/anarcho/ - Anarchism Board

>If you're a real anarchist why don't you grab a gun and go into the woods

Because anarchism isn't about just freeing yourself. Either we are all free or none of us are, and those who just run into the woods are cowards to there fellow man.

>>8730

The woods are owned by the government. It's not like I could grow a garden out in the woods.

>>8733

On a more non-shitposting note, nothing is really stopping you from growing a garden, even in the woods.

Typically anarchist and people in general prefer to not do things that may take them out of their comfort zone, or do anything that's not widely approved and practiced in their society. At most they'll be willing to listen to anarchist music, read anarchist books and meet with other anarchist to talk about things they won't do much about.

They'll blame everything on rich people, corporations and government, but aren't willing to cooperate and make workplaces and means of production themselves. But they sure like talk and complain all the time about (no) jobs and worker exploitation.

They don't take any initiatives or take upon themselves to build something that requires work, learning new skills, has risk of failure or has risks of disapproving and chaining their believes.

Nothing is really stopping use from building an anarchist society today. Governments, police, corporations, etc., are minor inconvenience compared to the actual work that needs to be done:

- Being responsible, persistent, standing for what you believe - not just protesting and blaming others for everything.

- Going out of your comfort zone, taking risks, taking initiative, failing - not waiting for others or for when the governments stop existing.

Just felt sharing my thoughts and views. My observations based on being in anarchist, communist, anarcho-communist, "anarcho"-capitalist and other similar groups for 4-5 years.

I know that the topic was meant with shitposting in mind, but still felt like sharing my mind.

As a example for the way most anarchists (not-)act, this come to my mind regularly:

Most anarchists are using Windows, a proprietary/non-free operating system, made and owned by a big capitalist cooperation, known for its monopolistic abuses, control, spying, cooperating with governments, and for not doing things for the people in general.

On the other hand you GNU/Linux (such as Trisquel), free operating systems, not dependent on one entity, based on federation, allows you and your community to do whatever you want with the software - you are independent. GNU/Linux is based on the idea free software, which gives you freedom.

But anarchists don't generally use GNU/Linux and free software. It requires work and learning new stuff. Maybe even some thing won't work as you want or at all. In general, it requires you to go out of your comfort zone and to take action. As I wrote, anarchists can't be bothered to take action and responsibility.

Also, even if you aren't paying (directly) for Windows (or Apple's OSX), you are still supporting those corporations. You are making sure their software is being spread around and everyone is more and more dependent on it - rather than helping free software spread.

Bitch I have done more gardening than every disheveled hoor in your family combined, be that your mammi, your grandmammi, or your auntie

I may not be growing yams nigga but thats beside the point

You clearly have no concept of anarchism and are confusing it with primitivism.

Primitivists organizing on the internet is mildly amusing, but you still dont know what the fuck you are talking about.

A "real" anarchist is either trying to build alternative structures to the state, or he/she is actively trying to disrupt and subvert the state, innawoods does not necessarily have to be a part of any of that you mook.

I have a high tolerance for niggerish and I will occasionally partake

But if I ever meet you and you say "cash money" I make no guarantees

>you're not a REAL anarchist because you arent living in the woods

and you think i'm not trying? you think land is fucking free?

> this computer made with parts that I purchased through stores made by companies.

sorry I'l go find a non-profit computer factory

So because food is distributed by a capitalist industry I can't eat?

Fuck off fucking lifestylist.

>>8741

Actually, he is claiming we are lifestylists since we are just choosing anarchist ways of life like GNU/Linux instead of overthrowing hierarchical institutions like the Church, Islamic Caliphate, Capitalists and State.

But I doubt that's helpful. Anarchism can only work if people know the propoganda. Spreading teachings of socialism is the ONLY way.

>>8747

Securting your computer is an illusion, you are being delusional if you think you can secure your PC against anything.

what you need to do is establish plausible deniability if you are surfng for dangerous shit, thats the best you can hope for

(this doesnt mean you shouldnt run a VPN, make sure you arent leaking DNS, or that other shit, and have a network lock)

do ALL that shit, just dont fucking kid yourself homie(especially if you own anything from Intel,lol)

the only way to make sure something is confidential is to whisper it in a niggas ear…

(ok i take that back theres a way to communicate without getting snooped that involves electronics, but it also involves drops and a few other things, and is far too complicated for everyday use, its more of a onetime thing)

A quick quote from one of the brightest minds in Microsoft research, still quite accurate:

