#effective anarchism | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-cat-and-the-birdie · 9 months

Text

The Hobie Brown Punk Playbook - Part 2. - What is Punk? (Punk 101)

A short series where I analyze the political, historical, musical, and romantic influences of Hobie Brown, and how it affects his arc, design, and character.

1) Anarchism 101 / 2) Punk 101 / 3) Hobie Characterization Guide (How to Write Hobie) /4) Punk & Hobie's Design / 5) Romance in the 70's __________________________________________________________

Clueless about punk? Know nothing about the 70's? Or wanna learn more? Start here! In the last part I examined Anarchy and what makes Hobie Anarchy personified. And next, I think it's only natural to turn my attention to the thing that makes Spider-punk - punk.

In this part I'm examining what punk is, why the movement was created, what punks believe, and what they stand against.

This is an analysis of Punk, 70's History, and why it makes Hobie who he is.

______________________________________________

Punk -

What is it? What 'makes' you a punk? And should Punk be Gatekept?

Punk can be hard to define - and that's by design. With the whole 'hates labels' thing considered, it's understandable. It may be easy to feel like punk as a concept is confusing, or daunting to even grasp.

But remember, Punk is made for the people - and it's made to be accessible and understandable to all people, of every class and ability - so I hope I can help!

Punk as a Subculture What is a sub-culture? Is a sub-culture the same as an aesthetic?

Punk is a 'sub-culture' - a specific type often called a 'counter-culture'.

In basic terms, a subculture is a lifestyle.

Goths, Punks, Vegans, Nudists, Surfers and even things like the LGBTQ+ community are considered subcultures.

Subcultures effect many things such as they way you dress or your taste in music, and your hobbies. But subcultures can also effect things like your morals, political affiliation, identity, behaviors, and the spaces you exist in.

Subcultures are usually based around morals (Veganism, Punk, Straight Edge.), hobbies (Surfers, Stoners, Ravers), or identities (LGBTQ+ and African-American culture). By engaging in activities, a manner of dress, or a patter on behavior in a subculture, it becomes is way to outwardly express your beliefs and feelings - while also connecting with people who feel the same.

For example - Although Surfers are united through a hobby in specific, it'd be safe to assume that a surfer would, naturally, be pro-conservation, pro-animal rights, and anti-pollution. A surfer that promotes ocean trash dumping seems weird, right? That's because the surfer subculture has a political identity defined by the movement's past. Although a surfer surfs - what makes them a 'surfer' as a opposed to 'someone who surfs' is their participation in a culture that includes other things besides surfing, such as music, dress, and even the way they live - like choosing to live beach side or convert to vanlife, choosing to live off very little, etc. They may do some or all of those things, but all their core, what makes them a 'surfer' is their hobby, beliefs, and dedication.

The same way the Surfer 'Lifestyle' is more than just surfing, the Punk 'Lifestyle' is more than just music.

Punk is a subculture, a counterculture specifically. But what does that mean?

What's a counter-culture?

A counterculture is a subculture that arises to directly challenge a societal norm.

Not all subcultures are countercultures; but a lot are.

For example - Drag-racing is a subculture that exists around a hobby. By racing they are engaging in a subculture, but they're not directly trying to challenge society. Whereas on the other hand - Someone who is Straight Edge is consciously choosing not to drink - and consciously choosing to identify as straight edge in addition the being sober - in order to challenge societal norms and behaviors around drinking and drugs.

Most counter-cultures arise in response to a political event or social development.

Is a subculture and an aesthetic the same thing?

No. Subcultures and Aesthetics differ in one way -

A subculture displays and effects identity. An aesthetic does not.

What I mean is - a subculture effects your beliefs, thinking, behaviors or political alignment. An aesthetic does not.

For example - Hippy is a subculture because it encompasses a thought system. When you see a hippy - its safe to assume that they are anti-war and liberal. A 'republican hippy' seems absurd, because inherently, there is a moral and political align attached to the movement. Whereas on the otherhand - Emo is an aesthetic because it does not encompass a thought system - It is has no moral or political attachments. Although it includes a manor of dress and music the same way hippie may - it lacks moral implication. Because of that 'republican emo' is not contradictory - whereas a 'republican hippy' is.

Because of this, it usually makes no sense to judge someone based on their aesthetic. On the other hand, as the fashion, music, and style go hand in hand with it's politics, it's safe to assume and judge aspects of someone based on their subculture or counterculture. Punk is a counterculture - so it inherently has moral connotations - tied directly to the historical events the influenced it.

