Become an Anarchist or Forever Hold Your Peace

From CrimethInc.

As Donald Trump and Elon Musk subordinate the United States government to their pursuit of totalitarian power, their opponents remain in a defensive posture, accusing them of lawlessness. But neither courts nor laws will halt the descent into autocracy. Massive numbers of people will have to take it upon themselves to organize concrete acts of resistance, to take direct action on a horizontal and participatory basis—in other words, to become anarchists.


Tyranny Is the Opposite of Anarchism

On February 8, the editorial board of the New York Times wrote that Elon Musk

“is on a mission to rampage through the government’s confidential payment systems with an anarchist’s glee.”

If you know any real-life anarchists, you know how absurd this is. Given access to the government’s payment systems, no anarchist would begin by cutting off resources to starving children or medical research. An anarchist would begin by cutting off funding to the police and the other instruments of state violence—precisely the institutions that Donald Trump and Elon Musk will expand at any cost.

Anyone who tells you anarchism is about abolishing the social safety net for the sake of unbridled profit is lying to you outright. There are other words for that—for example, neoliberalism.

Anarchism is something else entirely. Anarchists propose to abolish all institutional means of coercion, so that no one can dominate or oppress anyone else:

Anarchism is the idea that everyone is entitled to complete self-determination. No law, government, or decision-making process is more important than the needs and desires of actual human beings. People should be free to shape their relations to their mutual satisfaction, and to stand up for themselves as they see fit.

Anarchists oppose all forms of hierarchy—every currency that concentrates power into the hands of a few, every mechanism that puts us at a distance from our potential.

-To Change Everything

In other words, anarchists seek to bring about a situation in which no politician or billionaire, elected or not, could ever be in a position to cut off essential resources to millions of people with the flick of a pen. This is a profounder commitment to freedom, equality, and the well-being of the general public than one can find within the halls of any government.

At this moment of peril, when aspiring autocrats have taken power and are attempting to consolidate permanent control of the state, why would the New York Times muddy the waters by taking a cheap shot at some of Donald Trump’s most determined enemies? Looking more closely at the quote above, it seems that the editorial board’s chief concern is not what will happen as a consequence of Elon Musk’s actions, but whether Musk and his cronies are following the rules properly.


A Three-Sided Conflict

As Trump and Musk carry out a hostile takeover of the United States government, outlets like the New York Times are narrating a story in which there are two sides: on one side, democracy and the rule of law, and on the other side, the criminal oligarchs that threaten to undermine them.

But this is not the only way to understand the situation.

It would be more precise to say that there are three camps—those who desire to return to the forms of governance that prevailed until January 20, 2025; those who are currently in the process of overturning that system in order to impose an even more oppressive system; and those who reject both of those options in favor of a more egalitarian alternative.

In the first camp, we find people who believe that a certain amount of self-determination is acceptable, as long as it falls neatly within whatever laws happen to be on the books. They are also comfortable with a wide range of ruthless self-seeking destructive behavior, provided that it, too, complies with those same laws. When people in this camp talk about “equality,” they do not mean that all of us should have comparable leverage on the conditions that determine what we can do with our lives. They mean equal opportunity on the market and equality before the law—both of which are preposterous to speak about when some people start life with pennies while others start with billions. People in this camp are concerned about Elon Musk overhauling the federal government, but they had no objection to him amassing hundreds of billions of dollars while a hundred million Americans lived paycheck to paycheck. They are concerned about Trump’s plans for Gaza, but until a few weeks ago many of them were perfectly at ease with the United States government funding a genocide there.

In the second camp, we find those who are determined to consolidate power in their own hands, regardless of what laws happen to be on the books. Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and their various capitalist, nationalist, and fascist backers will preserve whatever laws assist them and overturn the rest. They have no allegiance to any particular legal system or protocol. They seek their own advantage by any means, mendaciously claiming that they are the only ones who can address the problems of our time (“I alone can fix it”). Such people have always existed, but only over the past few years have resources become so unevenly distributed that a handful of them could take over the United States government.

Finally, in the third camp, we find anarchists and other rebels who also have no allegiance to the system of governance that has prevailed until now, but for entirely different reasons. Anarchists believe that everyone deserves the maximum amount of freedom, regardless of what laws happen to be on the books—and therefore, that no one deserves to be able to dominate anyone else, whether by hoarding access to resources or wielding the instruments of state repression. People in this camp hold that regardless of what any constitution proclaims, regardless of how an electorate votes in an election, none of us owe any allegiance to institutions that exist solely for the purpose of imposing disparities in power, whether we are talking about government departments, banks, or private military contractors. In contrast to those who are comfortable with oligarchy and ethnic cleansing as long as no one breaks the rules, there is no way to bribe or blackmail anarchists into making excuses for oppression.

