You must log in or register to comment.
Everyone who thinks this seems to forget that they have to live through the collapse of civilization. It’s not gonna be pleasant.
Accelerationists aren’t exactly deep thinkers who understand entropy.
Thanks for speaking on our behalf, but I think most accelerationists know a societal collapse has consequences. We’re just OK with suffering for 50 years so that future generations can prosper
We’re just OK with suffering for 50 years so that future generations can prosper
Correction: You’re OK with inflicting widespread suffering and death, especially on the most vulnerable, for the faith-based belief that, contrary to historical evidence, it will result in a society more aligned with your ideological utopia.
In the same vein, I appreciate your making that decision on behalf of me, my wife, and kids.
suffering for 50 years
In Europe, feudalism lasted 600 years last time, and only ended because a plague loosened up the nobility’s power over peasants. Vestiges of that old system endured in some parts of Europe for another 200 years after that, too.
In some neofeudalist future, where the lords and nobles have access to incredibly invasive technology for monitoring the thoughts and actions of all people, for controlling even more links in the chain of the production of food or tools or weapons, that power structure may turn out to be even more entrenched than the last time around. It’s not far fetched to say that the next time strictly inherited class comes around, it becomes a permanent feature of all societies that follow.
To add, the Junkers in Germany were the party of the old aristocrats. The last Junker to do anything of note was Von Hindenburg, who gave Hitler the chancellorship. Been completely irrelevant on both ends of Germany ever since.
You presented no signs of deep. You’re relying on logical fallacies like Survivorship bias, where you assume society will re-emerge. There is no logical reason that would force societal collapse to follow previous patterns.
You’re okay with 50 years of widespread suffering to maybe have any society. But not okay with paying increased monthly taxes to guarantee a stable society.
The Greek were right, democracy doesn’t work.
Democracy does work, but it needs to be maintained.
Democracy only works with an informed electorate.
Who said I’m against increased taxes, wut
Ofc liberals can win any argument when they get to make up what the opposing side thinks
You’re okay with more taxes, but you’re an accelerationist…
What does accelerationism mean to you? And what benefits do you believe society gains from this?
P.S. For the sake of transparency, I’m not liberal; but you can call me whatever you like.
FYI, there are accelerationists on both sides. The ones on the left are just unwitting allies of those on the right because their ideology is founded upon the belief that, contrary to all historical data, pushing society to a more miserable place will magically result in widespread class consciousness and a workers’ revolution.
This is something that has never happened in any major way in recorded human history and never because of intentional suffering. Generally, the historical results have been genocide and/or centuries of oppression.
I’ve noticed that many of these cruel and reactionary ideologies are not based in any historical data nor science. This is used to be called hysteria.
They still haven’t answered either; so I can only assume they did not realize the contradiction between accelerationism and paying more taxes. Sad times we live in.
P.S. For the sake of transparency, I’m not liberal; but you can call me whatever you like.
I’ve said this before to one of these types and then they started calling me a nazi. They’re unhinged evil morons.
Taxes need a functioning society so a government can function to collect them.
Ahh, the ‘hooray for me and to hell with everyone else!’ mentality. Always the sign of a stable, sensible person.
Why did you think there’s a “hooray for me” here?
Because you think you’ll ’endure the pain’ and then get to ‘build a better system’.
But better odds are you’ll just die early on, and the system you dream of will never come to pass. You have gambling brain. ‘We’ll totally win next time! Just got to start over one more time!’
It’s just so stupid.
Nah, you’re just a fucking idiot.
Always atart with yourself first.
It reminds me too much of these moments in RTS games, or Sim City, that time you got hit hard and you have to rebuild, but don’t have resources to build, but to get more resources you need to build infrastructure. It can take so long to get out of that rut, and that’s of you don’t get hit by another calamity.
Sometimes I think any policy maker should play a game of old school Sim City 2000 and we can all see how they do before we vote for them.
The problem is realism. Sim City would teach you that a village of 150 people will absolutely grow into a thriving city because that’s the simple premise of the game - it’s a citybuilder - but that’s not how real life works. They could play increasingly more complex simulation games like Democracy 3, and it would still fail to be a realistic look at the complexities of modern society.