While someone being emo may not tell you much about who they are as a person, Hobie being a punk can tell us a lot about who he is!

[I talk more about Punk, subcultures, and aesthetics here.]

Now that we understand countercultures and their function, let's look at punk in specific.

Punk - Basic Roots & Definition

By objective definition:

Punk is a counterculture that developed around the 1970's primarily in the cities of London and New York. Made up of almost exclusively of lower- and working-class folks of all ages - the movement grew in response to a couple of different political events throughout the 70's, all of which shaped the message and lifestyle that would become punk. Mainly centered around government corruption, surveillance, and anti-communism in the Western World, these events inspired a movement of anti-government, anti-war, anti-surveillance, and anti-capitalism.

With World War 2 ending in 1945, the world was left in a world divided between capitalism and communism.

With the start of The Vietnam war in 1955 (don't fret, I'll explain), average people were growing tired of the seemingly endless wars, and the corrupted, secretive governments that commanded them.

This gave way to the hippy movement - an anti-war counterculture centered around radical peace and pacifism. But as the Vietnam War stretch through the 60's and into the 70's, the hippy movement and it's pacifism waned.

As the CIA began to squash protests, and Western governments engaged in more corruption and espionage - the pacifism turned to anger, and the outcry turned to music.

What came next was Punk.

Now that we understand the roots of Punk - let's do a quick run down of the historical events that influenced it, and the beliefs that arised from it.

Before we begin, keep in mind that these are all events that Hobie would live through - and have opinions about. Born somewhere between 1958 and 1961, and living in 1978 (according to his intro mugshot) - all of these things would have an effect on Hobie, the way he was raised, and the struggles he had to face.

All of them have a really cool influence on Hobie and the punk movement, so let's take a look -

1978 Punk - Basic Historical Events & Beliefs

The Vietnam War (1955 - 1975) - A war between the Communist North Vietnam and Capitalist South Vietnam. In order to ensure the spread of Capitalism, the United States government crossed the globe into foreign borders in an attempt to secure victory for North Vietnam. They committed a LOT of atrocities that still effect the Vietnamese people to this day. In addition, The US government participated in drafting during this time. Eventually, the Communist Resistance proved victorious, and the country of Vietnam is currently communist. Resulting Punk Belief - Anti-Capitalism, Anti-War, Anti-Colonialism, Anti-Draft, Pro-Communism, Pro-Armed Resistance (in response to North Vietnam's armed victory.)

The Rise of Margaret Thatcher (1975-2013) - Often called the most hated woman in all of Ireland and probably the UK too, Margaret Thatcher is one of the most influential British Prime Ministers of all time. Leader of the 'Tories' (Short for Conservative) since 1975, Margaret Thatcher took office in 1979. Which means in 1978 - when Hobie is - she would currently be running her campaign for Prime Minister. Margaret Thatcher largely contributed to the unrest and conflict within the British-occupied Northern Ireland, as well as hardship within the working-class in her own country. Even though she left office in 1990, it can easily be said her damage lasted until the day she died, and even beyond. When Hobie says he hates the PM. He without a doubt means her. Resulting Punk Belief - Anti-Government, Anti-Conservative, Anti-Colonialism, Pro-Armed Resistance (in response to the Irish Republican Army)

The Civil Rights Movement - It can be hard to believe that Hobie's life overlaps with that of the Civil Rights Movement - but it does! With Malcom X's assassination in 1965, MLK's assassination in 1968, and Fred Hampton's (Black Panther Party) assassination in 1969 - regardless of how you age him - Hobie's childhood was largely characterized by the death of many Civil Rights Leaders in America. Even despite being British himself, Hobie would directly face this for much of his childhood - as racial segregation was legal within the UK until 1965 (around the time he'd be 4-7, if you age him 17-20). However this era was also characterized by the rise of Black culture in media, whether it be Disco, Ballroom, The Black Panther Party or Blaxploitation Movies. Resulting Punk Belief - Starch Anti-Racism, Extreme Race Solidarity, Affirmative Action, Black Pride

