jump to content
my subreddits
more »
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
313 points (94% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

Anarchism

subscribeSubscribe Nowunsubscribe57,080 readers readers
(~81 online) users here now
Anarchism is a social movement that seeks liberation from oppressive systems of control including but not limited to the state, capitalism, racism, sexism, speciesism, and religion. Anarchists advocate a self-managed, classless, stateless society without borders, bosses, or rulers where everyone takes collective responsibility for the health and prosperity of themselves and the environment.
If you are not yet familiar with anarchism, check out /r/Anarchy101.
If you want to debate, try /r/DebateAnarchism.
/r/Anarchism is for discussing topics relevant to anarchism. The moderation structure and policies are not intended to be an example of an anarchist society, an internet forum is not a society. If you join the discussion here, we assume that you are an anarchist, an ally, or want to learn more about anarchism. Review the Anti-Oppression Policy to see how you can help make space for marginalized people.
Conversations about moderation, rules, bans, and other meta topics take place in /r/metanarchism.
Resourcesclick
Related Subredditsclick
Meta & Transparencyclick
  1. New to anarchism?
  2. Debate anarchism
  3. Moderation discussion / meta
  4. Confed. of Anarchist Subreddits
  5. Event Calendar
created by veganbikepunka community for
No problem. We won't show you that ad again. Why didn't you like it?
Oops! I didn't mean to do this.
message the moderators (all posts are public)

MODERATORS

312
313
314
submitted by aggie1391 anarcho-communist
loading...
all 38 comments
[–]deathpigeonxYou should not only be free, you should be fabulous, too. 55 points56 points57 points  (11 children)
I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.
- Martin Luther King Junior
[–]TreeMonger 17 points18 points19 points  (2 children)
I posted this quote to /r/baltimore and my post was removed. lmfao
[–]odensraven comment score below threshold-44 points-43 points-42 points  (1 child)
Lolololololololol omg so RANDUMZ
[–]TreeMonger 13 points14 points15 points  (0 children)
youtube is leaking.
[–]oreoman27 Follower of Dear LeaderPolyamorous Poet -2 points-1 points0 points  (7 children)
Idk why we quote MLK... He's mostly just the media baby for the black movement back then when actually hindered them quite a bit
[–]RednBlackSalamander anarcho-communist, anarcho-satirist 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
Seriously? We're shitting on Martin Luther King now? If someone runs into a burning building and comes out with an armful of puppies, do we call him a scumbag because he didn't stop to give a talk on the relationship between corporate deregulation and inadequate fire safety standards?
[–]deathpigeonxYou should not only be free, you should be fabulous, too. 14 points15 points16 points  (1 child)
He said some good things, such as this quote, he was pretty savvy with the media, and he would work with people like Malcolm X.
Basically, things with him are complicated. He did both good and bad stuff, and, while he said stuff I disagree with, he also said stuff I agree with, and I'm not about to not quote him on the stuff I agree with because of the stuff I disagree with.
He was also much more radical than the media makes him out to be and was mostly committed to non-violence for tactical reasons.
[–]oreoman27 Follower of Dear LeaderPolyamorous Poet 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
Hmm. OK
[–]JaredOfTheWoods 8 points9 points10 points  (3 children)
A lot of reactionaries hold him up as poster child for purely peaceful protests, saying black people should be more like him. Bringing up MLK's slightly more radical side is a good response to his whitewashing
[–]oreoman27 Follower of Dear LeaderPolyamorous Poet comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points  (2 children)
Idk I probably would never mention him at all. He was radical only in speech I think
[–]JaredOfTheWoods 9 points10 points11 points  (1 child)
It's more like "hey this guy that you're using to denounce the riots would actually probably support them." I agree he probably doesn't belong in /r/anarchism but when relating to someone who isn't leftist, quoting Proudhon or Kropotkin at them probably won't have much of an effect.