I’d also argue the opposite lesson is usually learned from games, because most gamers don’t play on “hardcore” mode - and those that do play hardcore can still always reroll or /ff to start another game or even just touch grass and stop playing the game. Playing God doesn’t reinforce empathy.
Good policy needs to balance a clinical approach against empathetic concerns. My advice to policy makers would be reading books like “Cities and the Wealth of Nations” by Jane Jacobs and learning from modern experts and non-profit advocates like Strong Towns. They should be looking to peers for success stories to emulate and for failures to avoid.
Yeah, Sim City is not that realistic, but what some politicians belt out is so wrong they wouldn´t even get them out of a city builder start area.
Everyone is so used to consuming news not necessarily as entertainment but as background hum or as ammunition to confirm their ideology or dispel another. This isn’t wrong per se, but I think the consequence of constant barrage of war, disaster, tragedy, corporate abuse, political abuse at home and abroad desensitizes people to the possibility that these things can happen to them tomorrow right outside their front door.
They’re so used to the idea that theoretically the government has always been able to do whatever it wants to you they don’t realize how viscerally real it is that now they can do it without making excuses or cover ups, or under any pretense, and not only will no one do anything but millions will support the regime while you’re black bagged without due process. Authoritarian violence in America was always bad, but at least there had to be an excuse, a judicial system set up to defend cops who lie and say they felt threatened. Soon they will be brazen enough to snatch you up without pretense of a crime, without anyone knowing and without needing to explain themselves
They don’t realize how viscerally bad it will be for them when war breaks out no matter which side of that war they are on. Accelerationists are fucking clowns and they are not prepared for the world they’ve been jerking off to.
Authoritarian violence in America was always bad, but at least there had to be an excuse, a judicial system set up to defend cops who lie and say they felt threatened.
Hah! No, it’s always been like that. Particularly against minorities.
Right, and they are tried in an unfair judicial system and sent to American prison. This is bad, but not sending people to El Salvador without trial to die levels of bad. These things aren’t equal and to imply it is is disingenuous
Right, and they are tried
I’m gonna stop you right there.
You think they had trials for the minorities they grabbed off the streets? Maybe in New England or California or something, but in Texas if you’re a Black man in 1952 and a cop decides he doesn’t like you, you are a dead man walking.
I think - and I mean no offense - you might be looking at things from a sheltered point of view. Many of the things you’re seeing now seem crazy because a) they stopped happening as much in the 90s and early 2000s, and b) it’s much more visible now it’s happening again.
No spoilers, I know, but have you watched the news recently?
No, I know. Like I said, it’s not going to be pleasant.
It’s already not pleasant, but it’s going to not be, too.
So let’s make the best out of it, don’t you think?
How?
Building mutual aid networks for the anarcho communist revolution of cause
What are the core tenants of Anarcho-Communism from your perspective? From my understanding, it doesn’t seem like a system that addresses human greed properly.
It does by actively discouraging it just like capitalism discourages empathy
Hugs?
People don’t understand that a power vacuum attracts the power hungry that will do whatever it takes to get it.
Anarchists (lib left) aren’t typically waiting for society to collapse. We typically focus on building the world we want to see now in order to make the collapsing society unnecessary to provide out material needs. You know, the whole mutual aide and community organizing bit.
On that note, Authoitarian right are not waiting either. They are actively taking power over and from others.
There are accelerationists in every political sphere
Anprim would like a word
Good luck creating a social contract based on vibes only.
I don’t know what that means, but I don’t think you do either.
“Mutual aid is an organizational model where voluntary, collaborative exchanges of resources and services for common benefit take place amongst community members to overcome social, economic, and political barriers to meeting common needs.”
Legal systems are far more effective at guiding human behavior than hoping for the voluntary good will of people’s hearts.
So your argument is that the only way to get people to live together is under the constant threat of violence from the state?