Queer Liberation Wave 1 (1969-1979 and onward) - After spending years as an oppressed, underground subculture Queer Identity and it's liberation came to limelight throughout the 70's. The 70's began and ended with two of the most important events in Queer History - The Stonewall Riots and The White Night Riots. In 1969, New York City police officers raided and brutalized patrons at a popular pub called 'Stonewall'. Many trans people as well as a number of drag performers were being arrested for cross-dressing, which was illegal at the time. Stormé DeLarverie - a mixed-race drag king and butch lesbian, called out in anger and desperation at a crowd of onlookers, which incited the riot that is known as the beginnings of the Queer Liberation Movement. Stonewall Inn still exists until this day - and a year after it's anniversary - the first ever pride parade was started in NYC. Ten years later in 1979, a man named Harvey Milk was running for office in California. An openly-gay man and activist, Harvey was assassinated by a man named Dan White. When Dan was only lightly sentenced for this however, 100k people marched for Harvey's justice - sparking a night of violence and direct conflict with the police. Resulting Punk Belief - Anti-Police, Anti-Justice System, Anti-Bigotry, Anti-Homophobia, Queer Liberation

Other notable historical mentions that are just as important but probably too complicated and/or boring for me to talk about:The Cold War (1945 - forever probably) - The on-going and ever-evolving power struggle between Capitalism and Communism, The West and The East, and nuclear warfare. Yay. Particularly heated due to the Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East. The Watergate Scandal and the Nixon tapes (1972) - The Nixon administration gets caught wiretapping an opponent's office. Nixon is caught on tape trying to cover this up. Tapes are leaked. Nixons resigns. The War on Drugs (1971 - forever probably) - The Nixon administration ignites 'The War on Drugs', a campaign for strict criminalization of drug use. Although a ploy to 'clean up streets' it's backwards logic actually led to more extreme drug conditions. In addition, it also overlapped with the CIA distributing cocaine and crack into Black communities in the 1980's so.... yeah the drugs won the war.

So, What does any of this have to do with Hobie Brown?

And Can Hobie be written better?

Now that we have a better understanding of the world that raised Hobie, when we look back at him, we can get a lot clearer view of who he is and what he probably believes.

[And if you need a second to look at him after reading this far I completely understand I do too here ya go]

With all that in mind, we can say:

Being born somewhere between 1959 and 1962, Hobie Brown is a black guy raised in an era of persistent conflict, growing conservatism, and on-going social change. His existence is resistance in and of itself.

History-wise:

Raised in the 60's and coming-of-age in the late 70's - Hobie's life has probably been characterized by persistent war, and a generation who met it with radical kindness and compassion.

Although Hobie is a punk himself, Punks and Hippies have roots in the same places and concerns - albeit it different approaches. But at their cores, they're about freedom - and compassion towards others who need it most.

Hippies centered their movement around kindness and non-violence, but also action through resilience, community, and peaceful protest. And Hobie may not believe in non-violence (which - he doesn't. He believes in violence let's be clear.) we can still see the influence of Hippies on his upbringing and behavior.

Throughout ATSV, Hobie's action are motivated and based on resilience within the face of an oppressive institution, and his actions of protests are direct ones - they're indirect, such as building community between him, Miles, and Gwen. His methodology is one of gaining intelligence and destabilizing from the inside.

Race-wise:

To put it blatantly, as this something I feel like isn't highlighted about his character enough-

Hobie would have direct and real experience and trauma around his race based on the time he's from.

And without a doubt, his race would be something he has a lot of pride in.

Hobie would be very vocally proud to be black.

For once, Hobie without a doubt would be raised in a time where racial discrimination and segregation was legal for the beginning of his childhood. He's raised by black people who have lived with this segregation and abuse for all of their lives. And despite the illegalization of segregation in 1965, many racist attitudes would still persist to his modern year.

But, this is Hobie we're talking about. Hobie also was raised in a time where pride in a black identity was stressed at every turn. He's a black guy in 1978. He has wicks. Those two things connect.

When you see his leather vest, your first thought may connect to Sex Pistols, or UK punks. But Black Panthers - a movement that existed all throughout his life, wore leather jackets just the same.

I believe the Panthers influence Hobie a lot too. Many know the Panthers for their direct conflict with police - and Assata Shakur (Tupac's Aunt) being a member.

But the Panthers were also ALL about community. In fact, they started a program to feed inner-city kids breakfast and lunch throughout summer. Many are still going across the country. {As a child, this program fed me and my schoolmates :) }

Hobie takes after them. He sees a younger black child in need of help, and he takes a break from fighting to help them, mentor them, and teach them about the cause. Hobie would absolutely have a Black Panther pin on his jacket!

This is something that is really just brushed over in fanfic and fandom and I'm hoping to write a piece about how to better characterize him because of this - but from here, let's keep this in mind!