Whatever your politics, you are probably sympathetic to the anarchist analysis to some degree—perhaps more than you think. Try this thought experiment:

How much do you buy into the idea that the democratic process should trump your own conscience and values? Imagine yourself in a democratic republic with slaves—say, ancient Athens, or ancient Rome, or the United States of America until the end of 1865. Would you obey the law and treat people as property while endeavoring to change the laws, knowing full well that whole generations might live and die in chains in the meantime? Or would you act according to your conscience in defiance of the law, like Harriet Tubman and John Brown?

If you would follow in the footsteps of Harriet Tubman, then you, too, believe that there is something more important than the rule of law. This is a problem for anyone who wants to make conformity with the law or with the will of the majority into the final arbiter of legitimacy.

-From Democracy to Freedom


No Law Will Give You Freedom

Staking the defense against Donald Trump on the principle that “no one is above the law” has failed for eight years now. Worse, with Trump back in control of the government, it’s a self-defeating narrative. What happens when his lackeys in Congress pass new laws and the judges he appoints rule in his favor? At that point, all this rhetoric legitimizing the law as a good in itself will only strengthen Trump’s hand.

Many people spent several years of Trump’s first term waiting on former FBI director Robert Mueller to investigate and prosecute Donald Trump. As we argued back then, before Mueller’s investigation ended in a complete washout, this doomed strategy reflected a fundamental misunderstanding of the balance of power and the nature of law itself:

Democrats still don’t understand how power works. Crime is not the violation of the rules, but the stigma attached to those who break rules without the power to make them. (As they say, steal $25, go to jail; steal $25 million, go to Congress.) At the height of Genghis Khan’s reign, it would have been pointless to accuse the famous tyrant of breaking the laws of the Mongol Empire; as long as Trump has enough of Washington behind him, the same goes for him. Laws don’t exist in some transcendent realm. They are simply the product of power struggles among the elite—not to mention the passivity of the governed—and they are enforced according to the prevailing balance of power. To fetishize the law is to accept that might makes right. It means abdicating the responsibility to do what is ethical regardless of what the laws happen to be.

In the long run, the courts cannot constrain Donald Trump. He controls the executive branch, the part of the government that is supposed to enforce their rulings.

Nor will the courts constrain Elon Musk. Even apart from Trump’s support, he has unlimited money for court cases. If the courts attempt to punish him by imposing fines, he can afford to pay for tens of billions of dollars’ worth of illegal activity. He already routinely refuses to pay rent and other bills that no ordinary person could ever get away with shrugging off.

Nor will the police and other law-enforcement agencies constrain Trump or Musk. In theory, the police exist to enforce laws; in practice, the average cop knows very little about the law—they’re not lawyers, after all—but a great deal about obeying orders. Trump is the favorite politician of the mercenary caste, the ones who sell their capacity to inflict violence to the highest bidder (be that the state or private security contractors). Just as Trump has filled his government with disgraced public figures who depend on him, the police are his natural allies—the more so as a consequence of their compromised relationship with the general public.

Continuing to emphasize the centrality of law in objections to Trump’s agenda can only hamstring future movements, discouraging the emergence of the only kind of resistance that could offer any hope once he has completed his takeover of the federal government.

The truth is, neither the powerful nor the oppressed have ever had good cause to obey laws—the former because the same privileges that enable them to write the laws release them from the necessity of obeying them, the latter because the laws weren’t established for their benefit in the first place.

-“Take Your Pick: Law or Freedom


Remember How We Got Here

The binary narrative about criminal oligarchs undermining democracy and the rule of law is misleading in another way. The authoritarians who are overhauling the government do not represent the opposite of the preceding order, but the inevitable consequence of it. Their power grab is the result of several decades of democratically-managed capitalism, which enabled a coterie of billionaires to accumulate so much wealth and power that they no longer believe that they need the trappings of democracy to keep the populace appeased.