>In the real world, threat models are much simpler (see Figure 1). Basically, you’re either dealing with Mossad or not-Mossad. If your adversary is not-Mossad, then you’ll probably be fine if you pick a good password and don’t respond to emails from ChEaPestPAiNPi11s@virus-basket.biz.ru. If your adversary is the Mossad, YOU’RE GONNA DIE AND THERE’S NOTHING THAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. The Mossad is not intimidated by the fact that you employ https://. If the Mossad wants your data, they’re going to use a drone to replace your cellphone with a piece of uranium that’s shaped like a cellphone, and when you die of tumors filled with tumors, they’re going to hold a press conference and say “It wasn’t us” as they wear t-shirts that say “IT WAS DEFINITELY US,” and then they’re going to buy all of your stuff at your estate sale so that they can directly look at the photos of your vacation instead of reading your insipid emails about them. In summary, https:// and two dollars will get you a bus ticket to nowhere. Also, SANTA CLAUS ISN’T REAL. When it rains, it pours.

-Mickens, Thisworldofours.pdf

Another problem I commonly see in real life anarchist communities is that when you have retards like >>8740 >>8750 >>8751, people think it's a really useful to spend time listening to them - it's only fair to hear everyone viewpoint, right? And so all discussions go nowhere and you spend hours-and-hours to decide on the most trivial shit.

He's clearly retard - why are we allowing him to waste our time? Because anarchists are tolerant? There's no point in arguing back to anything at all, he's clearly a full retard. On the web it's easier to ignore this, but it still seems like most threads here basically revolve around arguing with shitposting retards.

>>8753

Install gnutism in your computer, got it.

Wat do next?

>>8754

Back software up on drives, start revolution, give free software out to comrades with computers of any sort (including phones)

>>8757

In other words, your "revolutionary" perspective cannot go beyond gnutism.

I'm inclined to agree with >>8740

>>8752

>hes clearly retard

>theres no point in arguing anything back at all

you are delusional and assmad that I called you on it.

Im not even against linux, I like the ideology behind it and open source is a very good thing.

its not the end all be all by a wide fucking margin however, and you cultists always act like its the answer to all our problems.

Just look at this smeghead below me with the Stallman space marine, it like watching those underwear gnomes in action, just with more question marks:

>>8757

1. Back up software on drives

2. ???

3. ????

4. ?????

5. Revolution!

>>8767

The space marine/hero shit is obviously a joke. But you should care about corporations not giving people choices, and you should at least care that SOMEONE is giving you more options. Thats all it really boils down to, a system that the individual can control and always will.

>>8770

You're just going from a megacorp like Microsoft or Apple to a person who acts like he's literally fucking Jesus and saving you. Stallman and the GNaUtism are a joke on freedom.

>"You're a retard if you don't use one of our 600 OS's that barely run mainstream applications, do basic stuff, etc."

This is basically GNU/Linux. Securing your pc != securing your freedom. I can still use Windows and secure my freedom. How? Block certain things like javascript, HTTPS everywhere, no cookies, HTML5 videos, etc, actually fucking paying attention. Anything you can do on Linux you can do in Windows, and that's a fact, but anything you do in Windows you can't do in Linux. What OS you use doesn't fucking matter, it's how you use them that secures your freedom. If anything, Linux has far less going for it in terms of freedom. Not paying for software isn't freedom, I can fucking torrent if I wanted free.

/rant

>>8737

>even if you aren't paying (directly) for Windows (or Apple's OSX), you are still supporting those corporations

>This is true because I say it is

You act like Illegalism isn't a legitimate way to protest, anon

>>8767

This what you choose to believe, but I haven't even implied that free software is the end all goal. It's not. What I gave was clearly just an example of a general attitude by anarchists I criticized. You are just jumping to stupid conclusions for whatever reason, most probably because it just suits your argument.

>>8771

What about back doors? But I guess you trust Microsoft or any other corporation that controls your computer to not do anything bad, since they never would do such a thing to you, their friend and value you very much. What does HTML5 video that even have to do with security?

And what you can't do on GNU? Run some non-free software, probably controlled by a corporation which doesn't allow you to see it works, or give you the means to repair or improve it, just so people can be dependent on that corporation? Sure, GNU can't do that sometimes and good riddance too.

And it's not even just about security or primarily even. It's about the community having control over the software that they use, not a few corporations who decide everything.

And the Stallman things are just a joke if that's not painfully obvious yet. I like his persistence and insightfulness, and I'm also grateful for what he has done, but GNU isn't his own and I don't idolize him.