Political-wise:

Hobie lived in a time of extreme change, progress, and political development. And to some, his methods may see just as extreme.

But now that we have a context for who he is and who he exists as, lets me transparent about it.

Growing up post-Hippy era, during the rise of conservatism in Britain - as a low-classer class black kid - Hobie's attitude towards activism would differ than those before him.

As most of the adult population seemed numb to war, and most of the Hippy subculture disbanded, outward rebellion and resistance would look a lot more pro-active in many ways, but just as thoughtful.

Hobie is very clearly an anarchist, but considering the political sphere of communism during the time as his behavior towards Miles and Gwen - I do believe he'd support communism, with anarchy being his primary stance and focus.

I honestly believe that Hobie would be pro-armed resistance. As Northern Vietnam and the IRA defended their homelands from foreign invasion, and the Black Panthers armed themself with guns against brutal police forces - Hobie's life would be colored with resistance through armed means.

Hobie uses his guitar as a weapon, both musically and physically, and he carries it openly. He doesn't need to do this. He's Spider-man. He choses to do this. I think Hobie would approve of the oppressed arming themselves, and that's why he does it himself.

And of course, he's anti-police or any form of military, militia, what have you. They are the arm of the state and exist only to target civilians with their will. I believe he would have no sympathy for police - as actual punks in his era had no sympathy for police. [And if he did (he doesn't) he'd be directly shunned by every other punk for doing so, because wtf.] But out of respect for the actual punks who inspired him, the Black activists brutalized, the queer people targeted, and all those who suffered under oppressive policing during this era (many of which are still alive and maybe even our parents), lets all agree Hobie outwardly and vocally hates police.

For many reasons. Many reasons personal and influenced by direct experience with him, or people he cares deeply about.

Please keep that in mind. It's quite literally impossible for Hobie to not be affected by these events to some extent.

Personality-wise:

This will be expanded in the next part - and of course this is just my opinion, but personality-wise, I think: Hobie is very politically educated and dedicated. And I feel like this is another thing that isn't highlighted enough or shown enough in fandom.

Hobie's morals, behavior, and methodology doesn't come from nowhere - and although they may be expressed in the music he listens to, the music itself is not the source.

It comes from direct experience with political action outside of being Spider-man.

Based on his deep understanding of anarchy and punk, we can guess that Hobie's very well-read, particularly in history and social theory. Both the IRA and North Vietnam were Marxist-Leninist, so it wouldn't be far of a leap to say that Hobie could be anarcho-communist.

Hobie would absolutely take the time to read - things like the Communist Manifesto, the Black Panther literature and other things.

In my opinion, from all of this - I can only assume Hobie is a reader, an avid one. He without a doubt participates in direct action outside of being SM - such as attending an anarchist/communist union, attending protests out of costume, organizing and planning meetings with other leftists, collecting and gathering supplies and food for those in need, squatting and securing housing for the homeless, and a lot of other things punks that aren't Spider-man do.

It kinda wouldn't make sense for him not to. He was a punk before he was Spider-man. When Hobie isn't being Spider-punk, and he's being a normal punk - if we try to consider how he spends his free time, a lot of the time our instinct is to imagine him and band. And that's a large part of Hobie.

But all of this is too. These are all things Hobie enjoys, because Hobie enjoys helping people. When Miles breaks free from the society, he's happy for him. It's all he wants.

_____________________________

When we genuinely put Hobie into these scenarios, it really helps to humanize him. We can all see the depth in his character, and that depth comes from a real, genuine place.

Like a punk opposing the draft, Hobie opposes the oppressive leader that mandates the trauma of youth. Like a Black Panther with their afro, Hobie wears his hair with pride.

All of these events contribute to him and who he is, and he shows it with everything he does and chooses to be.

I hope understanding these events helps you understand Hobie and his motives more - and I hoped this post helped you understand the history of punk more!

-------------------------------------------------------

This is UNGODLY long - and ungodly wordy. But if you read this far, thank you! And I hope it helped at all! If you learned anything or have any questions, please let me know! I'd love to hear your thoughts, insights, revelations, etc. As you can probably tell I love rambling about Hobie and I'm totally normal and functional and not at all obsessed.

Please stick thoughts of Hobie Brown in my enclosure. I promise I'm normal about him. Thanks again!

