seem like a great little choir boy for this chorus of small minded folk, is this sub full of angry 16 year olds or angry 30 year olds?
You know, the kinda person to call someone a faggot or autistic on the internet because they're too afraid and socially awkward to say it in real life, but have to feel big somewhere and don't know any other way too.
Almost as if they have trouble controlling the thoughts they express. You know. Like a person who actually has autism.
So am I, I just don't fit the contemporary definition. I just think you should apply yourself to something that has a chance to last longer than yourself, than you or I. Because when you think about it, you're not even alive for 1% of this whole wild ride that is existence. The greatest thing you can possibly do is give a gift to the future, to the world you'll never see.
I'm not saying an anarchist society, a society with no written law or established government, but one where the people, the workers, truly run their own lives would be a utopia.
I'm just saying that I truly and firmly believe that the world we are creating- one of dependence and total obedience to an entity man has created- the Military-Industrial Complex- will limit, as it already has, every single man, woman, and child's potential to the point that humanity is one day faced with a cataclysm that it has not progressed quickly enough to tackle.
This is why the best response to anyone embracing anarchism is to repeatedly smack them with their own hand and remind them that anarchy is a 4th grade playground, but with guns.
I posted the same thing a month ago. It's not just trans, it's also queer. Queer folks.
It's irritating in how transparent it is. It's trying to make them seem more down to earth, blue collar and folksy. Desexualizing their sexuality. Gays aren't the hedonists pissing on each other in pride parades but rather everyday Americans sitting on porches and enjoying iced tea. I don't even hate gays, but I hate "queer folks" out of principle.
I always heard y'all as some retarded southerner until lefties used it as a crutch. "Folks" instead of "people" is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.
When did we move from folks being the people that you know and hang out with to where folks became anyone and everyone you've ever known who never questions exactly what you believe? It's like /r/BPT or "Shameless" where we're all cool with gay people but let's just ignore how poor people fuckin hate homos.
It's cause SJWs have recently taken to old terms like Black folk and people of color. Now they're applying it to tans people and pretty much anyone else. A bunch of lefty retards just all wanna talk like folksy black women to seem extra woke basically.
Transphobia is an oppressive system based on unjustified hierarchy. Therefore, it is something anarchists must dismantle. Intersectionality is an important part of understanding how capitalism and the state oppress us.
Three questions -
So, what pharmaceutical company is going to produce your HRT pils there in your dumb as shit anarachist society /u/soccerskyman ?
What does domestic disputes have to do with anarchism?
How is your "Intersectionality" going to work for you when you try to put zionists, islamic people, and trannys all together in your faggy utopia?
Transphobia is an oppressive system based on unjustified hierarchy. Therefore, it is something anarchists must dismantle. Intersectionality is an important part of understanding how capitalism and the state oppress us.
Three questions -
So, what pharmaceutical company is going to produce your HRT pils there in your dumb as shit anarachist society /u/soccerskyman ?
pharmaceutical unions probably. Also I'm not trans so their not my "pils" anyways, but I digress.
What does domestic disputes have to do with anarchism?
Intersectionality (the idea that all oppression is intertwined and dependent on each other, and therefore must all be combatted)
How is your "Intersectionality" going to work for you when you try to put zionists, islamic people, and trannys all together in your faggy utopia?
I don't think you understand what "intersectionality" means. It's not a synonym with diversity. And to answer your question, orgies. Lots of degenerate kinky orgies.
Laffo. Ask the corpses of cities touched by communism on how that works. Just seeing you worthless high school faggots trying to work the infrastructure would be glorious.
That wasn't a answer.
No, I get what you typed. Good luck on trying to convert theocratic populaces and the average worker to your dipshit hedonism disguised as enlightened living. I'm sure grudges will melt and won't be just like a Jonestown repeat.
Laffo. Ask the corpses of cities touched by communism on how that works. Just seeing you worthless high school faggots trying to work the infrastructure would be glorious.
Are you trying to criticize centralized economic planning, Marxist-Leninism, or just lazily lumping all of the left all together? The world may never know.
If you actually want a complete answer and theoretical model on an anarchist society, try reading the bread book. The dirty talk is hot, but nows not the time bby
That wasn't a answer.
You asked what it had to do with anarchism. I replied with what it had to do with anarchism: intersectional theory. Maybe Google the term real quick or something idk, I've got work to do.
No, I get what you typed. Good luck on trying to convert theocratic populaces and the average worker to your dipshit hedonism disguised as enlightened living. I'm sure grudges will melt and won't be just like a Jonestown repeat.
I don't offer a solution to all the world's problems and conflicts dude, I just think we can do better. Conflict resolution, community protection, and public discussion can all be done horizontally; All of which can be very effective. And you know, guns help too.
No, what I am trying to tell you is that all your ideals are paths to everything getting fucked because you are all incompetent parasites.
As opposed to capitalists, who just work really hard and earn everything they get. No sir. No wage theft, exploiting markets, or horrific abuses here :^)
Well, that's a laugh.
???? Weren't you just calling me a parasite? I got bills to pay.
lol. So your ideal conflict resolution in your shitty perfect world is a police state. GOOD START!
Don't take this the wrong way but uh... I dont really think of someone who posts almost exclusively on /r/drama all day everyday as an "outside" type, so forgive me if I don't really value your judgement of my character. 😜
I'll have you know that /r/drama has autistics, spergs and mutants of every walk of life here. We have hardcore eliot rodgers to gamergate hyper rapists and even once had the biggest gamergater of all /u/Prince_Kropotkin
conflating anarchism and socialism definitely makes you the more retarded one in this exchange, which is impressive considering youre talking to an anarchist
Real talk, the bread book is a terrible way of converting people to Anarchism.
I like Kropotkin, but a book largely about old af agriculture is only appealing to ppl who already wanna be appealed to and I wish people would get over the bread book meme.
The Communist Manifesto is literally more appealing to normies than the bread book.
Real talk, the bread book is a terrible way of converting people to Anarchism.
I like Kropotkin, but a book largely about old af agriculture is only appealing to ppl who already wanna be appealed to and I wish people would get over the bread book meme.
The Communist Manifesto is literally more appealing to normies than the bread book.
Serious question though, I agree that all opression is wrong by definition, and that morally they all most be fought, but how can they be dependent on each other?
I am sorry I dont see how racism is related to sexism for so many reasons.
thx for being nice but sorry im kinda really drunk right now but ill try my best to explain:
An example of oppression being tied together with say sexism and racism is the treatment of Asian women by white men. They are fetishized, treated like sex objects, and are expected to be quiet docile and submissive. Racism against Asians justifies and re-enforces sexism against Asian women, and vice versa: they compound on eachother. For another example, capitalism could be said to enforce transphobia. Capitalists push to maintain gender roles and cisnormativity through advertisements and often discriminate against or force gendered roles upon trans workers (like making a trans woman wear a male uniform or barring a trans person from their restroom of choice). It can even arguably be extended to animal rights. For instance, feminist analysis of animal rights would note that female chickens are kept caged and restrained to get eggs while (almost) all male chickens are killed upon hatching.
There's a tendency amongst leftists that believe that with the abolition of capitalism, all other oppression will fall soon after ("brocialists" and "manarchists"). While it would certainly weaken other forms of oppression, there is zero reason to assume the struggle against capitalism must be prioritized. It's essentially saying "my revolution is more important than yours".