It was the rules of the previous game that created this situation. Wanting to go back a single step in history, to the previous stage of the process, is foolish, because that was the stage that led us directly to this one. It is impossible to rewind the clock—and even if we could, that would only mean arriving once again at the same situation. The problem is not simply that Musk’s protégés have run rampant through the databases of the government, though that is already producing consequences that will likely be impossible to undo. The real problem is the emergence of a caste of billionaires who no longer require the services of democracy and have enough power to do away with it.

These billionaires can buy up communication platforms, buy up both politicians and voters, use the global infrastructure under their control to determine the outcome of geopolitical struggles. Donald Trump and Elon Musk are the ones who are currently attracting the most attention, but behind them are Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, and many more. The individual character flaws of these men are beside the point; the significant thing is that the mechanisms of neoliberal capitalism are systematically concentrating power in the hands of people who are completely disinterested in others’ agency or well-being.

This is why milquetoast centrism cannot offer a convincing alternative to the despotism of the fascists and technocrats.

Describing the Democrats’ unsuccessful strategy of chasing Republicans further and further to the right, one Democratic politician quipped that “voters who ordered a Coca-Cola don’t want a Diet Coke.” This doesn’t put things strongly enough. Considering that Trump won the election on an explicit platform of mass deportations and autocracy, Democrats imitating Republican talking points while promising to “defend democracy” is like offering Diet Coke to a cocaine addict. Today’s Republican voters are motivated in great part by the desire to see violence directed against those more vulnerable than themselves. It is autocracy itself they desire, not any particular policy.

This bloodlust is the consequence of the avarice and narcissism that neoliberal capitalism fostered in so many people and then failed to fulfill. Those who have become accustomed to powerlessness and passivity, who urgently desire revenge but do not understand who is responsible for their situation, will elevate tyrants to power for the vicarious thrill of seeing someone made to suffer, even if the consequences make life worse for practically everyone. Doubtless some of them would change sides if they saw a real opportunity to improve their lives, but that would require much more than a promise to go back to the Biden era.

If the defenders of democracy cannot offer anything more inspiring than a return to the previous state of affairs—the one that caused this catastrophe in the first place—they will lose, and they will deserve to lose. It will take a more ambitious and far-reaching vision to defeat oligarchy.


Become an Anarchist or Forever Hold Your Peace

In 2020, the most powerful uprising in living memory took place in the United States. Millions of people filled the streets. They were not galvanized by a timid electoral campaign, nor simply by the footage of police murdering George Floyd, but by the brave actions of ordinary people who stood up to injustice—above all, by the burning of the Third Precinct in Minneapolis. By driving the political discourse in the election year, this uprising not only turned voters away from Donald Trump—it also showed billionaires that Trump would not be able to preserve conditions suitable for business, forcing them to temper their ambitions.

One poll showed Americans supporting the burning of the police precinct by a larger margin than any victorious presidential candidate this century.

In response to the uprising, Joe Biden and other Democrats doubled down on supporting the police. This shows that the Democrats believe that it is impossible to maintain power under capitalism without channeling more and more resources towards repression, tasking the police with keeping an increasingly desperate population under control.

Today, the Republicans are going even further, cultivating support for explicitly patriarchal, racist, xenophobic, and authoritarian politics—in short, for fascism. The implication is that as billionaires accumulate more and more power and the consequences of their rapaciousness trickle down to the rest of us, it will take more than police to keep the population under control: it will also take informal militias, and falsehoods about why some demographics deserve to have more power than everyone else, and probably, in the long run, ethnic cleansing and genocide on a larger scale than we have yet seen.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. invited us to trust that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” But today it is clear that things are not slowly, steadily getting better, neither in the field of civil rights, nor in regards to the natural environment, nor justice, nor governance.


“The function of government is to centralize power and impose domination: to enforce, to punish, to administer. Politicians preside over an economy more oppressive and invasive than any dictatorship could be by itself.”

The state is not the solution to these problems. It is a protection racket that—until recently—purported to solve our problems in order to lull us into dependence (“I alone can fix it”!) while suppressing our ability to meet our needs without it. Now, under Trump and Musk in the United States and rulers like Javier Milei elsewhere, there is no longer any pretense that the state exists to do anything besides oppress people and defend the profits of the rich. All this time, the state has been accumulating the means—both technological and social—that are required to force this new reality on us, and now the tyrants are intent on using them.

Yet in doing so, Elon Musk and Donald Trump are giving millions of people cause to reevaluate their priorities and dedicate their lives to profound social change. The 2020 uprising offered a glimpse of what it looks like for large numbers of people to act on their own initiative, creating a groundswell of resistance that is much greater than the sum of its parts. Our chief error, in 2020, was in imagining that we could simply return to business as usual afterwards, when in fact our only hope is to change the world.