#honey wake up its 12am and a new analysis just dropped #let me know if you read till the end!#this SPENT me i hope this makes sense #hobie brown #spiderpunk #spider punk #atsv #across the spiderverse #across the spider verse #spiderman #spider man #miles morales #gwen stacy #atsv analysis #marvel #itsv #hobart brown #Hobie Brown Punk Playbook

594 notes · View notes

iravaid · 3 months

Text

Replaying VtMB again for the zillionth time and I really can't help but gush about the opening cinematic and how Much there is in it. It does a lot to subtly establish the setting and dynamics going on in Kindred LA.

The meeting to announce the fledgling and the sire's fate takes place in a theatre, the orchestral pit a physical barrier between LaCroix and the rest of LA. He is giving a speech with all the pomp and show a Camarilla Prince is probably expected to, and barely anyone can give half a shit about what That pathetic man has to say. Just about every important Kindred you encounter throughout game is there, which I love. Velvet is blowing a kiss at Strauss; Isaac is boredly checking his watch; Therese is shifting uncomfortably in the front row; Jack is in the shadows glowering out at the stage; Damsel, Nines, and Skelter are grumbling amongst themselves; Gary and Ash can even be seen when everyone is leaving. Their disdain is palpable. He never earned their respect; he's never gotten his hands dirty, because there's always some desperate underling looking to pay off debts or claw their way up the tower and do the work for him. He's just another figurehead that they're waiting to finally get ashed either by his own people, or some lucky Sabbat bastard.

And it really sets the scene of a recently muscled in Camarilla pressing their weight down on an LA that just about survived the siege of the Kueii-jin. The third major conflict in the city in about 60 years (initial revoult, sabbat siege being the others)(Nines was there for all of those, something important to note imo). The Anarchs have thinned ranks, no Revolutionary Council, and a 'leader' who believes the Anarchs having a leader is completely antithetical to their cause and so refuses to use that title in any meaningful capacity; they were in no place to effectively fight back against the Camarilla swooping in to try and stamp out the Free State for good. And yet, when the sire is executed, the people look at Nines for what to do next, and he is spurred to speak out amidst a crowd of apathy.

Maybe some of this is coincidence. Maybe it's just recycling assets. I still like it, and think it holds weight in the story.

#big feelings about vtmb once again #vtmb #vampire the masquerade bloodlines #nines rodriguez #sebastian lacroix #vtmbposting

140 notes · View notes

drabblesandimagines · 11 months

Text

Ribbon

Jing Yuan x gn reader 561 words

“Something caught your eye?” He asks, lazily.

You’d been staring again, but surely it was the only time he'd noticed, losing count of how many times he'd nearly nodded off in place today. You’d been summoned a few hours ago to help navigate the piles of outstanding paperwork on his desk. Why he insisted on the anarchic method you weren’t sure - everyone else had adapted to digital systems - but what General Jing Yuan wanted he got, even if it meant you had to spend what was supposed to be your free afternoon trying to catalogue the mess into some sort of logical order.

“Ah, yes, I...” You round up the last pile on papers on your desk, trying to look preoccupied. “I was admiring your… hair ribbon.”

An amused grin crosses his face, his palm cupping his chin as he leans forward. “My hair ribbon.”

“Mm. It…” You swallow, paperclipping the pile together before placing them down on the desk. “It contrasts nicely with your hair. I was thinking about what colour would work with mine.” You tug a piece of your hair forward, as if you were musing. This is the worst lie that has ever come out of your mouth and he knows it. He must know it.

“I see.”

“Well, if that’s all I can assist with, General, I’ll take my leave.” You stand then, already thinking how therapeutic it'll be to scream into your pillow about this interaction once you're safely back in your quarters.

“No, that’s not all.” Jing Yuan gets to his feet and strides over in what feels like two steps – those long, lean legs of his - and you’re frozen in place as he draws near. He’s a good head taller than you, his collar pretty much level with your eyes, and your heart is thudding at the proximity. Can he hear it?

“What else can I assist you with, sir?” You keep looking straight ahead, watching his Adam’s apple bob in a swallow. There’s no way you can look up at him in the face right now without your cheeks flushing an intense shade of red. Why does he have this effect over you?

“I was just thinking about my hair ribbon and how… distracting it’s been for you this afternoon.”

“I wasn’t distracted, sir. I just got lost in thought for a moment, that’s all.”

“Ah, you think I didn’t notice the earlier looks? You must be aware your pace of work has suffered from it.”

You drop your gaze to the desk. “I apologize, sir.”