History seems to support that coercion is necessary to stop the most egregious abuses by bad actors. Tell us how we would prevent someone like Trump who lacks any concern for anyone else from cheating and robbing everyone without some sort of deterrent using force.
Not the guy you were talking to, but in my opinion, yes
I like the idea of anarchism, but I see it as more of an ideal world view than an actual stable reality.
To support this, every group member of every group must almost unanimously support the concept. When resources or safety in an area become scarce, it’s easy for some groups to evolve back into another power structure to take care of their own people.
It’s really difficult for me to imagine everybody on this planet getting along with this. But I’m certainly interested in other viewpoints.
Honestly ALL systems are more of an ideal world than a stable reality. So singling out anarchism because it too is idealistic isn’t really much of an argument against it.
Well, in many other systems you have an overarching ruling layer that sets laws and is able to enforce them from a top level.
That is precisely the reason why those systems can be relatively stable. As you just have a very large group of people following the same set of rules.
I’d rather live under a state with a secure monopoly on violence than in a stateless chaos of violence. Anarchy isn’t a form of government. It’s simply the period before a group uses violence to establish itself as the government.
Let me ask you, would you rather deal with a cop or a warlord?
You do not understand anarchism in the slightest. You are imagining some Hobbsian hellscape out of a disaster movie, which is completely counter to human nature.
This is the definition I am basing my perspective on.
“the organization of society on the basis of voluntary cooperation, without political institutions or hierarchical government; anarchism.”
Also human nature has created plenty of hellscapes in the past. Don’t think it can’t happen again.
Is that what you think mutual aid is?
Feel free to give your own take.
It’s not all or nothing, another way to think of it is:
How bad do things have to get for there to be an actual shift to making things better?
I would love to make things better one step at a time, I think our system is a great starting point.
But I ask myself the above question everytime things seem to be headed downward.
Events like Luigi is what I mean by things getting bad enough for something to push back.
Why do you think the shift will be towards something better, and not towards something worse?
How bad do things have to get for there to be an actual shift to making things better?
That is kind of inherent in the question. If things get worse then they aren’t getting better yet.
Things are getting worse. I’m not at all an accelerationist, but I think it goes without saying that things are getting worse and will continue to do so.
Maybe I’m an optimist, but I do think things will get better eventually, and it seems like a good question what that would look like.
ah, exactly what i missed from reddit: ableist wojak PCM nonsense. lovely.
Very first reaction I had and thankful I wasn’t the only one…
Whats pcm?
Political Compass Memes, it was a subreddit that sucked.
Specifically because it’s absolutely infested with Nazis.
Which is unfortunate, because using 2 dimensions to describe political ideology is much more informative than using just one (left VS right).
Not really, because somehow a libertarian society where you can own slaves is less “authoritarian” than a socialist society where everyone is fed, housed, because the poor capitalists don’t get the power to exploit people.
Meanwhile a primitive anarchist commune with so little development of the means of production, a person’s only options are to fill a very specific role in society or starve becomes free again.
The term “authoritarian” is not useful for describing how much agency people in a society have over their own lives.
Not really, because somehow a libertarian society where you can own slaves is less “authoritarian” than a socialist society where everyone is fed, housed, because the poor capitalists don’t get the power to exploit people.
I’ve never heard anyone argue that before, and it’s not shown on the compass itself. Do you have any evidence to back that up?
Vast government structures that encompass the lives of hundreds of millions of people can’t be put on a single page. We shouldn’t focus on political identity. We should focus on what works.
Are you saying it’s better to use one dimension to describe political ideology than 2 dimensions? Because that’s all I’m comparing. I’m not saying the political compass is perfect, I’m saying it’s better than “left VS right.”
I’m saying human systems and the ideas surrounding them can’t be quantified by a single graph.
There was a short time it wasn’t, and it was pretty hilarious ngl, but you have to have that kind of humor.
Yeah, it’s a perfect example of the allegory of the Nazi bar.
I hadn’t seen this specific story, it’s very accurate from what I’ve seen over the years.