As Trump and Musk gut every aspect of the state that is not about profiteering and repression, the stakes of this moment are coming into focus. There is no more middle ground. If you care about public health, you have to become a revolutionary. If you care about medical research, you have to become a revolutionary. If you care about climate change, about labor conditions, about the well-being of children in warzones, there is nothing else for it—you have to become a revolutionary.

In the movements to come, we must make space for the civil servants Elon Musk has fired, for the scientists and academics whose funding has dried up, for those who once sought social change through electoral politics. They should put all their skills to work in new contexts, experimenting with new forms of resistance and spreading whatever strategies work far and wide. But we should not simply try to rebuild the broken system that brought us to this dire situation. We must build a new vision together along with the means to bring it into being.

Anarchists propose to build our collective capacity to act on a horizontal and decentralized basis, rather than entrusting our agency to leaders. We seek to create a lattice of overlapping participatory and voluntary associations that can meet people’s material and spiritual needs. Rather than hoarding resources for ourselves the way the billionaires do, we seek to abolish all of the mechanisms that impose artificial scarcity, to create commons that benefit everyone. We seek to generate abundance, not profit.

To be an anarchist means to recognize that our freedom and well-being are inextricably bound up with the freedom and well-being of billions like us. It means discarding all the old excuses for remaining subservient to those who only endeavor to enrich themselves at others’ expense. It means becoming fiercely loyal to what is best in ourselves and each other, to our capacity for compassion and cooperation and courage. Across two centuries, anarchists have resisted under monarchies and persisted through dictatorships. Now that liberal democracy and neoliberal capitalism are concluding in a new form of tyranny, a new generation must draw on this long legacy of struggle.

There is no going back to the way things were, to the future that we once anticipated. The old world is in flames around us. Become an anarchist, or forever hold your peace.


Comments

anon (not verified) Fri, 02/21/2025 - 08:16

"He already routinely refuses to pay rent and other bills!"

-- literally anarchists

lmao ok, clownthinc.

anon (not verified) Sun, 02/23/2025 - 09:16

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Yes, anarchists should be more supportive of self-entitled Neonazi billionaires that parasite public assets paid by hard-working citizens. That's the new anarcho-squatting, don't you get it!? Become a billionaire, then buy the police and the GOP and have it your way with "the system". Freeeduuum!

anon (not verified) Fri, 02/21/2025 - 11:27

Since John Brown is mentioned here and since I was listening to an Uncivilized podcast yesterday where Brown and Turner were mentioned. I fear that the 'free' (there's always a cost) John Brown Museum in Osawatomie, KS and the 1911 John Brown statue in KC will be destroyed. I agree with the aversion to statues, property, and museums, but since they already exist these structures are quite remarkable.

The statue has been damaged in the recent past by white supremacists and the museum is visited and threatened by the same. I realize there are more important things to worry about today but just wanted to fyi: If you have any desire to see these things, I encourage you to go now while you still can.

Glad you mentioned King's "arc of justice" - so aggravating when people quote that phrase because with climate catastrophe there is no long arc. been posing that to people for what seems like forever.

anon (not verified) Fri, 02/21/2025 - 17:26

The dude won an election by a landslide. Won all major swing states AND the popular vote. This is clearly what an overwhelming majority of Americans want. You can be opposed to democracy if you wish, and front your critique from there, but to say that he initiated a "hostile takeover" of government evokes the imagery of taking office by force of arms. It's the kind of language we use to describe insurrection or military coups.. not orderly and normal democratic elections..

There are other lies of omission peppered throughout this text, but I really wanted to point out this one part in particular to highlight that it's this kind of sensationalist hyperbolic lib hysteria that makes crimethinc look like totally ridiculous yellow journalist dogshit

anon (not verified) Fri, 02/21/2025 - 21:54

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Do you really think he "won" and it wasn't the tech billionaire who owned and controlled the systems that handled all the data containing the "votes"? Do you really?

The entire reason that liberals weren't challenging the election results is because other than being complicit and seeing it as a fundraising opportunity, they couldn't have the american voting population not believing in "free and fair" elections. If the truth of a rigged election by the world's richest man / tech billionaire surfaced then nobody would trust any election ever again.

The whole damn thing was rigged, like every election before, but on an even more absurd scale, by a fucking tech billionaire whose tech they used.