“I’ll let you in on a secret – I’ve also been thinking what else it would look good against.”

“Oh?”

Suddenly, one hand grasps your chin and tilts your head up to meet his copper-eyed gaze, before the other encircles around your wrist and he holds it up against his chest. Your eyes widen, before he leans in and whispers in your ear, his breath feeling hot.

“Mm. I think it would contrast nicely against your skin, tied tightly around your wrists.”

“Tied…” you repeat, your breath catches in your throat.

“Suspended above your head, perhaps, as I trail kisses down your sweet neck.” He presses his lips just below your ear in a chaste kiss, before he gently nips your skin between his teeth, causing you to shudder. “Shall we see?”

- More Jing Yuan ribbon imagines.

Masterlist . Requests welcome . Ko-fi

Details for my event celebrating 200 followers.

#ghostdogwrites #jing yuan x you #jing yuan x reader #hsr x reader #hsr x you #hsr x gender neutral reader #honkai star rail #hsr imagines #suggestive language #honkai star rail smut #honkai smut

907 notes · View notes

ms-demeanor · 7 months

Note

it's hard to find legitimate data on risks associated with alcohol--a lot of results from religious organizations w/ vested financial interest in evangelical cult-type shit comes up when i try. i drink heavily occasionally, mostly because i just really like the experience of getting blasted with close friends once every few months--any advice on tracking down actual *reputable* data on the risks of that?

(tamping down on the urge to anonymously defend my actions in my favorite anarchism blogger's inbox but i *will* allow myself to defensively note that i never drink to the point of blacking out or puking. this isn't really relevant to the question i just have brain problems where i feel compelled to defend myself against imaginary assumptions.)

Okay i want to start this out by pointing out that I'm not particularly judgemental about drug use. Any drug use.

Basically, you do you. As long as you're not drinking and driving or otherwise doing harm (for instance, attempting to provide childcare while too intoxicated to do so safely) the only thing you have to worry about is what alcohol is doing to *you* and I was a smoker for like twenty years knowing full well how awful for me it was. If you want to drink and you know the risks, do what you want.

So, all that said, I mean this very gently (because it's clear that this is a sensitive issue for you) but it is not particularly difficult to find good data about risks associated with alcohol from sources less biased than American evangelicals.

For some research on the overall risks of alcohol consumption, here are some good, comprehensive, recent papers about the effects of alcohol on both individuals and populations.

Risk thresholds for alcohol consumption: combined analysis of individual-participant data for 599,912 current drinkers in 83 prospective studies

Population-level risks of alcohol consumption by amount, geography, age, sex, and year: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2020

Alcohol consumption and risks of more than 200 diseases in Chinese men

Getting occasionally blasted with friends is what's called "binge drinking" - which is defined as five or more drinks within two hours for men or four or more drinks in two hours for women, or reaching a BAC of .08 (the legal limit for driving in the US). This is a lot lower than most people think of when they think of "binge drinking" - that's five beers, an average bottle of wine, or two strong cocktails like a long island iced tea. Five or more drinks wouldn't put most people into blacking out or puking territory, and if you're a seasoned drinker a BAC of .08 may not feel like anything over the top or ridiculous, but it is a drinking binge nonetheless and there are specific risks associated with binge drinking. Here are some write-ups on binge drinking specifically:

Binge drinking: Burden of liver disease and beyond

Binge Drinking’s Effects on the Body

Effects of Repeated Binge Drinking on Blood Pressure Levels and Other Cardiovascular Health Metrics in Young Adults

I get the urge to feel defensive, it sounds like this is something that's concerning you and from the tone of your ask it seems like this is something that you were not aware of and has made you uneasy. (And it sounds like you're around a lot of people who ARE judgemental about alcohol consumption for reasons that have to do with them imposing their morality on you, which is a shitty position to be in)

But hey i wouldn't be a very good marginal anarchist if I wasn't about making sure that people have informed interactions with the world.

I still go out and get shitfaced every once in a while because it's fun and there are things that I can do to mitigate the risks (like making sure I'm around safe people, don't have access to a motor vehicle, and don't do it often) but I do so with the awareness that what I am doing could have some pretty bad consequences and I need to make sure to watch out for my health to keep an eye on the systems that drinking like that might impact. If you're gonna drink, you should be keeping an eye on yourself generally. If you're gonna drink heavily (even if it's only every couple of months), you have got to keep an eye on your liver, pancreas, and heart specifically.

