Add new comment

08:47 This system feels 'free' to those who rule it or benefit from it, as well as to those people who don't believe in anarchy (i.e. most people). Anarchists represent a tiny minority. Even white nationalists outnumber anarchists.

Propaganda and advertising do not need what has already taken root in order to work. Otherwise new consumption habits would never emerge. Novelty would not be the dynamic force it is within capitalism. Your argument is so clearly refuted by observing how the actual economy works and by most of social psychology, it's just laughable. Bernays would not be remembered and studied today if he were wrong. Advertisers still use his basic principles, just as political strategists still use insights from Geobbels. New demands can be stimulated. We've known these things for a long time now.

If you wish to create anarchy in the real world with other people (not simply anarchy on the internet with your two Facebook friends) then you would care if your social milieu or society gets infiltrated. That's any group's problem, including a problem even for white nationalists. I never said an open internet was intrinsically advantageous to the far right. An open internet facilitates the far right, along with every other political ideology. It has simply allowed the far right to flourish in a way they (or other fringe groups) could not have before the internet. Since the far right has more money than the far left, they are able to leverage it more effectively. Anews still does very little moderating. But even anews recognizes the need for at least some limits.

'Anything goes' has never existed in any human or animal group ..ever. Norms and limits on behaviour are part of every living social group. Anarchy isn't the absence of norms and limits, it is the absence of rulers and authority.