The problem I see here is that you perceive this as being anti-democracy when it really isn’t. Criticism of western democracy isn’t equivalent to a total rejection of democracy in general. Capitalism renders democracies ineffectual, which is what I perceived this meme to be pointing out.
It points out the contradiction of being in a supposedly free Western Democracy but still being totally at the mercy of others. It isn’t necessarily that Western Democracy is the cause, but that it fails to address these problems.
As opposed to Eastern Democracies which select our perfect godlike leaders who will show us the way to a perfect future (a long painful way), right comrade? /sarcasm
I don’t need to present a perfect alternative for my critique of Western Democracy to be valid. Critique is the means by which we can improve upon what already exists. Some short-term solutions could be to overturn citizens united and end legalized corporate lobbying, introduce voting reforms such as abolishing the electoral college and switching from first past the post to ranked choice or star voting, or expanding direct democratic programs like ballot initiatives. All of these have the effect of minimizing the influence of capital and maximizing the influence of people on the political process.
Longer term solutions involve bottom-up organization of things like mutual aid, unions of various types, decentralized infrastructure, community-run libraries (and not just for books), community gardens, etc. These kinds of dual-power structures always start small but have outsized positive effects on the communities they form in. If they were allowed to grow unhindered they would eventually grow together and easily supercede the top-down power structures that pervade our lives today, which is why they end up being suppressed or co-opted by the same.
A good example of how this occurs is how despite the internet providing a way to collect and distribute all the knowledge on earth for free to everyone on earth (the greatest library in all of human history), powerful corporations - with the help of governments around the world - unnecessarily spend vast amounts of wealth and resources to restrict the free exchange of ideas along socioeconomic lines.
You might be reading too much into this. Now if you can link to that same user praising Marxist leninism or any of the countries still based on that ideology. Then you have a hypocrisy to critique. But in the absence of that. Those are valid critiques of both Western democracy and Marxist leninist governments. And it’s probably based on their lived experience in a western democracy that they are criticizing it. I’m sure you can find many in China who would have similar criticisms about their own system.
And just to make sure it gets said. Anarchists have no more love for the Chinese Communist Party than you do. So if you think they’re honestly using Anarchist as an attack Vector of the west. They’re going to need all the luck they can get with it.
Those are fair points, but I think it might be better to have a very healthy dose of doubt towards anybody who advocates a teardown of democratic systems of laws. Not the same user in question, but I’ve seen various slrpnk posts defending things from TikTok to Raw Milk.
Are they truly Democratic though. Anarchism is an extreme form of democracy BTW. Not anti democratic. Coming at it from an American perspective, even many of our founding father’s figured by now we’d have majorly overhauled our governing system nearly 10 or more times. They knew their system was flawed. Instead institutional inertia has caused it to become progressively less democratic by many measures. And people turned the founders into infallible deities.
I have less issue with those advocating to rework or abolish institutions. Than those that as a blanket say we can’t question or modify them. Criticism etc should be couched in actually making those institutions more democratic and equitable of course. Not like the economic liberals that like to pretend that they are Libertarians advocating for tax cut and end to regulations that reign in the avarice of Corporations And the wealthy.
When a decision making system is torn down through violent means then for at least a breif moment might makes right, which is absolutely anti-democratic.
That’s not what anarchism calls for. Violence has to do more with those clinging to power. Because as they say when you make peaceful change impossible you make violent change inevitable. So you should be good.
The problem I see here is that you perceive this as being anti-democracy when it really isn’t. Criticism of western democracy isn’t equivalent to a total rejection of democracy in general. Capitalism renders democracies ineffectual, which is what I perceived this meme to be pointing out.
It literally blames “Western Democracy” for all of its problems.
It points out the contradiction of being in a supposedly free Western Democracy but still being totally at the mercy of others. It isn’t necessarily that Western Democracy is the cause, but that it fails to address these problems.
As opposed to Eastern Democracies which select our perfect godlike leaders who will show us the way to a perfect future (a long painful way), right comrade? /sarcasm
No
Describe a good democracy then.
I don’t need to present a perfect alternative for my critique of Western Democracy to be valid. Critique is the means by which we can improve upon what already exists. Some short-term solutions could be to overturn citizens united and end legalized corporate lobbying, introduce voting reforms such as abolishing the electoral college and switching from first past the post to ranked choice or star voting, or expanding direct democratic programs like ballot initiatives. All of these have the effect of minimizing the influence of capital and maximizing the influence of people on the political process.
Longer term solutions involve bottom-up organization of things like mutual aid, unions of various types, decentralized infrastructure, community-run libraries (and not just for books), community gardens, etc. These kinds of dual-power structures always start small but have outsized positive effects on the communities they form in. If they were allowed to grow unhindered they would eventually grow together and easily supercede the top-down power structures that pervade our lives today, which is why they end up being suppressed or co-opted by the same.
A good example of how this occurs is how despite the internet providing a way to collect and distribute all the knowledge on earth for free to everyone on earth (the greatest library in all of human history), powerful corporations - with the help of governments around the world - unnecessarily spend vast amounts of wealth and resources to restrict the free exchange of ideas along socioeconomic lines.
What does “decentralized Infrastructure” mean?
You’re using an example right now.
You might be reading too much into this. Now if you can link to that same user praising Marxist leninism or any of the countries still based on that ideology. Then you have a hypocrisy to critique. But in the absence of that. Those are valid critiques of both Western democracy and Marxist leninist governments. And it’s probably based on their lived experience in a western democracy that they are criticizing it. I’m sure you can find many in China who would have similar criticisms about their own system.
And just to make sure it gets said. Anarchists have no more love for the Chinese Communist Party than you do. So if you think they’re honestly using Anarchist as an attack Vector of the west. They’re going to need all the luck they can get with it.
Those are fair points, but I think it might be better to have a very healthy dose of doubt towards anybody who advocates a teardown of democratic systems of laws. Not the same user in question, but I’ve seen various slrpnk posts defending things from TikTok to Raw Milk.
Are they truly Democratic though. Anarchism is an extreme form of democracy BTW. Not anti democratic. Coming at it from an American perspective, even many of our founding father’s figured by now we’d have majorly overhauled our governing system nearly 10 or more times. They knew their system was flawed. Instead institutional inertia has caused it to become progressively less democratic by many measures. And people turned the founders into infallible deities.
I have less issue with those advocating to rework or abolish institutions. Than those that as a blanket say we can’t question or modify them. Criticism etc should be couched in actually making those institutions more democratic and equitable of course. Not like the economic liberals that like to pretend that they are Libertarians advocating for tax cut and end to regulations that reign in the avarice of Corporations And the wealthy.
When a decision making system is torn down through violent means then for at least a breif moment might makes right, which is absolutely anti-democratic.
That’s not what anarchism calls for. Violence has to do more with those clinging to power. Because as they say when you make peaceful change impossible you make violent change inevitable. So you should be good.
I’m not saying the theory of Anarchism and AnarchoSocialism is violent
I am saying self identifying Anarchists on this site have and will continue to express want to burn down state buildings.
I am explicitly saying those very specific individuals cannot be trustes.