This is all so-so theory. Needs some reaching to be true and it rests on some assumptions on human behaviour, but whatever. Just seems weak
the treatment of Asian women by white men
Only white men? black men dont? latinos and other asians either? if they do, why single out white men? I mean I am brazilian brah and I have seen some of the same shit there, and in brazil we are all different shades of brown ( the majority). So I can say for a fact that the desire of fucking some submissive asians goes beyond white men.
And how much of this attraction is based on a image on them being submissive? How much is just because they are aesthetically different and maybe just more beautiful? I have no reason to believe that most of this attraction is based on the reasons you gave me.
See this is my problem with "pop" social science like that, I am not saying that there is nothing there, you probably have a point somewhere, but as it is right now is way way too weak, it lacks empirical prof. The theory itself rests on too many assumptions for me to go " yeah that makes sense "
Besides, even if you were right, I am still not connecting the dots to racism, only some sexism. I could go on but lets just agree to disagree
There's a tendency amongst leftists that believe that with the abolition of capitalism, all other oppression will fall soon after ("brocialists" and "manarchists")
Brah, this isnt "browhatever", this is classical marxism. Materialism the technological determinist view of Marx himself. If you want to disagree sure, I even agree with you, but is not like is just a pop tendency between some leftists, is a legit theory with its own history. Dont frame it like is a bunch of american suburban white boizz wanting to have their own harem of women.
the difference being that those aren't necessarily murders with the motivation being that they hate women. Believe it or not, sometimes murders happen with the reason being something other than hatred of that specific gender. But you probably know that already and are just here to meme with us
Ok, that second one is a tl;dr. Can you point me to the specific spot where they come to the conclusion that the murders happen specifically because men hate women?
Ok I clicked the first link and skimmed it to find my answers. here is a quote:
We found that in the vast majority of cases, men kill their partners because of sexual jealousy. Either at the point where the female says "I've had enough of you whacking on me, I'm out of here,"—because 65 percent of the men have previously used violence on their partners—or after they'd left. What generally happens is he wants the woman and thinks she's his, so he tries to get her back. Often, he tries cajoling her or, ironically, beating her up. In these cases, eventually they realize she won't come back and change the project to annihilating her.
So it seems to me the problem is men's sexual possessiveness of their significant others. Nowhere do I see that it is "hatred of women". If anything it seems to be an overzealous love of a specific woman.
Jealousy - the entitlement to own, control, and otherwise be in charge of women - is intimately tied into misogyny. It is not real love, (or as you say overzealous love) real love of specific women does not end in murder. It is a devaluation of women to the point where their lives are expendable and if they do not submit to your control they are hurt.
Well at this point everything and anything is called misogyny. I'm not sure I agree that possessiveness == misogyny. If a woman is possessive of her husband/boyfriend is that misandry? I don't think so.
Ah, I get it. So when a woman is possessive of her boyfriend and finds him cheating or something and murders him, it was caused by internalized misogyny caused by the PATRIARCHY. It makes so much sense now.
everybody please keep in mind that the above poster, /u/truetrans, contributed this enlightening comment in the OP linked discussion:
Audre Lorde is wrong, intersectionality is false, and we should listen to men, not trans women who understand our community's violence from our partners.
So give 'em some slack please. There's obviously a few screws loose, and remember, only punch up, not down -- retards are excluded from our dangerous banter.
it's really no worse than that entire thread. one look at that discussion and everyone with half a brain should know why anarchists will never rule anything other than their own fever dreams.
The poster has failed to demonstrate that an alleged hatred of women is the proximate cause of heterosexual domestic homicide. The demurrer to the argument is sustained and a judgment of dismissal shall follow. It is so ordered.
Any reason that lesbians have a higher rate of domestic abuse than straight couples, by the way?
But that's literally not the same in all important respects. How many times have you told some schmuck that no, you can't compare circumcision to FGM because of reasons? Well, here's all of them reasons on a parade, starting with men generally aren't pressured by the Patriarchy to marry a transwoman, quite the fucking opposite.
Are you aware that the Duluth Model has been discredited for a very long time? And why are people who own rats/possums always so fucking weird? The very first possum owner I met (not directly) was a crossdressing furry who had sex with his female possom and commissioned hardcore bestiality porn of him and her.
Anarchists need to be aware of and stand up to all forms of oppression, including that towards members of the LGBTQA+ community. The continued murder of people without significant coverage allows it to continue. We need to stamp it out.
This makes anarchism actually sound quite interesting and awesome
LARPing always sounds interesting and awesome until you realize how retarded it is.
Because transphobia, transmisogyny, and misogyny have never had anything to do with domestic violence. Pack it up everyone, we have an expert on deck here.
/u/cypro- so you think the guy just suddenly decided he hates his tranny-wife because she's a tranny and decides to just murder her?
So you think this is what happened: This guy just suddenly realized "holy shit, my wife is actually a fucking tranny!" after years of marriage. This sudden realization (of something he had already known for years) is enough for him to decide to murder his wife.
Sounds like you're just trying to frame domestic violence as a hate crime, when there is no reason to.
He told investigators they got into an argument and he "snapped," adding that she was "always belittling him," police said
That's literally the entirety of the details we know about the motivation of the incident. Where in that are you finding the misogyny out of curiosity? Or did you just pop an outrage boner as soon as you read the headline and jumped to the conclusion that best fits your LARPing?
If you think that a man killing his wife because he "snapped" during an argument, where he tries to mitigate his actions by saying she was "always belittling him" is not a reasonable situation to infer that factors like misogyny, transmisogyny, etc, may have played a role... you might just be stupid.
It's definitely because women are less hateful than men and not because of their far more limited biological ability to inflict damage. /s
We actually know statistically that women initiate physical assault more than men do in non-reciprocal domestic violence situations, by about three times as much. To wit -
In 2001, the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health collected data about the health of a nationally representative sample of 14,322 individuals between the ages of 18 and 28. The study also asked subjects to answer questions about romantic or sexual relationships in which they had engaged during the previous five years and whether those relationships had involved violence.
From this information researchers found that of the 18,761 relationships, 76 percent were non-violent and 24 percent were violent. Of the 24 percent that were violent, half had been reciprocal and half had not — reciprocal meaning there was violence inflicted by both partners. Although more men than women (53 percent versus 49 percent) had experienced nonreciprocal violent relationships, more women than men (52 percent versus 47 percent) had taken part in ones involving reciprocal violence.
This statistic was undoubtedly the most striking: in committing acts of domestic violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, in the 71 percent of nonreciprocal partner violence instances, the instigator was the woman. This flies in the face of the long-held belief that female aggression in a relationship is most often predicated on self-defense
The thing is this - in reciprocal violence situations, they do walk away (or not, ahem) with the majority of the physical damage, but seriously that's to be expected because women are almost always physically weaker. This biological fact however doesn't seem to stop them from instigating physical violence more than men, which is actually kind of surprising.
TL;DR - Women initiate physical assault and abuse at rates closer to three times more than men do.
I was waiting for the tankie I responded to to reply to my post with their gotcha moment of "AH HA, THIS PROVES MEN HATE WOMEN" or something before posting something very similar to what you said. I feel like you jumped the gun
It's ok. Judging from /u/RanDomino5's weird off subject comments in this thread, they are not quite in control of their mental faculties enough for that gotcha moment to have actually happened anyway
Ok I admit I jumped to that conclusion when I saw your post history. Are you more one of those "violent revolution" anarchists? You have to admit thats pretty close to tankies, minus the stalin apologia
People are less willing to reciprocate when a women is violent. When you commonly get away with it, it's not suprising that you commonaly instigate it.
