Ok, bullying doesn’t work if you have “good intentions”
Ok, bullying doesn’t work if you have “good intentions”
Sure, bud.
At the wage-slave bit, I was hoping that anon would try to raise the coworker’s class-consciousness.
It’s not that their opinion is now valuable. We just figured out that Bullying doesn’t work.
Minecraft released its’ alpha in 2009. Terraria came out in 2011.
When Terraria came out, the first reaction some people had was “so, it’s just a minecraft knock-off, but lame, because it’s 2D?”
This endured about a millisecond until people noticed what Teraria was about.
That was before Minecraft’s concepts were adapted in so many games.
The Bible is a mode of thought? O.o Also, again: the bible never claims to prove god.
Also, game theory is a scientific field with provable theorems and theses. Not the same cathegory as a religious text.
Completely different categories, homie. Also, the bible doesn’t even claim to do so.
I’d argue that you don’t really need empirical data for that, since game theory already proves that’s the case.
I once read that adobe also patents the simplest UX improvement, which means that gimp can’t implement good ideas that people are already used to.
“Hatred of law enforcement”?
They are incredibly for “law and order”.
Trying out your bullshit ancap memes all over the place, I see?
Authcoms have failed to realize that anarchism is materialist at least since Stalin.
Great meme bro. Did Hakim pick that out for you?
I read the anarchist rebuttal. It made clear that force and authority are different things. The robbery example would not be authority, but force, according to the anarchist essay. The hexbear author didn’t understand that, or misrepresented the anarchist.
It’s ok, if you didn’t get the video. How is steam a monopolization of power?
Do you know the difference between a free and an imperative mandate? If not, then you don’t understand the anarchist’s critique.
How would you know? You didn’t fucking read it, if you didn’t source the argument of “authority is created through unquestioning obedience”!
I did read both the anarchist’s rebuttal and the hexbear comment (as far as I could stomach). I don’t completely agree with the anarchist’s rebuttal, which is why I didn’t share it. The hexbear bloke didn’t genuinely take the anarchist’s proposal seriously, as I’ve explained several times now.
There are literally those who think self defense is authority but justifiable authority, did you read the “Problems with “On Authority””? No?
That’s not what the essay’s author claims. The essay’s author doesn’t view self-defense as “blind obedience”, hence they don’t think it is authority. Please stop misrepresenting stuff, it’s getting exhausting.
It’s no use arguing, if we both don’t accept each other’s definition of authority. You claim that the anarchist definition is incomplete, which you try to prove with Engels’ definition. I say that no anti-authoritarian uses the same definition as Engels and the cycle continues.
Just admit that you don’t want to consider anarchist perspectives. It would save you a lot of time.
You would be the first tankie to do so.
When yod definetly understand how power works.
Sorry, we might have a different definition of socialism going on here.
To me, socialism is when the workers ownsthe means of subsistence, not when the government does stuff.
Have fun doing your idealist vanguard LARP. Thinking that the “right” people in the government will somehow lead to socialism.
Tell me you’re single without telling me you’re single.