So you're either (a) a supporter of the "win", or (b) a fool that believes it was legitimate, or (c) both. Just don't pretend you're an anarchist.

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 00:25

In reply to by anon (not verified)

BWAHAHA good lord, the cope

my sibling in anarchy, democracy has always been a mirage used to control the masses. the carrot and the stick. give us more, daddy! we just need moar!!1!

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 12:47

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Did you miss the part where it says: "The whole damn thing was rigged, like every election before ..." while goosestepping around your basement and trying to come up with a tOtally kewl retort that is tOtally not at all a reading comprehension fail? Get fucked, bootlicker.

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 13:18

In reply to by anon (not verified)

You leftists really make this shit easy for the nazis. Democracy is the rigger. Why do you give a fuck about its downfall? If only we could get you "anarchists" off your asses to do anarchism as passionately as you hop up in defense of the State.

Every. Damn. Time.

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 13:41

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Take a breath and read it again, slowly. There is never one instance in the comment that is getting you all worked up where it implies that democracy is anything desired. Say it with me: "democracy isn't what is being called into question here" but rather dumbass trolls posting on an anarchist website implying that the election results were anything other than a rigged show put on by the world's richest man that is a tech billionaire and whose technology the elections used. Say it again: democracy isn't the issue. Democracy and anarchy are not compatible. Nobody here is trying to claim democracy can be fair, the point is that this election was rigged and it's and idiotic authoritarian smokescreen to claim otherwise.
Now go chop some wood.

lumpy (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 13:41

In reply to by anon (not verified)

you know that's not what they're saying but to answer your bullshit bad faith question...

because we've read a history book or two and we know what comes next

Durruti's Ghost (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 16:39

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

It’s not bad faith, yo. Goddamn. Like, wrap your brain around the fact that some of us reject leftism as vehemently as nazism. Your instance to silence that voice says a lot.

And no, you read a history book. Because the lesson of what happens when anarchists join popular fronts in defense of the government and mainstream society is that we are shook troops who are concisely and mercilessly massacred when our usefulness has run out our we become too much of a threat to State power.

CalvinSmith (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 17:01

In reply to by Durruti's Ghost (not verified)

for joy every time the republican wins so that he can keep arguing with no-wing anarchists on here. If he does, that's pretty clever. Cheap entertainment.

In all seriousness, by abstaining from the USA election again, I missed a great opportunity to try to argue that Donald Trump will crash the system. If you buy into anything at all he says, you would think he was trying.

lumpy (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 17:14

In reply to by Durruti's Ghost (not verified)

it's like ... not even pretending to be reading what they write ... levels of bad faith

OR you're a fukin dimwit and can't comprehend what's written on the screen

which would you prefer?

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 12:51

In reply to by anon (not verified)

So you're admitting to poor reading comprehension and retardation? Projection much?

As an anarchist I don't give a fuck about elections, republicans or democrats. But I also really don't give a fuck about pretending things to be true when they certainly are not.

This is basic anarchy 101 shit, bruh. Oh but you would know nothing about anarchy because you're not one. How pathetic that you spend all your time on an anarchist site anyway. OooOooh nOooo!

TypoBot (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 13:57

In reply to by anon (not verified)

...because you're not *an anarchist.

Even typo correction is more important than your poor reading comprehension, democracy, AND election. It's VERY important, but not really. OooOooh!

anon (not verified) Sat, 03/01/2025 - 18:59

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Trump won 77,284,118 votes, or 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president. That is hardly a "landslide" it was fewer votes then Biden won in 2020. And so many Americans have been disenfranchised that the voting public makes up an even greater minority of the "American public" than is immediately evident. Those who aren't represented include the youth, ex-felons, a great many people who are elderly, sick or disabled, and those erroneously purged from voter rolls by political machines. So enough of the "he was elected by a landslide" BS. He does NOT have a fucking mandate from anyone but a minority of Americans and a majority of international billionaires.

anon (not verified) Fri, 02/21/2025 - 21:28

"hostile take over" doesn't mean the election, but the re-vamping/undoing of various govt institutions. you seem to be giving a bad faith reading to this piece, and i am no crimethinc lover. 

also your apparent faith in the democratic process, and your assumption that everything was fair and above board doesn't speak well for your critical thinking. don't have to agree with crimethinc or any given politician to think that both parties have funky shit going on. 

funky in a bad way, i mean.