Yes, women are incredibly stupid and/or believe they're socially protected from retaliation by the /r/pussypass. Note that on the rare occasion a small man picks a fights with a larger man, we rightfully call him an idiot.
If you think that a man killing his wife because he "snapped" during an argument, where he tries to mitigate his actions by saying she was "always belittling him" is not a reasonable situation to infer that factors like misogyny, transmisogyny, etc, may have played a role... you might just be stupid.
If you think trans people are people that are part car... You might be a redneck
Women use the "snapped" excuse when they kill or abuse their spouses or children, and that's okay. But when a man does it, that excuse becomes bullshit?
Way to make women out to be completely lacking of agency and on the level of children. My bussy is sad now.
I feel it could be anything from he was in an emotionally abusive relationship and legitimately snapped to he's an abusive cunt or a crazy person trying to make up a story to shift blame. You don't anywhere near enough to infer anything about his motivations. The best option here is to let the courts figure it out as opposed to acting like you or I actually know anything about their relationship, his motives or anything beyond the shit in the linked article.
I think you're wrong, mate. You beat your wife because she's a living thing, and that obviously means you hate all living things. So in essence domestic violence means that you're just actually Thanos. QED, mate. /s
Friend, I think all that cypro is fucking your ability to think rationally. If you were on bica, you might realize that another possibility is that his wife was emotionally abusing him for years and he snapped as a result.
Why don't anarchists go live in the woods or something instead of indulging in all the comforts of capitalism/consumerism and trying to convince everyone else? Of all the ideologies that one seems like you don't even need a lot of people to make it work. Hmmm, call me a cynic but I'm starting to doubt their resolve and sincerity.
Capitalism is about individual freedom, It's perfectly capable of encapsulating individuals that choose to be a collective. They could form a commune/coop at any time where they collectively own all belongings and interact with the greater capitalist world as one entity but they are incapable of actually building anything of their own so they instead demand hard working capitalists simply give them the utopia that desire instead of endeavoring to build it themselves.
So they can move to the middle of nowhere and start their ethnostate and the internet can stop autistically screeching about the rise of fascism when they see how few move there.
How is it deceiving the legal system in any way? You are simply a group of friends all buying property in the same town. As long as you don't mention any ulterior motives in doing so there's no law that can stop you from lawfully acquiring property.
Is there a panel missing with a retard saying that we should get rid of all laws, all government services, and the entire social safety net? Or did the guy in that panel already die from a preventable disease or from being brained by some bandit with a big stick who wanted his food?
So... Uh. Lol. Are you for Trump, or are you OK with the fact that giving the power to the proletariat and lumpenproletariat will always give you Trump, and if you give them more power, they are going to put your hipster ass to the wall the moment they can?
Trump wasn't elected by the proletariat. He was elected by the middle class. Literally anyone other than Clinton would have won in a landslide. Sanders would have easily won the general, because his ideological ancestry is the working-class socialist movement which was mostly dismantled in the 1950s.
What do you mean by "above"? Wages? Social hierarchy? Distance from "real" work? The "middle-class" is obsessed with acquiring social status and performatively/conspicuously distancing themselves from working-class people.
Working class are workers who don't own capital (e.g. stocks etc) and therefore any part in the means of production. Who are these "middle class" you are talking about I don't know, but Trump was deffo elected by the working class.
The problem with the working class is that they don't have the sort of class consciousness that supporting the likes of Bernie Sanders require, they don't perceive themselves as monolithic, there's a lot of wealth inequality inside them and they want it that way. They don't want a large part of their hard-earned money given to the useless poor, and they don't want any bare-faced handouts themselves. Therefore they tend to prefer right-wing populists like Trump, who promise them opportunities (like reviving this or that industry and creating jobs), not dignity-destroying wealth redistribution.
And what they definitely don't like is the sort of super-empathetic left that's all about gays, tri-gender pyrofoxes, and helping foreigners before local workers because they are in much more need.
Your definition of class is obsolete (because it ignores the cultural aspects of class) and social safety net programs are tremendously popular. People who actually work understand what it's like to be going through rough times, and have empathy and solidarity despite capitalist efforts to destroy those concepts.
Your definition of class is obsolete (because it ignores the cultural aspects of class)
What kind of a deranged commie are you if your definition of working class is not based on the ownership of the means of production, but on "cultural aspects"? The fuck does that mean, that a NEET playing vidya in his parents' basement can now culturally identify as a proletarian and masturbate to the fantasies of himself and other such "working class" folks overthrowing the Trump-voting miner and farmer bourgeoisie?
... you know what, I bet that's exactly what's going on, with you in particular and most of r/@ commenters in general, or even the entire reddit leftisphere, if not most lefties on the internet.
What kind of a deranged commie are you if your definition of working class is not based on the ownership of the means of production, but on "cultural aspects"?
The fuck does that mean, that a NEET playing vidya in his parents' basement can now culturally identify as a proletarian and masturbate to the fantasies of himself and other such "working class" folks overthrowing the Trump-voting miner and farmer bourgeoisie?
Antonio Francesco Gramsci (Italian: [anˈtɔːnjo franˈtʃesko ˈɡramʃi], listen ; 22 January 1891 – 27 April 1937) was an Italian Marxist philosopher and politician. He wrote on political theory, sociology and linguistics. He attempted to break from the economic determinism of traditional Marxist thought and so is considered a key neo-Marxist. He was a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy and was imprisoned by Benito Mussolini's Fascist regime.
Antonio Francesco Gramsci (Italian: [anˈtɔːnjo franˈtʃesko ˈɡramʃi], listen ; 22 January 1891 – 27 April 1937) was an Italian Marxist philosopher and politician. He wrote on political theory, sociology and linguistics. He attempted to break from the economic determinism of traditional Marxist thought and so is considered a key neo-Marxist. He was a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy and was imprisoned by Benito Mussolini's Fascist regime.
lab techs A and B work at The Company, owned by the local county government. They do the same job and make the same money, roughly 50k for 40 to 60 hours weekly. The lab building, microscopes, chemicals, test tubes, and whatnot and owned and regulated by The Company. The lab techs are provided medical benefits and forced to contribute to a pension.
Lab Tech A spends his post expenses income entirely on entertainment, travel, and consumer goods.
Lab Tech B puts half of post expenses income into a savings account. When the savings account exceeds 10,000 dollars, he dumps any excess into a large cap ETF.
After two years at the same job, Lab Tech A and B are still in the same working position, performing the same tasks and receiving the same salary.
So as long as you carefully manage your stock portfolio so that you have less capital gains than labor made income, you can avoid being put up against the wall when the revolution comes? Phew, lemme call my accountant. Is this pre or post tax?
Depends on what you mean by that. Cops and politicians, no. Organization and collective decision-making when necessary, yes. In addition, we see very little distinction between political power and economic power.
Well that's obvious. First step in the creation of the anarchist society is the mayocide. After that is complete the minorities will be the majorities and the mayos will be a thing of the past
When you're such a boot licker you can't even begin to imagine a world where you're not always asking permission from your boss or senator to stay alive.
I said you're all such boot lickers that you can't even begin to imagine a world where people aren't working for a slave wage, for their employer's benefit, or hoping their senator will pass the new healthcare bill they need, or hoping you don't get killed by some untrained pig responding to a fake hostage situation.
And you can't come up with a single thing to discredit me aside from ad hominem bull shit. Congratulations. You've officially lost a debate with a retarded person.
In an anarchist society, it'd be such a utopia that everyone would suddenly become intersectional feminist anti-racist gender activists. If they don't, we'll drag them from their homes and beat them to death in the street, because saying bad things about minorities is violence.
