pretty sure tankies in threadiverse have nothing to do with ML theory.
I lean black simply because I am aware disabilities persist, and vanguarding is required until we are all reenabled. Until we are all empowered, none are.
vanguarding is required until we are all reenabled
I mean I’m autistic and I don’t need nor want a vanguard. Hierarchical power structures like vanguards are especially dangerous for people like me, because they provide a positive feedback mechanism for people already at the top of the power dynamic. And it kinda doesn’t sit right to me that my existence as an autistic person, my disability, is why we “need” a vanguard party. Maybe I’m missing something?
Disabilities≢disorders.
Explain to me how can I empower people with paraplegia, comatose, dys/agraphia, dys/apraxia, amputation, aphasia, dysarthria, agnosia, etc…
Autism is absolutely a disability by any reasonable definition of disability. (ASAN is autistic self-advocacy, i.e. these are autistic people speaking about our lived experience.)
Explain to me how can I empower people with paraplegia, comatose, dys/agraphia, dys/apraxia, amputation, aphasia, dysarthria, agnosia, etc.
We would have to ask them (or for the comatose person, whomever is responsible for their medical decisions) for what they need to be included in the community, and then act on it. In general, we can apply the same anarchist principles of freedom, horizontalness, non-domination, continuous consent, dignity, and inclusivity to our projects.
Like I’m not saying to never look out for anyone ever. Of course, we sometimes do need to stand up for people to defend them when they’re down. I’m pushing back against vanguardism, the Leninist institutionalization of professional “revolution” that never seems to morph into communism as promised.
Leninist institutionalization of professional “revolution” that never seems to morph into communism as promised
Nurses and doctors are institutionalized professionals vanguarding people to morph into better healthier versions of what you couldn’t do alone.
If you have someone you can rely on, better yet, someone you use as support, you have a vanguard. Realizing how vanguarding is how we grow as mammals, is realizing some institutions are more corrupt than other hierarchical mammals.
I try to lean in empowerment and enabling you to do what you wish.
Not strip you off your desires, needs, and wishes.
The problem with vanguardism isn’t that there are people who protect/stand up for others, it’s that it inevitably institutionalizes those people into positions of power over those others. Nurses, caregivers, etc. aren’t “supposed” to have power over their patients, but they very often do. Humans are already good at protecting and supporting each other–no need to risk creating a power differential by forming a designated vanguard to rigidify it.
I feel like there’s a disagreement on the definition of vanguardism. I didn’t know it exactly, so i looked it up on Wikipedia and AnarWiki, and i get from those that a key element of the “strict” (leninist) definition is that it applies to a whole society rather than individual cases, and that it requires a minority of educated people to guide a mass of uneducated people, implying that the uneducated masses can take no part in it.
What you describe as one on one relations would seem to fall more under general “solidarity” than vanguardism to my eyes.
Also, vanguardism is by this definition not horizontal, neither consensual.
Feel free to correct my uneducated ass, but with the knowledge i have, it seems that you are using a much wider definition of vanguardism than the original one.
pretty sure tankies in threadiverse have nothing to do with ML theory.
I disagree. Many share important ideological things such as democratic centralism and many use the same talking points offline MLs use to defend their favorite states. In practice they also always seem to fall back to ML approaches when asked about what to do.
Damn, I’m having an identity crisis. Am I a dogmatist who reads theory and blindly accepts everything I read, or do I not read theory at all 🤔
Do you actually have any reason for thinking that we don’t read theory, btw, or is this just another case of, “They’re bad anyway so it’s fine to just make up whatever about them?”
bruv, reread what I commented.
We can seize the memes of Marx-Leninism without praxing the acts.
Black anarchism is ML praxis, but more about empowering each other, than excommunicating people for contrivances.
e.g. Blåhaj is an ML instance, but NexusAncap.
This doesn’t mean they need to defederate and gulag each other.
Hmm maybe we are just not getting each other. I feel like I precisely replied to a part of your comment, but you seem to think I really missed the point.
Black anarchism is ML praxis
To me this doesnt make sense, and from a hlance your links dont seem to be able to explain that to me. Doesnt mean its not there, just that I dont get it. I connect ML praxis with hierarchical, authoritarian and exclusionary organizing and I dont see that really reflected in your link.
e.g. Blåhaj is an ML instance, but Nexus Ancap.
I wouldnt describe those instances with those words, but I think we also just use them differently
I connect ML praxis with hierarchical, authoritarian and exclusionary organizing and I dont see that really reflected in your link.
Thoust needs more reading.
MLs are horizontal, vanguardian and inclusionary when organizing. They just are more aware some folks excel at vanguarding better than direct actors, aiders, intersecters, solidarity, etc. etc… Not everyone is Superman, but I can definitively trust Lois Lane can get her hands on the list of the Legion of Doom’s secret addresses, or say Superboy intersecting with many people in a rally. Awareness of how people excel at other things over other things is just being aware people are different. And MLs accept those facts are real, and need to be accounted when organizing anything.
We are no longer going to talk about tankies, I pray.
I wouldnt describe those instances with those words, but I think we also just use them differently.