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 00:30

In reply to by anon (not verified)

it's not a takeover then. moreso an autocannibalization in the midst of a decadent social order. but you're correct, the hostility is there

unfortunately, folks like anon 21:59 who will show up in defense of democracy are numerous

lumpy (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 08:49

In reply to by anon (not verified)

it's both. you can all be right on this one

steve bannon has been crowing for years already about the "democracy hack" that's been in play since at least the 2016 election. they used the meta-data to up the game of those rigging and buying elections for the far right, it's what chris wiley's book was about

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Wylie

but also, obviously anarchists should never have been sincere believers in the "democracy" of a capitalist colonial state... i mean, hopefully nobody needs me to explain why that costs you your @ card automatically because you don't understand the fundamentals of your own political perspective, beyond embarrassing if you're that lost. only exception would be if you're still learning, which is fine

ANYways, it's also still worth noticing when a chunk of the ruling class of tech billionaires is behaving like they're looting a ship that's on fire and sinking. that's not about belief in democracy at all, it's more about asking yourself what they know that you don't, like why are they acting like there's only a few years left on the clock for the whole damned game? hmm?

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 09:28

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

Get in while the getting's good! This is prime time for profitable non-accountability and the pendulum will (probably?) swing back the other way in some halfhearted form. which really just means their profits are minorly cutt. For some, I'm sure "power" is interchangeable with "profit" in this example, but that Venn diagram is often a circle

lumpy (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 13:16

In reply to by anon (not verified)

... "get in"? who do you imagine you're speaking to right now?

are you hallucinating a bunch of little crypto-goblin sociopaths nodding along to your sage advice or something? you sound like a bot that shills pump and dump schemes lol

Anononon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 04:23

"We seek to create a lattice of overlapping participatory and voluntary associations that can meet people’s material and spiritual needs."
Sure, revolutionary struggle is important. However, the significant amount of wreckers and wreckerism should give anyone with boundaries and a sense of self preservation pause about intertwining themselves with the various anarchist communities. Being interdependent with people that could and would turn on you in a heartbeat is a mistake. But yeah, resist and stuff, just know you can't trust anarchist community.

anon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 07:33

In reply to by Anononon (not verified)

in the u.s. (at least) you can't trust community. no generalized group of people will have your back in all circumstances. you making this a statement about anarchists is misleading. 

Anononon (not verified) Sat, 02/22/2025 - 10:50

In reply to by anon (not verified)

This article urges people to form community and entwined relationships with anarchists as a form of resistance. My statement is a response to the article and its assertion. It's not a matter of people having your back or not, it's a matter of wreckers and their pawns actively trying to destroy people they are enmeshed with.

lumpy (not verified) Sun, 02/23/2025 - 09:08

In reply to by Anononon (not verified)

tend to agree with you but i'm curious about this "wreckers and their pawns" concept of yours

are we talking cult leaders? people with PTSD who lash out? gov't agents?

all of the above?

anon (not verified) Sun, 02/23/2025 - 19:14

In reply to by Anononon (not verified)

"wreckers and their pawns" are endemic to the post-war American society. Like what Vonnegut once wrote, along the lines of there's never been in history such a case of the poor shaming and antagonizing themselves and each other, where up to a certain point, not far back, the poor used to develop cultures edifying or celebrating of their collective fates. That's where folk music, Blues and Rap came from, when rich people's music was usually a snorefest. Save, perhaps, Louis XIV's Court music composers.

Today you'll see working-class types rage-posting pics of homeless people sleeping on subway benches, but that's not talking about the countless dirty wars between tenants, neighbors, co-workers... That's pathetic. I wonder if even billionaires got as much contempt toward the "lower classes", save only normal carelessness. There's so much "horizontal" hatred, that is but the mirror image of a culture of shame.

The drive to enhance our personal material conditions through collaboration within society is going in the opposite direction to building community. At least if it isn't mutually-shared with equity.

anon (not verified) Mon, 02/24/2025 - 08:27

“tldr. I mean, uh, we mean, how do these people expect to use the next new generation’s untapped teen angst to reproduce cliche after cliche when they use all those big mean words? …cringe!”
- MisdemeanorThoughtm Never-Needing-To-Be-Employed Collective

CalvinSmith (not verified) Mon, 02/24/2025 - 12:50

Hyperbole about NK's superiority to the US was erased, but im still allowed to insult lumpy. I guess he deserves it...

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
d
e
H
n
C
z
d
E
Enter the code without spaces.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.