Right, when men kill their wives because of "heated arguments", we should always assume that misogyny was uninvolved until we find some detailed notes about his hatred for women, right?
Uh, yeah /u/cypro- that's exactly what you should (but won't) do.
It's current year friendo. When it comes to cases that might involve some form of sexism or racism or sexual assault or really anything on the rad-fem docket, if the accused is higher on the privilege totem pole than the victim, then they are guilty until proven innocent. And even then they are probably still guilty
You get your anarchist card from your local village elder, but you have to make sure you avoid the roving warbands as they pillage your town and shoot anything that moves.
Imagine waking up one day and your "wife" is breathing sleep breath in your face and then you notice the beard stubble and the narrow hips with Hello Kitty underpants from the Junior Misses department and you are like: "Holy shit. I have been fucking a dude for the past three years."
i thought you anarcokiddies didnt like police/prisons/laws?
Even if you don't like the police or justice system and you are actually guilty, it's not in your best interest to confess. I'm not sure how that's mutually exclusive with anarchism...
200 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-01-11
Sarcasm and flippant behavior represent contempt, which is the opposite of intellectual integrity. You seem like a real fool of a human.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 AVirtualDuck 2018-01-11
I take great pleasure in posting this.
If anarchism became the dominant political ideology, minorities would almost certainly face violence and discrimination, or form their own communities predominantly made up of people falling into that minority group.
1 WillTrigger4Upvotes 2018-01-11
It's like these retards think survival of the fittest means everyone is sharing.
Nope, it means tribalism and I'm going to kill everyone that's outside my tribe because they have stuff and I need stuff and who are the weakest links? The minorities that don't have the population to defend themselves.
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
The idea is that the entire species is the same tribe. And I was unaware that nothing bad ever happens now that we have Big Brother holding our hand. You're just saying you prefer the illusion of safety over freedom.
Also, I have zero clue what survival of the fittest has to do with anarchism. You seem to be confusing the alt-right with anarchism. I'm pretty doubtful you even have a grasp of what anarchy is, probably just going with the company line, "Anarchy is chaos!" like a good statist.
Seriously though, this sub seems like it sucks more boot than Quentin Tarantino.
1 metameanderer 2018-01-11
Do you really thing cro magnon thought the same way as you do? They fucked anything they could because we acted like the animals we are.
The tribes that were successful were tribes that were the best.
Oh, and what sucks about QT? I mean he's got QTπ in half his name. It's quite normal.
Remember, when I say the tribes that were successful I mean the ones that were able to kill or scrounge for the most food and prevent the other tribes from taking it.
Eat a Ukrainian dick on the eastern front.
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
Are you all high on PCP or something? Anarchy has nothing to do with cro magnon or our edge lord animal instincts. That's the past. You're an animal with or without the government. You seriously think that the only thing keeping people in modern society from going on a murder/rape rampage is the threat of punishment? You think punishment can eradicate suffering or will you realize it only spreads it?
No shit. Here's a little fact for you. We live on a small, blue dot that floats through a vast space filled with mostly nothing. Out in that nothing is the future. It's the room we need to expand, to stay alive. If we stay on Earth, we will die. If we keep killing one another over this "tribe" bull shit, then we're just wasting time until something happens that we can't stop that eradicates us.
It's a pretty well known fact about QT that he has a foot fetish.
Why do you all idolize prehistoric people so much? You understand that's the past right? We work FROM that point, not back to it. What is your all's obsession with people able to inflict their will on any and everyone? Are you too weak to stop them? Are you afraid? Or do you wish you were brave enough to be the killer?
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
poat busy
1 WillTrigger4Upvotes 2018-01-11
Yes, the only thing preventing me from just killing my neighbor and taking his stuff is the threat of punishment. It's all 100% opportunity cost and risk/reward calculations. The value of the things I would obtain by doing so would not exceed the value of my freedom and there are very few things that would exceed that value. Hence why I'm a productive member of society instead of a marauding rapist murderer.
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
No, you're a beast. You're a monster wearing the mask of a human being. This is the thought process of psychopathy. You place more emphasis on your own freedom then the lives of others because you don't, by choice or inability, identify with them. You are only capable of thinking about yourself.
1 WillTrigger4Upvotes 2018-01-11
You've yet to get to the part of your point where that matters. Most sociopaths are integrated into society perfectly, the ones you see on the news are the ones who have no idea how to control themselves and are put down like the rabid animals they are.
Besides, we are animals and a dime a dozen one at that.
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
A socio or psychopath can integrate into society, but now we let them run everything. This has led every "normal" person who only has socio/psychopathic traits instead of being dominated by them to attribute success to things that the "deranged" seek- power over others primarily.
And I concur that we are animals. But we are deeper in the meta, so to speak. We think, we feel, we build. We think about how we think, we feel, and we build. We should never forget our origins, but we as a species should realize that we are the Goku of our universe. We set limits just to overcome them. It's what we do. Everything that has ever been possible was impossible until it was proven possible.
1 WillTrigger4Upvotes 2018-01-11
And we've obtained that level of technology because we have rule of law that society came together and agreed upon, dismantle one form of government and another pops up because people like me exist who only look at things from a very analytical point of view wherein I will take the path of least resistance to get what I need and will prey upon the dimmer and weaker parts of the herd. The only difference between that scenario and right now is I have to do it within the bounds of our legal framework so instead of just cutting the brake lines of my neighbor before he goes into work then taking everything from his house I instead convince him to let my brokerage manage his money and bleed him dry that way.
Takes longer but the end result is still the same except he lives his life happy and more importantly, lives his life.
1 serialflamingo 2018-01-11
That sounds like a personal failing on your part.
1 WillTrigger4Upvotes 2018-01-11
My wife is always bitching that I don't murder enough people to buy her a new dress :/
1 Sentinell 2018-01-11
Yeah, that makes sense.
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
Wow, that totally discredits me and makes you socialites here on r/drama seem like Golden Gods, huh? We should all bow down before you.
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
Yeah but you're posting to /r/Drama. Either way you're autistic
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
My one time excursion into this cesspool will certainly taint my character to some degree, but I'm not sure I'd go so far.
Tell me though, since you seem like a great little choir boy for this chorus of small minded folk, is this sub full of angry 16 year olds or angry 30 year olds?
You know, the kinda person to call someone a faggot or autistic on the internet because they're too afraid and socially awkward to say it in real life, but have to feel big somewhere and don't know any other way too.
Almost as if they have trouble controlling the thoughts they express. You know. Like a person who actually has autism.
1 [deleted] 2018-01-11
[deleted]
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
I do have autism. Which is why I live on the internet to sneer and hiss at people with strong political opinions without consequence.
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
Well, then I think we both know your mind could be put to better use.
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
Ye maybe I could become an libertarian
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
So am I, I just don't fit the contemporary definition. I just think you should apply yourself to something that has a chance to last longer than yourself, than you or I. Because when you think about it, you're not even alive for 1% of this whole wild ride that is existence. The greatest thing you can possibly do is give a gift to the future, to the world you'll never see.
I'm not saying an anarchist society, a society with no written law or established government, but one where the people, the workers, truly run their own lives would be a utopia.
I'm just saying that I truly and firmly believe that the world we are creating- one of dependence and total obedience to an entity man has created- the Military-Industrial Complex- will limit, as it already has, every single man, woman, and child's potential to the point that humanity is one day faced with a cataclysm that it has not progressed quickly enough to tackle.
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
Ew no I was joking
I'm a
1 BannaHamHock 2018-01-11
Why do you take the internet so seriously, you weird fucker?