I exemplified praxis over meming. The rules are in place for actual enforcements. “Influence” here meaning actually mimicking Joseph Stalin for enforcing his views over all. e.g. “I would hate to gulag you for ‘wrongthink’”
pretty sure tankies in threadiverse have nothing to do with ML theory.
I lean black simply because I am aware disabilities persist, and vanguarding is required until we are all reenabled. Until we are all empowered, none are.
I mean I’m autistic and I don’t need nor want a vanguard. Hierarchical power structures like vanguards are especially dangerous for people like me, because they provide a positive feedback mechanism for people already at the top of the power dynamic. And it kinda doesn’t sit right to me that my existence as an autistic person, my disability, is why we “need” a vanguard party. Maybe I’m missing something?
Disabilities≢disorders.
Explain to me how can I empower people with paraplegia, comatose, dys/agraphia, dys/apraxia, amputation, aphasia, dysarthria, agnosia, etc…
Autism is absolutely a disability by any reasonable definition of disability. (ASAN is autistic self-advocacy, i.e. these are autistic people speaking about our lived experience.)
We would have to ask them (or for the comatose person, whomever is responsible for their medical decisions) for what they need to be included in the community, and then act on it. In general, we can apply the same anarchist principles of freedom, horizontalness, non-domination, continuous consent, dignity, and inclusivity to our projects.
Like I’m not saying to never look out for anyone ever. Of course, we sometimes do need to stand up for people to defend them when they’re down. I’m pushing back against vanguardism, the Leninist institutionalization of professional “revolution” that never seems to morph into communism as promised.
that is a vanguard.
Vanguardism.
Nurses and doctors are institutionalized professionals vanguarding people to morph into better healthier versions of what you couldn’t do alone.
If you have someone you can rely on, better yet, someone you use as support, you have a vanguard. Realizing how vanguarding is how we grow as mammals, is realizing some institutions are more corrupt than other hierarchical mammals.
I try to lean in empowerment and enabling you to do what you wish.
Not strip you off your desires, needs, and wishes.
The problem with vanguardism isn’t that there are people who protect/stand up for others, it’s that it inevitably institutionalizes those people into positions of power over those others. Nurses, caregivers, etc. aren’t “supposed” to have power over their patients, but they very often do. Humans are already good at protecting and supporting each other–no need to risk creating a power differential by forming a designated vanguard to rigidify it.
I feel like there’s a disagreement on the definition of vanguardism. I didn’t know it exactly, so i looked it up on Wikipedia and AnarWiki, and i get from those that a key element of the “strict” (leninist) definition is that it applies to a whole society rather than individual cases, and that it requires a minority of educated people to guide a mass of uneducated people, implying that the uneducated masses can take no part in it.
What you describe as one on one relations would seem to fall more under general “solidarity” than vanguardism to my eyes.
Also, vanguardism is by this definition not horizontal, neither consensual.
Feel free to correct my uneducated ass, but with the knowledge i have, it seems that you are using a much wider definition of vanguardism than the original one.
I disagree. Many share important ideological things such as democratic centralism and many use the same talking points offline MLs use to defend their favorite states. In practice they also always seem to fall back to ML approaches when asked about what to do.
I’m pretty sure tankies in threadiverse haven’t read any theory ml or otherwise
Damn, I’m having an identity crisis. Am I a dogmatist who reads theory and blindly accepts everything I read, or do I not read theory at all 🤔
Do you actually have any reason for thinking that we don’t read theory, btw, or is this just another case of, “They’re bad anyway so it’s fine to just make up whatever about them?”
No they do read, especially crap such as Engels On Authority
bruv, reread what I commented.
We can seize the memes of Marx-Leninism without praxing the acts.
Black anarchism is ML praxis, but more about empowering each other, than excommunicating people for contrivances.
e.g. Blåhaj is an ML instance, but Nexus Ancap. This doesn’t mean they need to defederate and gulag each other.
Hmm maybe we are just not getting each other. I feel like I precisely replied to a part of your comment, but you seem to think I really missed the point.
To me this doesnt make sense, and from a hlance your links dont seem to be able to explain that to me. Doesnt mean its not there, just that I dont get it. I connect ML praxis with hierarchical, authoritarian and exclusionary organizing and I dont see that really reflected in your link.
I wouldnt describe those instances with those words, but I think we also just use them differently
Thoust needs more reading.
MLs are horizontal, vanguardian and inclusionary when organizing. They just are more aware some folks excel at vanguarding better than direct actors, aiders, intersecters, solidarity, etc. etc… Not everyone is Superman, but I can definitively trust Lois Lane can get her hands on the list of the Legion of Doom’s secret addresses, or say Superboy intersecting with many people in a rally. Awareness of how people excel at other things over other things is just being aware people are different. And MLs accept those facts are real, and need to be accounted when organizing anything.
We are no longer going to talk about tankies, I pray.
I exemplified praxis over meming. The rules are in place for actual enforcements. “Influence” here meaning actually mimicking Joseph Stalin for enforcing his views over all. e.g. “I would hate to gulag you for ‘wrongthink’”