312 notes · View notes

reds-writings · 3 months

Text

rust cohle headcanons pt. 2

(pairing: rust cohle x fem!reader)

a/n: some more rust thoughts for public consumption. bon appetit.

word count: 1.5k ish (she got a bit carried away oops)

warnings: lil nsfw but other than that not much (let me know if there's anything else! minors get lost!)

thinking about the fact that he didn’t really have access to television until he was 17

you get a kick out of making any pop culture references that occurred before the year 1981 because chances are they’ll go right over his head

it wouldn’t be surprising if most pop culture hubbub wasn’t in his realm of extensive knowledge given that he really only sets aside any free time he has for reading or contemplating whatever anarchic thoughts are running rampant in his head that day

you don’t find yourself in his apartment all that often given that it doesn’t exactly hold the vibe of something straight out of a home & garden catalog

he also feels something along the lines of self-consciousness when you’re exposed to the eerie emptiness of his space (the printed pictures and erratically scribbled notes/diagrams he has stuck up on his wall from active cases don’t help)

it’s not something you necessarily judge him for, it just makes you feel a twinge of sadness to see that he only allows himself the bare minimum levels of ‘comfort’ just to get by

as your relationship grows a bit more steady he finds himself at your place more than his own anyway (he tries to do most of his work at work as much as he can the longer he’s with you so things can be more effectively separated for the sake of his own consolation more than your own)

he doesn’t leave much of a trail behind himself but to the trained eye, signs of him had steadily built up over time in your home

a cheesy ‘don’t mess with texas’ mug in your cabinet you nabbed for him as a joke from an antique store in town or an old crystal ashtray set out on the front porch railing for when he needed a smoke (one by the window in your bedroom too for whenever you felt benevolent enough to let him smoke on your windowsill late at night)

there was also the growing plethora of his daily attire manifesting alongside your own clothes in your closet and dressers (find yourself wearing any of his stuff and he’s POUNCIN’)

a few scattered men’s products in the bathroom (he’s a straight razor kind of guy cause he seems like a meticulous self-groomer in that way and he has some hair products that would have Marty in a tizzy)

speaking of the straight razor, sometimes you’ll be the one to throw in the flag when he’s too busy to shave (not that any stubble on him is unsexy but the smoothly-shaven feel of his face remains superior for a number of reasons)

you’ll have him sit his butt down so you can straddle him to get rid of the culprit of the growing frictional burns on your face, neck, and thighs. a sacrifice made for the greater good.

makes for some great foreplay nearly every time (lil freaks)

there’s also an extra pack of american spirits you keep in one of your bedside drawers for whenever he runs out or forgets his own

he doesn’t ever make a big deal out of his birthday. meaning he does everything in his power to avoid acknowledging it and just goes about his day like normal. but ever since you got the date out of Marty you never let it go by without doing something to make the day special

this isn’t to say you cross any major boundaries or throw any huge celebrations he’d absolutely loathe

it meant small outings to dinner (or whatever that could get him out of the house for a bit if he wasn’t working) or little meaningful gifts waiting for him whenever you had the time to see each other if he happened to be on the job

you just wanted to imprint something about the day that didn’t leave him so passive or resentful that he lived to see another year in his life. that his existence didn’t have to mean much to anyone or himself but it absolutely meant something to you

Rust awoke in the warmth of your bed to the sight of a dreary day taking place outside. The outline of your figure on the empty half of the bed struck him only slightly suspicious. You weren’t known for being an early riser in any sense of the phrase but the smell of food drifting upstairs gave him an inclination of why you weren’t in your usual curled-up spot beside him at this hour.

Drifting his gaze slightly, the sight of a blue frosted cupcake on his side’s nightstand with a cigarette instead of a candle stuck in it as a crude joke had the corner of his mouth quirking faintly. One way or another, it was apparent you’d find a way to make the date of his birth as digestible for him as you could each year it passed. He remembered just how offended you’d gotten around the time you first got together and discovered his birthday was coming up soon while he’d had no intention of making you aware of it in the first place. Ever since then, you’d made it a sworn mission of yours to celebrate his birthday in some way shape, or form, always keeping it small with his limits in mind.

Making his descent down the stairs of your old home, he could hear the growing sounds of Fleetwood Mac paired with your soft humming. Once he finally rounded the corner to come into view of the kitchen there stood the vision of your swaying figure, drowning in some old Budweiser shirt while flipping over pancakes at the stove.

“Is that you, birthday boy?” The teasing call followed by a quick look over your shoulder had him jumping slightly out of his daze.

