Say “aye” or yes" if you are in favour defederation.
Say “nay” or “no” if you are against defederation.
Only users who have a sh.itjust.works account can vote. Fresh accounts won’t be counted.
Say “aye” or yes" if you are in favour defederation.
Say “nay” or “no” if you are against defederation.
Only users who have a sh.itjust.works account can vote. Fresh accounts won’t be counted.
Well, here are a few that are controversial with the extreme left:
Freedom of speech and freedom of religion are good things. While I can’t ask the state to let itself be overthrown by ignoring ideological/religious/personality-cult calls to revolt, I don’t want a narrowly defined state ideology used as a tool of court politics like Iran or the USSR.
When collective rights conflict with individual rights, I’m mostly in favor of individual rights. If a local group pops up that takes a married woman’s property and gives it to her husband, bans divorce, and lets husbands beat their wives, I want my government to use laws mandating equality against them instead of give them communal autonomy. I don’t care what color their skin is or what language they speak.
There is no good reason to believe that true communism will ever work for a group bigger than 10,000 people. I’m being generous because I’m not certain it has worked for 3,000. Also, true communism will be very hard to sustain in a commune that reproduces itself by birth to current members if the children have anywhere else to go. Communes that reproduce by attracting new members instead of by birth to current members, a.k.a. monasteries, can sustain communism indefinitely. (Buddhist monasteries have had very large populations, but it’s rarely clear at a glance whether the monastery feeds the monks or if they have to work for their own food.)
The more a group trumpets “diversity” and “tolerance”, the less tolerance they have for diversity of thought and view. They’re overjoyed to recruit any color or shape of body so long as the mind inside toes the party line.
Anarchy (actual lack of a state) is the best friend patriarchy could want. A band of brothers makes a powerful coalition to rob and kill others, or on the flipside to protect their blood relatives. That puts a lot of power into the hands of grandfathers who have a posse of grandsons to fight for the family and can refuse to defend you if you don’t obey.
Communist rule has been excellent for education, basic health care, and redistributing the wealth present when the Communists were elected. But it’s been poor for increasing wealth.
Where does hexbear oppose freedom of religion? And do you really want freedom of nazi speech?
The individual rights hexbear opposes are landlording and bosses owning the means of production, not this weird shit you brought up in the rest of the bullet. I actually have no idea what you’re talking about. Neither anarchists nor MLs want that.
Cuba is pretty functional despite being heavily sanctioned — they developed their own COVID vaccines — but you’re talking about actual communes. Despite the name, when people talk about “communism” they don’t usually mean actual communes.
“toeing the party line” — you guys literally do the same thing, shunning anyone who thinks like hexbear does.
I’m not an anarchist, but anarchists don’t want the wild west. Go read what serious anarchists actually want.
Again, communist nations like Cuba are heavily sanctioned, that is why they are poor.
I think this comment is pretty illuminating, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. A lot of you just fundamentally do not know what hexbears think or why, and you don’t really share a common political language and set of concepts to talk in, and you end up filling in the gaps with assumptions.