"negative peace "

toxic positivity/ negative peace aside, I would imagine that not being represented within the established political hegemony could foster some negative emotional response.

deleted by creator

“…frustrated at Britain’s attempts to help Ireland during the Irish famine…”

lol. was this written by an English aristocrat?

what is generational wealth?

incredibly simplistic perspective, and intellectually dishonest; we traded monarchy for a dictatorship of the capital owning class.

scrub the influencer brainworms from your gray matter for one moment and produce a critical thought–

engagement with what, exactly?

the signal which carries no message is white noise.

meaningless engagement is distraction, wasted bandwidth.

an emoji is not a meaningful improvement to the material condition of the working class, or a threat to the status quo. It’s not even relevant to the abolition of work.

thank goodness internet tough guys exist to defend limp-dick slacktivism.

hashtag resist

like and subscribe 👍

petitioning for a fucking emoji epitomizes the criticism that social media is a vehicle for diverting action into impotent dialogue.

since we’re on the subject

retributive violence against individual actors is not the same as dismantling oppressive systems, and should not eclipse the important work of creating resilient communities and networks of mutual aid to replace those heirarchies.

lhd suggests otherwise, yank.

how? abolish the standing beaurocratic heirarchy which perpetuates and expends its own power and the interest of the ruling class by inflicting violence on the working class. what that looks like depends on how the people who make up a community choose to govern themselves.

realistically I don’t expect a revolution of the proletariat to take place, so I promote the institution of robust mutual aid networks, radical solidarity (organized labor, intersectional liberatory philosophy), and resilient autonomous communities, to compete with the prevailing system of power.

attempts at anarchist-adjacent organizing have existed, and continue to in some communities, though of course execution varies, as does identity.

the USSR was not an attempt towards a stateless society, being a state-capitalist imperialist kleptocracy.

common ownership and control of the means of production in a classless moneyless stateless society governed via collective mutual determination or similar horizontal system of power.

communism is when ussr

capitalism has always carried the implied threat of starvation for those unable or unwilling to labor in order to enrich the capital owning class.

this sort of vapid whitewashing/revisionism is just ‘maga’ for neoliberals, and is entirely devoid of substance.

show me a period of prosperity under capitalism and I’ll show you a marginalized population subjugated.

enlightened centrism, which is just ‘fellow kids’-ing perpetuating the current status quo, which is just capitalist democracy, which is just right-wing, which is authoritarian. that is when it’s not poorly concealed reactionary entryism.

based and sustainability-pilled

counterpoint;

eat my entire ass, red fash.

the actual criticism by those on the left is that private ownership of the means of production necessitates an inequitable heirarchical relationship between an ownership class and the working class.

this relationship is enforced by the state, which is essentially an abstraction of capital, by inflicting violence in order to protect the interest of the capital owning class.

neoliberalism is conservative in that it functions to conserve this status quo, offering incremental material improvement as a social pressure-release valve, but liberal democracy can not deliver liberation to the working class because of its primary function of enforcing private capital.

most liberals don’t consider neoliberalism conservative because the coloqial usage in US contemporary politics is referring to the reactionary position of the christo-fascist right.

good luck

ps: you may be an anarchist