1 ConsoleWarCriminal 2018-01-11
wtf I love anarchism now
1 -absolutego- 2018-01-11
This is why the best response to anyone embracing anarchism is to repeatedly smack them with their own hand and remind them that anarchy is a 4th grade playground, but with guns.
1 BussyIsAHumanRight 2018-01-11
Why are trans people always referred to as folks? I never really hear that word applied to any other group.
1 ahbslldud 2018-01-11
folx
1 wowbagger88 2018-01-11
I posted the same thing a month ago. It's not just trans, it's also queer. Queer folks.
It's irritating in how transparent it is. It's trying to make them seem more down to earth, blue collar and folksy. Desexualizing their sexuality. Gays aren't the hedonists pissing on each other in pride parades but rather everyday Americans sitting on porches and enjoying iced tea. I don't even hate gays, but I hate "queer folks" out of principle.
1 metameanderer 2018-01-11
I always heard y'all as some retarded southerner until lefties used it as a crutch. "Folks" instead of "people" is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.
When did we move from folks being the people that you know and hang out with to where folks became anyone and everyone you've ever known who never questions exactly what you believe? It's like /r/BPT or "Shameless" where we're all cool with gay people but let's just ignore how poor people fuckin hate homos.
That is all.
1 totalrandomperson 2018-01-11
Shameless had a whole arc about about the gays with a closeted bussy boi beating his father about it.
1 Barrrcode 2018-01-11
Because "people" is to generous for these folks.
1 Constantdiarrhea 2018-01-11
It's cause SJWs have recently taken to old terms like Black folk and people of color. Now they're applying it to tans people and pretty much anyone else. A bunch of lefty retards just all wanna talk like folksy black women to seem extra woke basically.
1 Phantom_Engineer 2018-01-11
Nobody knows what else to call them as a group.
1 -absolutego- 2018-01-11
It's applied a lot to far leftie groups in general because upper middle class kids appropriating black slang has been a stereotype since the 1920's.
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
Three questions -
So, what pharmaceutical company is going to produce your HRT pils there in your dumb as shit anarachist society /u/soccerskyman ?
What does domestic disputes have to do with anarchism?
How is your "Intersectionality" going to work for you when you try to put zionists, islamic people, and trannys all together in your faggy utopia?
1 Socrates2x 2018-01-11
I'm stealing that. It's mine now.
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
revolutionarily appropriating*
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
pharmaceutical unions probably. Also I'm not trans so their not my "pils" anyways, but I digress.
Intersectionality (the idea that all oppression is intertwined and dependent on each other, and therefore must all be combatted)
I don't think you understand what "intersectionality" means. It's not a synonym with diversity. And to answer your question, orgies. Lots of degenerate kinky orgies.
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
Laffo. Ask the corpses of cities touched by communism on how that works. Just seeing you worthless high school faggots trying to work the infrastructure would be glorious.
That wasn't a answer.
No, I get what you typed. Good luck on trying to convert theocratic populaces and the average worker to your dipshit hedonism disguised as enlightened living. I'm sure grudges will melt and won't be just like a Jonestown repeat.
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
Are you trying to criticize centralized economic planning, Marxist-Leninism, or just lazily lumping all of the left all together? The world may never know.
If you actually want a complete answer and theoretical model on an anarchist society, try reading the bread book. The dirty talk is hot, but nows not the time bby
You asked what it had to do with anarchism. I replied with what it had to do with anarchism: intersectional theory. Maybe Google the term real quick or something idk, I've got work to do.
I don't offer a solution to all the world's problems and conflicts dude, I just think we can do better. Conflict resolution, community protection, and public discussion can all be done horizontally; All of which can be very effective. And you know, guns help too.
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
No, what I am trying to tell you is that all your ideals are paths to everything getting fucked because you are all incompetent parasites.
Well, that's a laugh.
lol. So your ideal conflict resolution in your shitty perfect world is a police state. GOOD START!
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
As opposed to capitalists, who just work really hard and earn everything they get. No sir. No wage theft, exploiting markets, or horrific abuses here :^)
???? Weren't you just calling me a parasite? I got bills to pay.
Guns = police state
gg gold medal mental gymnastics there buddy 🏅
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
Humor me. What kind of work do you do?
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
Scripting mostly, general data management as well I guess.
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
Ah, so you are a champagne socialist sperg with no concept of the outside world. Got it.
1 holy_black_on_a_popo 2018-01-11
They all are. Prolly still lives with mommy. (Daddy's still on his cigarette adventure)
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
Don't take this the wrong way but uh... I dont really think of someone who posts almost exclusively on /r/drama all day everyday as an "outside" type, so forgive me if I don't really value your judgement of my character. 😜
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
I'll have you know that /r/drama has autistics, spergs and mutants of every walk of life here. We have hardcore eliot rodgers to gamergate hyper rapists and even once had the biggest gamergater of all /u/Prince_Kropotkin
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
Bummer
1 westofthetracks 2018-01-11
conflating anarchism and socialism definitely makes you the more retarded one in this exchange, which is impressive considering youre talking to an anarchist
1 Neon_needles 2018-01-11
Nah, they are pretty much the same in this instance. H2H
1 serialflamingo 2018-01-11
Real talk, the bread book is a terrible way of converting people to Anarchism.
I like Kropotkin, but a book largely about old af agriculture is only appealing to ppl who already wanna be appealed to and I wish people would get over the bread book meme.
The Communist Manifesto is literally more appealing to normies than the bread book.
1 serialflamingo 2018-01-11
Real talk, the bread book is a terrible way of converting people to Anarchism.
I like Kropotkin, but a book largely about old af agriculture is only appealing to ppl who already wanna be appealed to and I wish people would get over the bread book meme.
The Communist Manifesto is literally more appealing to normies than the bread book.
1 xjapxn 2018-01-11
https://media1.tenor.com/images/f4f6a908df00c2f36a0aab9509c11b27/tenor.gif?itemid=4674700
1 DrinkProfessionally 2018-01-11
Serious question though, I agree that all opression is wrong by definition, and that morally they all most be fought, but how can they be dependent on each other?
I am sorry I dont see how racism is related to sexism for so many reasons.
1 soccerskyman 2018-01-11
thx for being nice but sorry im
kindareally drunk right now but ill try my best to explain:An example of oppression being tied together with say sexism and racism is the treatment of Asian women by white men. They are fetishized, treated like sex objects, and are expected to be quiet docile and submissive. Racism against Asians justifies and re-enforces sexism against Asian women, and vice versa: they compound on eachother. For another example, capitalism could be said to enforce transphobia. Capitalists push to maintain gender roles and cisnormativity through advertisements and often discriminate against or force gendered roles upon trans workers (like making a trans woman wear a male uniform or barring a trans person from their restroom of choice). It can even arguably be extended to animal rights. For instance, feminist analysis of animal rights would note that female chickens are kept caged and restrained to get eggs while (almost) all male chickens are killed upon hatching.
There's a tendency amongst leftists that believe that with the abolition of capitalism, all other oppression will fall soon after ("brocialists" and "manarchists"). While it would certainly weaken other forms of oppression, there is zero reason to assume the struggle against capitalism must be prioritized. It's essentially saying "my revolution is more important than yours".
1 DrinkProfessionally 2018-01-11
This is all so-so theory. Needs some reaching to be true and it rests on some assumptions on human behaviour, but whatever. Just seems weak
Only white men? black men dont? latinos and other asians either? if they do, why single out white men? I mean I am brazilian brah and I have seen some of the same shit there, and in brazil we are all different shades of brown ( the majority). So I can say for a fact that the desire of fucking some submissive asians goes beyond white men.