4chan, basically any online game chat room, blizzard in particular holy shit, I remember playing SC1 and WC3 online and for the most part everyone was normal, go to any Blizz game public chat now and it’s full of trump/nazi spammers. Crazy.
Something I’ve been thinking about since watching the comedian part of the Trumps rally right before he got elected the 2nd time… The jokes made me laugh, but not in a “haha he’s so right! Puerto Ricans are trash!” it was in a “wow! anyone who believes that is such an idiot!” similarly I very much enjoy edgy humor like Southpark or a smaller project like DBZ Abridged, TO ME the joke is in the ridiculousness that anyone would say/act/behave that way, but it absolutely invites in the people who unironically agree with it.
It’s unfortunate to say the least.
It’s crazy what a great example 4chan is of this. Used to be 99 dudes laughing and playing along with some weird idiot and then suddenly it’s 99 weird idiots. Really what turned me to sanitization of spaces.
Thanks. And while we’re at it: what’s wojak?
The drawn white dude.
I’m sorry I hurt the fee fees of people who want to destroy society and drag everyone into a hellish nightmare by calling them dumb.
What’s up with this centrist nonsense? It’s a good thing to want to change the existing power structures actually.
I only see mockery of accelerationists, which I broadly support. Its 10 times easier to reform an existing government that to destroy and build a good one from scratch.
To be fair, the only reason I sound like an accelerationist, is because the building is clearly on fire right now and I’m presuming its structural at this point. So yeah, while I wish it didn’t get to this point, it feels likely that we will have to rebuild things from the ground up.
life hack: begin building new social structures before the current ones collapse
Accelerationists HATE him for this one weird trick, click to read more
You sound like an accelerationist because you think things are unsalvageable? Go figure.
While I agree in theory, it assumes the existing system has rational or somewhat rational actors.
If your system is full of counter productive individuals, it might be easier to start fresh.
This works better with groups and companies, entire countries, not so much.
Not when the existing government is built to concentrate and protect current property relations. Sure have parallel structures built to replace what exists but don’t reform, revolt.
Difficulty of reform aside, the pain and suffering that will come from societal collapse will be immense. The chance of successfully building a better system out of the crumbled remains is low. I don’t think it’s a great aspiration.
some will die, that is a sacrifice.
Thank you for your wisdom, Lord Farquaad.
You first
Good people dying is bad, always! Even if it’s worth it in the end, we should try to find a way to save lives instead!
Good people are dying now though. When is the cost of drastic change worth the cost of the status quo?
the way to save lives is to change the society that harms billions not prop it up because you lack the imagination to think of something better.
I agree that society is currently immensely flawed and should be changed, I just want minimal deaths on the way. If we can save lives, we should! Some deaths are necessary for change though.
This isn’t happening
Accelerationism is happening towards fascism. This would be a different story if socialism was on the rise with parallel structures in place to rescue us during the collapse
Literally this is not happening nor will happen. Not even close, it blows my mind other leftists think fascism provides opportunity. “Things are going to be great after this is all said and done!” As we’re rounded up and deported to El Salvador
The way to fight fascism is by attacking the system that holds it up not recreating its parent.
It’s literally not built to do that. The government has been hijacked by private interests.
What? Goverment has always existed to protect property rights of the ruling class that’s basic. Anything else it does that appear to do anything else are either really about their real goal or hard fought bargains meant to prevent rebellion that always are viewed as temporary,
Goverment has always existed to protect property rights of the ruling class
Edgy teenager take.
Modern western governments were created with the intent of replacing the old ruling classes with a democratically elected government. Pay attention during history class.
I study actual history and read actual history books that critically examine history through various lens from Marxist, de-colonial and other authors and that does not line up with the middle school propaganda you were feed sorry. Democracy at least at first for only property owning white men because the merchants and rich capitalists got rich and powerful enough that the aristocracy was an enemy of theirs and no longer useful to hold real power. These voting rights slowly expanded in order to placate rebellious populations or gain supporters when necessary first all white men, then women on and on while never forgetting and always co-opting “democracy” to maintain their power.
actual history
Lol
but where are the parallel structures
immediately attacked by the ruling elite when it starts to form
Not if it means creating a hellscape and rolling the dice hoping it works out as you let a fascist win an election.