[–]oreoman27 Follower of Dear LeaderPolyamorous Poet 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Alright I see your point. But I wouldn't quote an Anarchist at them either so that was a weird comment. He might support the riot, but if we're being completely honest, he would get the spotlight like a magnet, maybe do some sit ins, occupy something for a little while, maybe do a boycott... And then call it a day, and continue on his parade of organization. He was a bit of co-opter and he wasn't on our side.
And just saying that he would've supported riots just seems like popping people's bubbles, unless you're really going to get into the whole thing about it.
[–]aggie1391 anarcho-communist[S] 39 points40 points41 points  (1 child)
I had seriously never heard of Freddie Gray until after the riots. That's what gets people to actually report on it. It literally is the best way to get some damn attention on injustice and the murders of the oppressed by the oppressors and their trained attack dogs.
[–]BaronVonMannsechs individualist anarchist 17 points18 points19 points  (0 children)
And I fear the ones criticizing the rioting for not being peaceful won't give a damn one way or another. They're not there to win over.
[–]AbolishSuffering platformist anarchist_Right To Well Being 22 points23 points24 points  (5 children)
Maybe they should ask 'is peacefully protesting, marching etc, the correct way to express your discontent'? Why is that the default, and the burden of proof is on something else. Should we not go berserk if the cops murder someone? Is a riot not a way of reclaiming the city and demonstrating our power?
[–]D_Poner57 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
-"why is it the default?"
Because that's what the system wants the oppressed to do. They want us to engage them in ways that will have little to no affect. They want us to think that if we take the moral high ground all will be well, while they commit some of the most perverted moral lapses ever seen. MLK saw this near the end of his life, and started to question the practice he had made popular after they were co-opted to be used to slow the movement he represented.
[–]490665068 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Because that's what the system wants the oppressed to do.
You are right on! It's control!
[–]zombiesingularity communist-luxemburgism 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
If violence never solved anything, the powerful wouldn't fight so hard to push a message of non-violence. Violence threatens them, non-violence does not.
[–]ravia 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
No, people should not. They should use real nonviolence. Peaceful protest is not nonviolence. Nonviolence is used when violence would be used. It is not expression. It is not a celebration with friends, a street party, a tent city of cohorts that looks like a rock concert. It is disruption, holding to truth, respectful maintenance in the face of forces that work to arrest, brutalize, stop the actions one undertakes. It is flooding the court system with arrestees, walking where one is not permitted to walk, doing what one is not permitted to do. True nonviolence refuses to lift a finger in violence, and not just for strategic purposes of avoiding the blowback of violent reprisal. The truth is that oppressors are more complex than their own oppression. They are people, and you could have been them had the deck been dealt differently. But it does more than refuse to act violently. It takes action. It does things. Some are symbolic, others are transgressive. But the action must involve crossing some line or other, getting arrested, getting beaten.
Rioters risk this as well, of course. But they also harm many people. Innocent people. They get their message across at far too great a price, just as drone weapons don't just hit the right targets. Yet even if only the right targets could be hit, to do so betrays the truth: even the oppressor is in fact more than they appear. They are complex people with good and bad things about them. The reduction of violence, its imposed narrative of black and white, really is part of the problem. Going from police brutality to rioter brutality really does mean feeding the beast of brutalization.
People recoil against peaceful protests for good reason. But just remember that self expression is not nonviolence. Nonviolence takes place where violence would be used.
[–]sailornasheed Anti-fascist 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Nonviolence only works if the majority population has an open heart to the people being oppressed. I believe, at this point, and in this situation, that they do not.
[–]hamjam5 Anti-fascist_Nietzschean Anarchist 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
I think the attention is a positive result of rioting, but making it the reason one riots is a very self defeating mindset. If your highest goal is just reform, then the riot will never become revolution, and the issues you originally rioted for will probably not ever even get fully addressed. Your best hope is to be co-opted by liberal non-violent career politicians.