And how much of this attraction is based on a image on them being submissive? How much is just because they are aesthetically different and maybe just more beautiful? I have no reason to believe that most of this attraction is based on the reasons you gave me.
See this is my problem with "pop" social science like that, I am not saying that there is nothing there, you probably have a point somewhere, but as it is right now is way way too weak, it lacks empirical prof. The theory itself rests on too many assumptions for me to go " yeah that makes sense "
Besides, even if you were right, I am still not connecting the dots to racism, only some sexism. I could go on but lets just agree to disagree
Brah, this isnt "browhatever", this is classical marxism. Materialism the technological determinist view of Marx himself. If you want to disagree sure, I even agree with you, but is not like is just a pop tendency between some leftists, is a legit theory with its own history. Dont frame it like is a bunch of american suburban white boizz wanting to have their own harem of women.
1 saint2e 2018-01-11
So a person who married a trans person, literally a trans lover, ends up murdering that person, and transphobia is the cause?
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Internalized transphobia is the next big thing. probably
1 saint2e 2018-01-11
TIL people hate trans people so much they will go out of their way to marry them and then later on, murder them.
1 keepittropical 2018-01-11
The long con
1 newcomer_ts 2018-01-11
Not that long, if he did reassignment surgery.
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
TIL people hate women so much they will go out of their way to marry them and then later on, murder them.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
the difference being that those aren't necessarily murders with the motivation being that they hate women. Believe it or not, sometimes murders happen with the reason being something other than hatred of that specific gender. But you probably know that already and are just here to meme with us
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
I'm with ya, facts are dumb
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/07/homicides-women/534306/
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Intimate-Partner-Violence-and-Sexual-Abuse-among-LGBT-People.pdf
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Ok, that second one is a tl;dr. Can you point me to the specific spot where they come to the conclusion that the murders happen specifically because men hate women?
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
Can you point me to a specific spot where murders against women have nothing to do with sexism and the devaluation of women's lives in society?
Let me google for ya buddy, idk, just go try to read or something
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Ok I clicked the first link and skimmed it to find my answers. here is a quote:
So it seems to me the problem is men's sexual possessiveness of their significant others. Nowhere do I see that it is "hatred of women". If anything it seems to be an overzealous love of a specific woman.
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
Jealousy - the entitlement to own, control, and otherwise be in charge of women - is intimately tied into misogyny. It is not real love, (or as you say overzealous love) real love of specific women does not end in murder. It is a devaluation of women to the point where their lives are expendable and if they do not submit to your control they are hurt.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Well at this point everything and anything is called misogyny. I'm not sure I agree that possessiveness == misogyny. If a woman is possessive of her husband/boyfriend is that misandry? I don't think so.
1 wwyzzerdd 2018-01-11
No its misogyny too. Don't you get it?
Anything and everything is rooted in soggy knees.
Which is why blacks wear their pants so low, so they have more fabric around their knees to keep them dry.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Ah, I get it. So when a woman is possessive of her boyfriend and finds him cheating or something and murders him, it was caused by internalized misogyny caused by the PATRIARCHY. It makes so much sense now.
1 Scummy_mofo 2018-01-11
Now you're thinking with intersectionality!TM
1 CaptainNeeMoNoy 2018-01-11
If only men could murder their partners and get off scot free by making claims of abuse with no evidence like women can 🙄
1 westofthetracks 2018-01-11
lol this is the opposite of true
1 holy_black_on_a_popo 2018-01-11
Can you please just post bussy now? I need to hatefap.
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-01-11
everybody please keep in mind that the above poster, /u/truetrans, contributed this enlightening comment in the OP linked discussion:
So give 'em some slack please. There's obviously a few screws loose, and remember, only punch up, not down -- retards are excluded from our dangerous banter.
1 OniTan 2018-01-11
All trannies are mentally ill so of course /u/truetrans is.
1 princessCuck 2018-01-11
What the fuck?
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-01-11
it's really no worse than that entire thread. one look at that discussion and everyone with half a brain should know why anarchists will never rule anything other than their own fever dreams.
1 metameanderer 2018-01-11
We need to listen to women's experiences because we are women. Also we should listen to trans experiences because we are trans.
Wait did you put up a poster empowering women with a vagina on it? Holy fuck that's transphobic.
1 princessCuck 2018-01-11
The poster has failed to demonstrate that an alleged hatred of women is the proximate cause of heterosexual domestic homicide. The demurrer to the argument is sustained and a judgment of dismissal shall follow. It is so ordered.
Any reason that lesbians have a higher rate of domestic abuse than straight couples, by the way?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
But that's literally not the same in all important respects. How many times have you told some schmuck that no, you can't compare circumcision to FGM because of reasons? Well, here's all of them reasons on a parade, starting with men generally aren't pressured by the Patriarchy to marry a transwoman, quite the fucking opposite.
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
I have never heard of a man attracted to women who has beat a woman.
1 Ultrashitpost 2018-01-11
Did you seriously post your own "quote" on your user page?
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
No, I did not... user pages show all of your posts. The only thing I have posted directly to my page is a possum.
:3
Thanks for the click!
1 Ultrashitpost 2018-01-11
Np!
Now please click on my link!
1 Magehunter_Skassi 2018-01-11
Are you aware that the Duluth Model has been discredited for a very long time? And why are people who own rats/possums always so fucking weird? The very first possum owner I met (not directly) was a crossdressing furry who had sex with his female possom and commissioned hardcore bestiality porn of him and her.
1 truetrans 2018-01-11
Hmmm. I dont know anyone who owns a possum. I just think that they are neat marsupials.
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-01-11
just because your conception of misogyny is pants-on-head retarded, doesn't mean your conception of transphobia has to be as well
1 OnePercentOfMonster 2018-01-11
men who beat other men up are misandrists
1 Stuntman119 2018-01-11
Internalised misandry must be stopped
1 comebepc 2018-01-11
Do you expect them to not be retarded?
1 SashaVelourLoveForce 2018-01-11
Deferred transphobia, like Madoka Magica the transphobia built up from countless time loops to overpower the karmic laws of the universe with bigotry
1 RetardDick 2018-01-11
LARPing always sounds interesting and awesome until you realize how retarded it is.
1 Ultrashitpost 2018-01-11
/u/cypro- so you think the guy just suddenly decided he hates his tranny-wife because she's a tranny and decides to just murder her?
1 cypro- 2018-01-11
I guess misogyny has never been a factor in domestic violence either 🤔
1 Ultrashitpost 2018-01-11
So you think this is what happened: This guy just suddenly realized "holy shit, my wife is actually a fucking tranny!" after years of marriage. This sudden realization (of something he had already known for years) is enough for him to decide to murder his wife.
Sounds like you're just trying to frame domestic violence as a hate crime, when there is no reason to.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-01-11
I mean, one dude wakes up one day and realizes his wife is a bitch.
Another dude wakes up one day and realizes his wife is a dude.
1 OniTan 2018-01-11
I think he realized his wife was very ugly.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
That's literally the entirety of the details we know about the motivation of the incident. Where in that are you finding the misogyny out of curiosity? Or did you just pop an outrage boner as soon as you read the headline and jumped to the conclusion that best fits your LARPing?
