[go: up one dir, main page]

    • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary

      • BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I always ask people who want to take away guns, why is it that authoritarians love to do this with marginalized people first then everybody? Even today with such military advancements. Why would a government be worried about its millions of people being armed and angry at them. So far, not one of them has tried to answer it.

      • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Found the American 😁

        Take your showel and crowbar and join the strike, because that’s what scares the powerful the most, that we might not work for them. Shooting? That’s a simple problem to solve for them, just send in cops or the army.

        • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Australian.

          You cannot overthrow the state without weapons and at least a genuine threat to use them.

          • Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            7 hours ago

            If we’re talking in absolutes, state can be overthrown without guns : it’s a social construct, it can be unmade by social means.

            Now, it’s far far easier with violence, and violence is easier with guns, so practically and realistically you’re probably right. But eh, i like nitpicking.

            • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              it also entirely depends on which state we’re talking about.
              The norwegian state can absolutely be overthrown if the “overthrow the state” party gets 90% of the votes with 100% voter turnout, whereas the american government might well just nuke seattle if they see any third party getting more than 3% of votes…

        • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          You can get weapons, it’s not impossible. You basically just can’t have a criminal history and need to present a good enough reason (sport shooting, hunting, collecting, etc).

          But very few Australians are leftists, so it’s not like the quote would be something most would agree with. They’re liberals who think giving the state the monopoly in violence is a good idea.

          • Brave Little Hitachi Wand@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I feel like the main thing that needs to happen to overthrow a state is not exactly guns, but for the oppressors to put theirs down. It just so happens they usually need an argument they’re able to understand.

          • 𞋴𝛂𝛋𝛆@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Pretty much like California then. In Georgia, I could walk in a shop and buy anything. Here in CA, I think the wait period is lover a week, and shops are all but non existent. In GA, there is legitimate hunting and need. CA is more for the paranoid, at least here in SoCal. Y’all also have a lot more police training, if memory serves. That makes a big difference in the numbers and risk/assessment.

            Most real liberals I have ever met look more like conservative stereotypes, own guns, are reasonable, and do not get tangled with idealism. That is not to say, indifferent to egalitarian cause, but realize the greatest evils in the world are ignorance and indifference.

  • _‌_反いじめ戦隊@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I can tell hypocrites from liberals quite easily:

    Laws for all

    vs

    laws for thee.

    Anarchists just hate authoritarians.

    Btw, this Venn Diagram is far right: “Leftists”

        • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          That’s all very well and good historical context, but I’d still rather call myself a leftist (or simply an anarchist) before I ever call myself a comrade; The contemporary connotations with the USSR and authoritarians make it something negative to me.

          • whaleross@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            The only leftists I hear using “comrade” unironically are the Stalin apologists that are pro-Russia and pro-Putin today. Fuck them. Fuck them with a lightbulb. Fuck the ones that latch on an edgy ideology without knowing any history. Fuck the ones that know history even harder. Fuck them with a strip light that is already cracked. Fuck them all the way to the gulag where they can have their great purge group wank before they are shipped for the Ukraine meat grinder.

            OP, call yourself whatever you find fit and don’t bother with the online NKVD volunteer divisions.

            Personally, I’m a dirty filthy leftist socialist. I’m filth for the right wingers, the centrists and the far left totalitarians alike.

            • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Comrade is pretty commonly used in anarchist circles, at least in my neck of the woods. Some people don’t use it, but it isn’t really controversial/a topic deemed worthy of discussion around here. We’ve got bigger problems than what word we use for “like-minded person aiding us in the struggle”

          • _‌_反いじめ戦隊@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Anarchist or “ally” is fine if you don’t want that type of ancient association to the reclaimed neo meaning of “comrade.”
            The issue that you need to see is that who&where you sourced this Diagram is clearly aligned with authoritarians, and wants to oppress our efforts in intersection and solidarity.

            As anarchists, we need to see the attempts to divide us, and solidify against oppressions. And using an authoritarian diagram instead of the better illustrations that “Conservatives” and “Liberals” use laws to divide and conquer our collective efforts.

            Guns are just one type of liberatory tool to free us from oppression. Bolt cutters are one of the firsts, and first-aid kits.
            Liberals are the first to place conditions on these tools.

  • Cassa@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    leftism is inherently rooted in liberalism, what this probably is talking about is neo-liberalism, which is frankly far removed from the liberal philosophical thought.

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      “Leftism” is a response to the failures of liberalism to uphold it’s own values. A bunch of people wentt, “hey this freedom and rights for all stuff sounds pretty rad but it’s not really happening under the system that claims to be making it happen. How would a truly free society actually look, and what do we need to do to get there?” So yeah, it’s based in liberalism inasmuch as leftists are calling liberals hypocrites that failed to uphold their own values and goals

    • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Leftism has progressed a lot in the past 300 years. Its roots are irrelevant because it looks nothing like its great grandparents ideas.