I was referring to the watermark lol (bottom right of the image)

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I've blocked so many people that, on my 196 feed, there had only been like 22 posts lol. I had to switch to anonymous mode to count

The Anarchist Library is awesome- they have so much great content

Ah cool, thanks for the tip!

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think the most important factor when it comes to that issue is free association and, like you said, decentralization. Ideally we would see coordination rather than hierarchy; no one has to be in charge- there are simply roles that get filled. There are even guides online

It's my understanding that the US military is as capable as they are on the battlefield largely due to the autonomy each individual unit is granted.

This is where things start to get out of my wheelhouse though, but it seems to me that if enough people want this kind of change, we could make it happen by enough individuals simply pitching in

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I'd imagine the same and only way we could get there in the first place- mutual aid and violence

Edit: I've been enjoying this thread, so thanks for that! Been a long time since I've gotten this deep into discussing these things, and I like it

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago

But it is closer than people living in capitalist countries are, correct?

Closer to anarchism? I don't think so. Closer to everyone's needs being met and having freedom? Yes, I'd say so.

I guess it is sort of a progress at least (if it is, maybe I'm thinking the wrong way?)

It sounds like you're a pragmatist, and that's valid, but most anarchists are considered idealists, which seems to be where the 'disconnect' is (using that term lightly)

also do you mean society as a whole as in the whole world to be cashless or countries since it'd be a less radical change, and if so, wouldn't these cashless societies become targets of the rest of the world?

'Idealists' like myself catch a lot of flak over this exact issue. To me, it's largely a matter of principle, so I think we should do it anyway. I feel strongly that it isn't our responsibility to make sure every base is covered before making revolutionary change.

I believe that hierarchy is bad, so we should get rid of it. Yes, that then makes us a target for new oppressors, but we're only not a target now because we already have oppressors

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago

No such thing as a dumb question!

Money functions as a points system to facilitate class hierarchy, so I don't believe money should exist. Social democracies are still capitalist.

Some people prefer to distinguish "justified" hierarchies, e.g., hierarchies of expertise (like teacher-student type relationships)- i.e., someone being in charge is okay if it's well justified.

Others however, like myself, prefer to focus on the underlying power dynamics. I don't think society or its institutions should ever be granting anyone power over another person

When I look at these countries you mention, rather than seeing efficient and equal distribution of resources, what I see is a lot of unnecessary mediating factors, embedded in an inherently unjust structure- the state itself. The people there may be relatively happy, but they're not free

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

yes!

Why?

downvote me harder

My instance doesn't do downvotes

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You did great and it's the same message either way but, just for fun, your translation in French would be:

bonjour je m'appelle helium. j'suis un gaz noble.

(The literal translation would be "mon nom est helium" but people don't usually talk like that in French- just like the literal translation of "je m'appelle" is "I call myself" but people don't usually talk like that in English)

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Personally, I think that, when it comes to "important" stuff, having an individual or group whose opinion you trust based on other aligned values is sufficient.

E.g., if you're not sure how to feel about furries, but you respect the consensus of the queer community, you can look to them to decide how to ensure your actions/words align with your values

This is basically the whole point of electing representatives. It's not your job to have an opinion on every single thing- we hire people with whom our values (ideally) align, and it becomes their job to have all those opinions

This works similarly in elections. Many people don't have the time, energy, and/or capacity to sit down and learn about each proposed amendment/etc, so different groups publish their recommendations

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

hello it's me helium

i am a noble gas

Noble ?

Unintelligible

funkyphoto.clear

4
121
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world

Poll

Edit: I've noticed some folks aren't taking this poll very seriously

109
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
47
10
132
252
517
Hmmm (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
239
c/fuckcars? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

"Finna" = "Fixing to" = "About to"

82
Encoprulesis Part II (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

Not really part 2 but it's on theme and I thought that title was creative and I can't be that creative twice in one day

289
Encoprulesis (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

Made this meme a while ago from that tweet but never shared it

25
Ink on paper (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
view more: ‹ prev next ›

TherapyGary

joined 2 months ago