1 cypro- 2018-01-11
If you think that a man killing his wife because he "snapped" during an argument, where he tries to mitigate his actions by saying she was "always belittling him" is not a reasonable situation to infer that factors like misogyny, transmisogyny, etc, may have played a role... you might just be stupid.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
When a woman murders a man after "snapping" can we assume it was a result of misandry? 🤔
1 ____________13 2018-01-11
It's the only logical conclusion... so no, no we can't.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
At what rate does that occur compared to when the genders are reversed?
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
My guess is women murder men at a much lower rate than men murder women.
1 VidiotGamer 2018-01-11
It's definitely because women are less hateful than men and not because of their far more limited biological ability to inflict damage. /s
We actually know statistically that women initiate physical assault more than men do in non-reciprocal domestic violence situations, by about three times as much. To wit -
The thing is this - in reciprocal violence situations, they do walk away (or not, ahem) with the majority of the physical damage, but seriously that's to be expected because women are almost always physically weaker. This biological fact however doesn't seem to stop them from instigating physical violence more than men, which is actually kind of surprising.
TL;DR - Women initiate physical assault and abuse at rates closer to three times more than men do.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
I was waiting for the tankie I responded to to reply to my post with their gotcha moment of "AH HA, THIS PROVES MEN HATE WOMEN" or something before posting something very similar to what you said. I feel like you jumped the gun
1 VidiotGamer 2018-01-11
"Sorry for ruining everything, ever, all the time" - story of my life.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
It's ok. Judging from /u/RanDomino5's weird off subject comments in this thread, they are not quite in control of their mental faculties enough for that gotcha moment to have actually happened anyway
1 cleverseneca 2018-01-11
He belittled you. You know what to do.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
Words mean nothing anymore
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Ok I admit I jumped to that conclusion when I saw your post history. Are you more one of those "violent revolution" anarchists? You have to admit thats pretty close to tankies, minus the stalin apologia
1 princessCuck 2018-01-11
You lost, get used to it.
1 nanonan 2018-01-11
People are less willing to reciprocate when a women is violent. When you commonly get away with it, it's not suprising that you commonaly instigate it.
1 OniTan 2018-01-11
Yes, women are incredibly stupid and/or believe they're socially protected from retaliation by the /r/pussypass. Note that on the rare occasion a small man picks a fights with a larger man, we rightfully call him an idiot.
1 westofthetracks 2018-01-11
i mean it seems pretty reasonable to assume thats a factor
1 newcomer_ts 2018-01-11
Projection is a powerfull thing.
1 CarnistHappyCamp 2018-01-11
back in the olden days, we'd just call this "making shit up"
1 ChipChippersonAMA 2018-01-11
If you think trans people are people that are part car... You might be a redneck
1 holy_black_on_a_popo 2018-01-11
Women use the "snapped" excuse when they kill or abuse their spouses or children, and that's okay. But when a man does it, that excuse becomes bullshit?
Way to make women out to be completely lacking of agency and on the level of children. My bussy is sad now.
1 The_Donaven 2018-01-11
I feel it could be anything from he was in an emotionally abusive relationship and legitimately snapped to he's an abusive cunt or a crazy person trying to make up a story to shift blame. You don't anywhere near enough to infer anything about his motivations. The best option here is to let the courts figure it out as opposed to acting like you or I actually know anything about their relationship, his motives or anything beyond the shit in the linked article.
1 OniTan 2018-01-11
Sounds like they got into a dick measuring contest.
1 wowbagger88 2018-01-11
If it isn't big, what's the point? Might as well go for gussy.
1 Trapsarentgayyy 2018-01-11
Misogyny isnt real because women are property, not people
1 Barrrcode 2018-01-11
You don't beat your wife because you hate all women. You beat your wife because you hate your wife. QED, mate.
1 CraftedLove 2018-01-11
I think you're wrong, mate. You beat your wife because she's a living thing, and that obviously means you hate all living things. So in essence domestic violence means that you're just actually Thanos. QED, mate. /s
1 princessCuck 2018-01-11
Friend, I think all that cypro is fucking your ability to think rationally. If you were on bica, you might realize that another possibility is that his wife was emotionally abusing him for years and he snapped as a result.
1 iprobablyneedahobby 2018-01-11
Why don't anarchists go live in the woods or something instead of indulging in all the comforts of capitalism/consumerism and trying to convince everyone else? Of all the ideologies that one seems like you don't even need a lot of people to make it work. Hmmm, call me a cynic but I'm starting to doubt their resolve and sincerity.
1 DudeCat 2018-01-11
Because it is not enough for them to be anarchists, we must be anarchists along with them.
1 -absolutego- 2018-01-11
They want all the benefits of society without having to contribute to it beyond playing intelligentsia.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-01-11
"It is not enough for me to fail. Others must also fail."
1 aqouta 2018-01-11
Capitalism is about individual freedom, It's perfectly capable of encapsulating individuals that choose to be a collective. They could form a commune/coop at any time where they collectively own all belongings and interact with the greater capitalist world as one entity but they are incapable of actually building anything of their own so they instead demand hard working capitalists simply give them the utopia that desire instead of endeavoring to build it themselves.
1 BussyIsAHumanRight 2018-01-11
Now if only capitalism would allow white nationalists to form white only towns.
1 DistortedLines 2018-01-11
So we can gas them easier?
1 BussyIsAHumanRight 2018-01-11
So they can move to the middle of nowhere and start their ethnostate and the internet can stop autistically screeching about the rise of fascism when they see how few move there.
1 throwawayz9090909000 2018-01-11
Utah already exists my dude.
1 BannaHamHock 2018-01-11
Capitalism does allow this already, you just have to be smart enough to not state that as your intention while you're in the process of doing it.
1 BussyIsAHumanRight 2018-01-11
1 BannaHamHock 2018-01-11
How is it deceiving the legal system in any way? You are simply a group of friends all buying property in the same town. As long as you don't mention any ulterior motives in doing so there's no law that can stop you from lawfully acquiring property.
1 BussyIsAHumanRight 2018-01-11
Go fuck your mother, jew.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CsUALLGWEAAhJ8l.jpg
1 iprobablyneedahobby 2018-01-11
Is there a panel missing with a retard saying that we should get rid of all laws, all government services, and the entire social safety net? Or did the guy in that panel already die from a preventable disease or from being brained by some bandit with a big stick who wanted his food?
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
That's not what Anarchists want.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
That's not what you want, that's what you deserve and would be subjected to in the unlikely event of being able to destroy everything.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
I sympathize with the desire to smash the political system, naturally.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
So... Uh. Lol. Are you for Trump, or are you OK with the fact that giving the power to the proletariat and lumpenproletariat will always give you Trump, and if you give them more power, they are going to put your hipster ass to the wall the moment they can?
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
Trump wasn't elected by the proletariat. He was elected by the middle class. Literally anyone other than Clinton would have won in a landslide. Sanders would have easily won the general, because his ideological ancestry is the working-class socialist movement which was mostly dismantled in the 1950s.
1 sparingchanges 2018-01-11
Do you legitimately believe that anything above full time fryer boy at McDonald's is middle class and therefore bourgeois or petit bourgeois?
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
What do you mean by "above"? Wages? Social hierarchy? Distance from "real" work? The "middle-class" is obsessed with acquiring social status and performatively/conspicuously distancing themselves from working-class people.
1 sparingchanges 2018-01-11
God I hate you
1 princessCuck 2018-01-11
So, like coal miners and carpenters?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
Working class are workers who don't own capital (e.g. stocks etc) and therefore any part in the means of production. Who are these "middle class" you are talking about I don't know, but Trump was deffo elected by the working class.