Such things are possible without the collapse of society.
Ok but we’ve only been successful at collapsing society so far, not in the reform department
Personally im a Anarcho-Syndicalist so imo the system can be used. We can use economic sabotage, general strikes, and eventually take over the economy rather than burning it all down.
anarchy-syndicalist have always supported revolution and the complete overthrown of hierarchies its never been about slow incremental change within existing power structures.
Ok that was just poorly worded, what I meant to say is that theres no point in burning it all down without a plan. The seeds of revolution are planted before it begins.
This is a false dichotomy. You have to have a viable counter structure already built otherwise you are just making shit worse and hoping fascists don’t take over.
Letting shit just collapse on purpose also will just foster resentment in like 2/3rds of the population toward people who let it happen or encouraged it to happen. Which seems to be MLs and leftwing foreign policy activists, at least here on Lemmy. I’m not going to join hands with someone that played an active or passive role in potentially ruining my life and my loved one’s lives even if they’re ideologically very similar otherwise.
Spite becomes more powerful than a desire for positive change in large groups of angry people.
Ehh it’s about building a powerful international worker syndicate that can replace the state as painlessly as possible. So you’re technically right, but your comment is misleading in the context of the one you responded to.
I’m really glad I’m in the lower left because that’s my favorite of the faces.
It’s from all that soy milk
If a house is 4 million dollars and you work as an uber driver or cashier you may have a different opinion that everything is good. All this current world order has done is monetize everything with debt, a big wall of debt that bids up the price of inelastic goods, as the rich borrow as much as possible to write off their cheap debt using their inflated collateral while never liquidating a penny of their assets.
Then when their mansion burns down due to building in a risky area or the bank that lends all this debt overextends then the government bails them out, as peoples paychecks are inflated away and they are denied pay raises due to the bad economy.
But I’m one of these smooth brains.
If you want society to collapse then yes you are a smooth brain.
Things can always be worse. And they wont only get worse for you, so if you are ok dragging everyone down into hell with you, you aren’t just dumb, you are evil.
Are ride-hail drivers better off when cars become astronomically more expensive and rare, and are cashiers better off when stores are closing?
Revolution is for those who think they have nothing to lose - or think that they cannot lose. Someone with a “bad” job is ironically still much further from supporting widespread upheaval than a mansion-dweller who thinks they’re untouchable.
I suspect that it’s a mental error to imagine that there’s one ideal ideology to start with.
For example, I think the founding fathers of America envisioned that the federal government would be smaller than the state governments. It’s not completely insane to imagine supporting true libertarians for a federal government and a progressive left wing party for a state government.
But people aren’t that mentally flexible. If they vote right wing for federal government, they will never vote left wing for state government. And so, despite the fact that capitalism can solve certain problems quite efficiently, the fact that it’s utterly unsuited to solve our most common problems like making sure people have basic essentials means that libertarianism is a bit of a dead end, unless people can actually learn to think flexibly.
This is one of the basic reasons why Political Compass Memes is such a bad idea. It encourages people to lock in their political identity, rather than remain flexible, and centrism isn’t the answer, either. We should be trying to use the right tool for the right job.
This is one of the basic reasons why Political Compass Memes is such a bad idea.
No kidding. Not only do people fall on different parts of that two dimensional map depending on context (e.g. different positions on how much government support there should be for the arts versus for the sciences, how much government should regulate guns versus automobiles, etc.), but elevating these two axes above all the other unseen dimensions (ideological purity versus pragmatic compromise or versus consensus seeking, at what point process should yield to substance, the extent to which our institutions should have inertia that resists change, etc.), which causes people to oversimplify political issues into just those two dimensions.
There are many dimensions, and each problem may call for a different solution that would fall into a different place in any given dimension than the solution to another problem.
Prior to the trump era I voted libertarian federal, dem/left for state govt for this reason. The problem with parties at the moment is there’s not just economic policy tied up into them but cultural and societal aspects that have to be weighed.