Again, I think the attention is great. It helps raise consciousness of issues. It gets more people involved in the movements and the issues. But, I think the best reason to riot is always hopes that it will spread to the population to such a degree that the population as a whole will become an ungovernable force to destroy the system behind the issues that prompted the riot. That people will learn to enjoy rioting and looting and insurrection more than they enjoy the comfort and peace and docility offered by the Planetary Work Machine.
[–]Rotundum9 Anti-fascist/Platformist 12 points13 points14 points  (12 children)
Does anybody else hate the word "riot". I feel like its just a label that the media and white people give to protesters of color whenever they take some form of meaningful action against the status quo.
[–]aggie1391 anarcho-communist[S] 22 points23 points24 points  (1 child)
Like how during Katrina, black people "looted" while white people "found". Black people are "thugs", white people are "troubled youth". Yeah, that's true.
[–]Rotundum9 Anti-fascist/Platformist 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Exactly like that, well said.
[–]All-the-post-leftist anarcho-pessimist 7 points8 points9 points  (6 children)
Nope, a riot is a positive. it's a giant fuck you to whiteness.
It's patronizing to say "riot" is a demonozing word. The youth aren't protestors, a protestor is the black preacher at the front of the march standing proud as he sits on thousands of donations for the church and nothing more.
These aren't protestors, these are fucking RIOTERS
[–]Rotundum9 Anti-fascist/Platformist 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
I don't normally agree with a lot you have to say, but this was a really well written and informative response, thank you.
[–]pukescabies Other: punk 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
you make a convincing argument but it all translates to semantics to me. a bunch of different people with different definitions for the same or similar actions.
[–]All-the-post-leftist anarcho-pessimist 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
Wait a protest as a riot?
They are different words used in completely different context's
[–]pukescabies Other: punk 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
the fact that they are in different contexts is exactly my point. protest and riot can be used by a media source trying to slander someone interchangably. Fox or whoever can use the words protest and riot to discredit a movement they are trying to discredit - activists can use either word to empower the movement or activity. I could describe a militant protest or a peaceful protest - the only difference beyween the words is that it would be difficult to describe a "riot" as a peaceful event.
Protestors can riot. Rioters can protest. The words really say little about the events or tactics but they get everyone in a huff over word usage.
[–]All-the-post-leftist anarcho-pessimist -2 points-1 points0 points  (0 children)
Yeah no, idk what college you go to but that's just not how it works friendo.
This isn't even worth debating, if you want to cling to such a liberal word go for it but its gross.
[–]itspronouncedfloorda -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
Whiteness doesn't care. So it's not.
[–]AManWhoPlaysGuitar anarchist without adjectives, anarcho-communist 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Rebellion and uprising are fun words to use.
[–]Eris17 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Indeed it's almost always used to refrence people of color in this country. But I don't like the way racism is simplified like this. All sorts of people have been have been subject to propganized words such as "riot". They are trying to say these people are "bad". It just so happens the poor and oppressed hear are black. So I'd like to change the "protesters of color" to "protesters of minority" or protesters that, if successful , could seriously upset the status quo. Jews have always been subject to the same Shit. Native Japanese are subject to this now(though probably not nearly as bad). Its not Because they're black, it's just because they're different and that gives a place for people to be able to vent hate and grant them a feeling of superiority. Black is just the way this country indentifies the outcasts and oppressed who have been subject to the same Shit for whateve religion, color, culture,etc. For the history of the world.
[–]rediphile -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
White people use it to describe themselves too sometimes, but never when taking some form of meaningful action against anything. Usually just to display dismay regarding entertainment-sports.
[–]gonucksgo anarcho-primitivistLibertarian Socialist/Social Anarchist 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
It's good for TV.
[–]redinator anarcho-pacifistIt's the ecology, stupid! 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
That quote is from the London riots, not Baltimore.
[–]ADavies 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
And whose interests do the mainstream press (mostly) serve?
[–]criticalnegation -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
Soooo...PR?
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 19711 on app-201 at 2015-04-28 11:52:51.101870+00:00 running ef2e545 country code: DE.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%