The problem with the working class is that they don't have the sort of class consciousness that supporting the likes of Bernie Sanders require, they don't perceive themselves as monolithic, there's a lot of wealth inequality inside them and they want it that way. They don't want a large part of their hard-earned money given to the useless poor, and they don't want any bare-faced handouts themselves. Therefore they tend to prefer right-wing populists like Trump, who promise them opportunities (like reviving this or that industry and creating jobs), not dignity-destroying wealth redistribution.
And what they definitely don't like is the sort of super-empathetic left that's all about gays, tri-gender pyrofoxes, and helping foreigners before local workers because they are in much more need.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
Your definition of class is obsolete (because it ignores the cultural aspects of class) and social safety net programs are tremendously popular. People who actually work understand what it's like to be going through rough times, and have empathy and solidarity despite capitalist efforts to destroy those concepts.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
What kind of a deranged commie are you if your definition of working class is not based on the ownership of the means of production, but on "cultural aspects"? The fuck does that mean, that a NEET playing vidya in his parents' basement can now culturally identify as a proletarian and masturbate to the fantasies of himself and other such "working class" folks overthrowing the Trump-voting miner and farmer bourgeoisie?
... you know what, I bet that's exactly what's going on, with you in particular and most of r/@ commenters in general, or even the entire reddit leftisphere, if not most lefties on the internet.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci
That person is probably middle-class.
1 WikiTextBot 2018-01-11
Antonio Gramsci
Antonio Francesco Gramsci (Italian: [anˈtɔːnjo franˈtʃesko ˈɡramʃi], listen ; 22 January 1891 – 27 April 1937) was an Italian Marxist philosopher and politician. He wrote on political theory, sociology and linguistics. He attempted to break from the economic determinism of traditional Marxist thought and so is considered a key neo-Marxist. He was a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy and was imprisoned by Benito Mussolini's Fascist regime.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
So Trump voters are the cultural hegemony? o_O
But they'd have voted for Sanders? O_o
That person is probably you, is what I'm saying.
1 WikiTextBot 2018-01-11
Antonio Gramsci
Antonio Francesco Gramsci (Italian: [anˈtɔːnjo franˈtʃesko ˈɡramʃi], listen ; 22 January 1891 – 27 April 1937) was an Italian Marxist philosopher and politician. He wrote on political theory, sociology and linguistics. He attempted to break from the economic determinism of traditional Marxist thought and so is considered a key neo-Marxist. He was a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy and was imprisoned by Benito Mussolini's Fascist regime.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
lol
1 sparingchanges 2018-01-11
lab techs A and B work at The Company, owned by the local county government. They do the same job and make the same money, roughly 50k for 40 to 60 hours weekly. The lab building, microscopes, chemicals, test tubes, and whatnot and owned and regulated by The Company. The lab techs are provided medical benefits and forced to contribute to a pension.
Lab Tech A spends his post expenses income entirely on entertainment, travel, and consumer goods.
Lab Tech B puts half of post expenses income into a savings account. When the savings account exceeds 10,000 dollars, he dumps any excess into a large cap ETF.
After two years at the same job, Lab Tech A and B are still in the same working position, performing the same tasks and receiving the same salary.
Is Lab Tech B no longer a proletariat?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
If he receives the majority of his income from stocks then sure.
1 sparingchanges 2018-01-11
So as long as you carefully manage your stock portfolio so that you have less capital gains than labor made income, you can avoid being put up against the wall when the revolution comes? Phew, lemme call my accountant. Is this pre or post tax?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-01-11
If you do that then you get a bullet too. Which part of this confuses you?
1 comebepc 2018-01-11
Don't you believe in absence of a government?
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
Depends on what you mean by that. Cops and politicians, no. Organization and collective decision-making when necessary, yes. In addition, we see very little distinction between political power and economic power.
1 nanonan 2018-01-11
The anarchist revolution won't stop until every single revolutionary is on government benefits.
1 OniTan 2018-01-11
The anarchist movement was dealt a significant blow today when they inadvertently bombed a mailbox containing their own welfare checks.
1 PoorLilMarco 2018-01-11
In an anarchic society, what's stopping people from killing minority groups they don't like? 🤔
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
Well that's obvious. First step in the creation of the anarchist society is the mayocide. After that is complete the minorities will be the majorities and the mayos will be a thing of the past
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
Organization
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-01-11
organization what?
1 iprobablyneedahobby 2018-01-11
(((ORGANIZATION)))
1 nanonan 2018-01-11
But I thought you weren't an organisation.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
*Organizing
1 -absolutego- 2018-01-11
I thought hierarchies were oppressive.
Guess what organization entails?
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
Talking to people gasp
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
When you're such a boot licker you can't even begin to imagine a world where you're not always asking permission from your boss or senator to stay alive.
1 comebepc 2018-01-11
Wut?
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
I said you're all such boot lickers that you can't even begin to imagine a world where people aren't working for a slave wage, for their employer's benefit, or hoping their senator will pass the new healthcare bill they need, or hoping you don't get killed by some untrained pig responding to a fake hostage situation.
1 comebepc 2018-01-11
Oh, I see. You're retarded
1 Im_StonedAMA 2018-01-11
And you can't come up with a single thing to discredit me aside from ad hominem bull shit. Congratulations. You've officially lost a debate with a retarded person.
1 fsdgfhk 2018-01-11
In an anarchist society, it'd be such a utopia that everyone would suddenly become intersectional feminist anti-racist gender activists. If they don't, we'll drag them from their homes and beat them to death in the street, because saying bad things about minorities is violence.
1 Cowabungaaaaa 2018-01-11
These are the kind of people who believe disagreeing with trans people is transphobia. Well, the idiots are, thankfully they’re being downvoted
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
I disagree with plenty of trans people. Not about their gender, though.
1 Cowabungaaaaa 2018-01-11
How is that related?
1 Barrrcode 2018-01-11
Then you're not transphobic, you're just suffering from a shared delusion.
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
1 RanDomino5 2018-01-11
1 OnlyRacistOnReddit 2018-01-11
Uh, yeah /u/cypro- that's exactly what you should (but won't) do.
1 Basically_Trash 2018-01-11
It's current year friendo. When it comes to cases that might involve some form of sexism or racism or sexual assault or really anything on the rad-fem docket, if the accused is higher on the privilege totem pole than the victim, then they are guilty until proven innocent. And even then they are probably still guilty
1 ChipChippersonAMA 2018-01-11
/u/cypro-
1 GenitalGesticulation 2018-01-11
But literally 100% of trans people are murdered literally every day literally because of transphobia.
1 Solilowey 2018-01-11
u/Im_StonedAMA
You get your anarchist card from your local village elder, but you have to make sure you avoid the roving warbands as they pillage your town and shoot anything that moves.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-01-11
Imagine waking up one day and your "wife" is breathing sleep breath in your face and then you notice the beard stubble and the narrow hips with Hello Kitty underpants from the Junior Misses department and you are like: "Holy shit. I have been fucking a dude for the past three years."
1 princessCuck 2018-01-11
I just shuddered.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-01-11
This is the most boring fascist regime ever. When do we get to join death squads?
1 Trapsarentgayyy 2018-01-11
/u/BDICorsicanBarber i thought you anarcokiddies didnt like police/prisons/laws? Or are you fianlly realizing how retarded you are?
1 BDICorsicanBarber 2018-01-11
Even if you don't like the police or justice system and you are actually guilty, it's not in your best interest to confess. I'm not sure how that's mutually exclusive with anarchism...
1 Reynoodlepoodle 2018-01-11
No excuse for this one. Tranny strength shouldve let them be equals in combat