And also, you may think you are not paying for Microsoft software, but even if you download everything without cost, you are still paying them. Your government, schools, workplace and other are using it. Because people can't use anything else since they never bother learning anything else. Also Microsoft and Apple are pushing deals with governments and schools, but people who use corporate controlled non-free software won't even notice, since it doesn't even affect their daily routine.

>>8773

Also fuck the open source ideology "ideology", if there's even such a thing. Open source is about using whatever you want and don't bother thinking about it. The "open source" term was coined, so people can talk about free software programs made, but not talk about morals and liberty, just so those programs can be more suitable in a corporate environment, which tramples does ideas.

>>8775

It's better to not pay directly, but Microsoft would still love many people using Windows, if not all payed. They practically give Windows away in some place, just so people can be dependent on it. Because pain to switch later, when all your files are in proprietary formats and you can really use anything else than non-free programs made only for Windows, and you sure love those non-free games too, which also won't run on GNU.

You are going to pay one way or another, they can afford you not paying right now.

And again, you are latching onto the free software example like it's the only issue I wrote about here, and it's not. I also gave an example about anarchists/communists complaining about jobs, but not bothering to cooperate or take responsibility, because it's outside of their comfort zone. And also because of being scared of failure or seeing their believes not working in practice. So they only blame the government or corporations for ALL their trouble, and not really do anything more that just complaining.

>>8776

>And it's not even just about security or primarily even. It's about the community having control over the software that they use, not a few corporations who decide everything.

Oh, here it is. It's not about security in militancy, it's about muh bourgeois liberal software ethics.

I mean, you are not wrong about Micro$oft (see I use a dollar sign because Microsoft operates on profit (unlike muh free software tough I will go on petty rants whenever someone suggests that free software isn't profitable) I am so smart) but that is every single software enterprise in capitalism. Do you know what Red Hat has been trying to pull in the perfect GNU utopia with their systemd shit?

Don't be stupid, son.

>Also fuck the open source ideology "ideology"

Indeed, fuck open source. Won't change the fact that open source is far more popular than so-called "free software". Oh, and it has nothing to do with the fact that Open Source is more capitalist than FSF (that insinuation is laughable), it has to do with the fact that Open Source has an approach that actually serves to accomplish their goals. Their goals are shit, but they accomplish them.

>This what you choose to believe, but I haven't even implied that free software is the end all goal. It's not.

Okay, install gnutism on computer, got it.

What do next, oh revolutionary emissary?

> Won't change the fact that open source is far more popular

So what, and what's your point - the more popular things are, the better they are?

> Okay, install gnutism on computer, got it.

> What do next, oh revolutionary emissary?

What kind of an answer do you except to such stupid question, do I have to make a list for you? Do anarchist stuff. I don't know what kind of life you live or how are things around you.

>>8781

>So what, and what's your point - the more popular things are, the better they are?

Whiners can't be winners.

That it's more popular doesn't mean that it's intrinsically better. It means it is better at being popular, which, if you are trying to build a movement, is pretty fucking important.

Unless you are yourself happy knowing that anarchism is the correct ideology while remaining fringe and irrelevant, I recommend you drop these transcendental bullshit attitudes.

>What kind of an answer do you except to such stupid question, do I have to make a list for you?

What was the purpose of this thread again? To scold anons for not being anarchist enough (for you)?

Really, you make a huge fuzz about using le free software and shitting on other people for not following your example. All for what? Is free software really the end-all be-all of anarchism militancy?

What I am trying to get at is, if you are going to shit on your comrades, at least make sure your complaint go at least a bit beyond gnutism.

>>8785

Oh, so the whole problem is I'm hurting my comrades' feelings. This is actually does make some sense and I actually agree that what I said wasn't very nice.

> Whiners can't be winners.

I agree on that too, and that's was my whole point too - everything I wrote was about that, not about free software. My whole point was based around anarchists complaining (whining) about how badly government and corporations are, but not willing take responsibly and… I already wrote this several times, read my previous posts if you want.

Maybe I should have written everything in more positive way. I'll take a note on that.

It's not me who made this thread, if that's your impression.

>>8750

>spanking your member to GNU is still rearguard at best, much more important would be f.e. helping to spread ad-hoc mesh networks, this would have a direct, measurable benefit which I doubt that you could quantify with some kind of utopian GNU paradigm wechsel

>truly secure meshnets

>possible without open-source software

>>8775

>use linux on laptop

>friends ask what the fuck it is

>talk to them about free software

>they ditch windows

oh wait, this will never happen to you because you will never leave your mom's basement.

>>8730

>ID: 3553b8

>3553b8

>b8

nice try, comrade.

Guise I'm the one who told him to come here since he was bitching about his strawman version of anarchism

sorry