Only the top right 3 depend on collapsing society.
Time to get Hari Seldon and prepare a foundation.
Which is a great analogy cause Hari fully lived and died in the collapsing empire. His life never improved due to faster collapse.
So this is what Trump needs Greenland for… He had a plan all along!
Accelerationism is cringe. Do you want to change society? Start doing Prefiguration.
Agreed but the problem with this is that it requires people to be ok with the idea that they are building something that they likely won’t see. It’s a difficult concept for most people to grapple with.
The reason why prefiguration works is because the same praxis also helps to improve one’s life in the here and now.
Eh it’s mainly the upper end of the square that thinks like this.
The difference is, in the bottom left we’ve been aware the Empire is receding and are already creating new structures in the cracks left behind
The other three quadrants are just doing the same old shit
All would say the same thing there. Look at the auth right we have today and the rhetoric of ‘the decadent decay of society and the need to rebuild traditional structures…’
None of the other three have the concept of prefiguration
So I went looking for how you might define the term outside of a pre-ordained order of society and found it somewhat comical that the M/W dictionary’s first example came from the playbook of the poster child for fascism…
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prefiguration
This chilling prefiguration of Hitler’s Final Solution is unmistakable, and Heidegger never explained, let alone apologized for, such horrendous statements. —Gregory Fried, Foreign Affairs, 17 Oct. 2014
That’s doesn’t seem to be the same concept as the anarchist political praxis
They can say the same, but who’s structures would you rather be a part of, given the choice? Horizontally-organized ones that function cooperatively, or the same crap you’ve got right now?
All we gotta do is keep showing people that better ways exist and work.
A lot of people actually like authoritarianism. These people are known as morons.
I don’t argue with the notion that virtually anything is better than we have now. I’d probably fall somewhere leftish but pretty neutral in the auth/lib scale. Basically to say having central authority enough to get things like big science, public infra, and foundational enforcement to the extent of ensuring people play by the agreed rules, but not the elite group dictation of them we have now. The idea of the self moderating and communal policing commune sounds nice, but unrealistic if you have anyone not following that path in or near the society.
I think there are plenty of people of all political ideologies who don’t fall into this intellectual trap. But I took this as criticism of a very real breed of political slacktivist who thinks that their preferred society is so natural or inevitable that it will just happen automatically whenever the current rulers fuck up badly enough.
But this is just fairy tale thinking. New societal structures are built from the bottom up and only replace the existing ones when a state of incredible weakness for one structure coexists with a state of strength for the new structure.
So I kind of agree but there are definitely lib-left people who engage in this type of thinking. It seems like insurrectionary anarchists largely fit in that category, but someone who knows more about their ideology can correct me if I got it wrong.
I consider myself one ;) post-left anarchism in general
We’re not waiting around for a revolution, we’re of a mind to DIY where we can. At least, that’s the idea. Individual actions may vary.
Ah gotcha well if you are genuinely building new structures then you are not the type I’m talking about, so it’s possible my above statement was a mischaracterization. I’ve just run into some people whose plan for replacing the state/capitalism is basically:
Set fire to shit
???
ProfitAnarchist utopiaAnd I just don’t think that has any chance of working whatsoever.
a very real breed of political slacktivist who thinks that their preferred society is so natural or inevitable that it will just happen automatically whenever the current rulers fuck up badly enough.
Excellent description.
The bottom left will also at least get anarchy briefly after any collapse.
Well, an opportunity for it.
Anarchism means “no rulers” not “no rules”. Smaller communities tend to organize cooperatively by nature, but we have to consciously organize so seizure of power is preventable.
Anarchism means “no rulers” not “no rules”.
And if the government collapsed, there would be a brief period where there are no recognized rulers. 🤦♂️
Didn’t the collective Right build Project 2025? What exactly did the LibLeft build?
“Why is 99% of the population such smooth brained extremists?” ; said Nero as he kept on fiddling and turning up the heat
Think of poor lil, Nero he just wants to play his fiddle in peace.