“You feedin’ just us or a small village out in the world somewhere?” He quipped as he took in the array of food you’d managed to prepare in the time you’d been awake.

“I was restless and didn’t know what you’d be in the mood for so I just went ahead and made a lil’ bit of everything. Whatever we don’t scarf down I can take on over to Lou’s down the road,” Was your breezy answer before you paused to point the spatula at him, “she called yesterday sayin’ she had a small somethin’ for you so when we go you’re gonna accept whatever it is with a grin and grateful attitude.”

“Lou’s one of the more tolerable people who happens to take residence in this miserable state.”

“Yeah, but you still get that constipated look on your face whenever someone else tries doing somethin’ nice for you. Thus my warning.” The look you had was more cheeky than anything as you finished up your last set of pancakes and moved them over to a bigger plate alongside the rest of the food.

“No presents this year?” He hummed as he watched you busy your way around the kitchen.

“Geez! I’ve made you greedy over the years, haven’t I? I was hopin’ to go out into town for a bit if the weather ain’t too crazy. Any presents I’ve got for you, mister, are gonna wait til’ later. Got it?”

“Yes, ma’am.” An amused huff left his nose.

for your birthdays Marty’s the one to help Rust in planning the bigger stuff (should you want it) given that you had a bit more friends than he did who wanted nothing more than to celebrate you and have fun

you reassured him every year that you were fine with keeping it on the simple side and just spending the day with him while just chilling out (he did not listen)

he’s very much a gift giver in the sense that he’ll be out and see something random only to bring it back home and casually be like ‘thought you’d like this’ then leave it at that

you love your little collection of gifts and trinkets from the grump

even if most don’t see it in him, he’s the biggest giver you’ve ever met

he doesn’t seek any praise or reward for the silently selfless acts he finds himself committing for you and he carries them out as if they were all completely normal (he has an underlying thing for praise in the sheets though, don’t let him lie. he’ll crumble within seconds at any soft utterings of how good he is or how much you need him)

you get comfortable with ambushing him with random bursts of affection every now and then later down the line and he just sits there and takes it (mans enjoys it don’t let him lie about that either)

you’re more outwardly flirty/touchy with him in general (of course taking into account whether or not he appears to be in the mood for any of that at the given moment)

saying things like ‘there’s my dashin’ cowboy!’ or ‘the ladies of louisiana are gonna try and send me packin’ now that i’ve got you locked down!’ just to see him caught off guard

photos of him are few and far in between, let alone of you two together, but he does find himself taking more photos of just you (innocent and not so innocent)

he just wants to memorize any and all details of you! sue him!

a/n: just you wait until i start pulling out the sad old man rust fics cause i'm obsessed with that era too. ponytail defender til i die !

#reds-writings #rust cohle imagine #rust cohle x reader #true detective imagine #true detective season 1 #true detective #rust cohle #rust cohle headcanons #matthew mcconaughey

135 notes · View notes

lucyrcrover · 8 months

Text

It was around the George Floyd uprising and calls for police abolition that I began to look into anarchism. Institutions that had been a negative force in my life, but which I was tacitly taught to accept, were coming into question

I set this context of a powerful insurgency up because for me, I think anarchism was the startlingly beautiful realization that I did have power. It was a sense of optimism that had been totally missing from my life as someone who'd seen the effects of the war on drugs and homophobic/sexist persecution.

I was reading Benjamin S Case's "Street Rebellion," and he quotes an activist at a riot who spoke thus:

"I know you think that's fear in your chest right now, but it's not - you've just never felt freedom before," and I think that moment alone encapsulates a lot.

#anarchism #punk #anarchist #socialism #anarchopunk #anarchocommunism #riot grrrl #punk rock #anarchy

243 notes · View notes

iberiancadre · 19 days

Note

Blaming job precarity on labour protections, thay is some real neoliberal shit for a post tagged "real marxist hours". Are you sure there aren't any other causes? Like, I don't know, the recessions and crashes of 2008/2012/2014/2020, tolerance of employers who hire and pay under the table, insufficient protections for people affected by the practice (especially non-EU workers), relative disregard for unions in labour law negotiations, inequalities in infrastructure distribution and so on? None of those things are essential parts of social democracy, they're the consequences of right-wing attacks on it, and Spain's specific failures at social democracy are not universal nor a reflection of the system in general.

And the issue of colonial and post-colonial exploitation wasn't addressed sufficiently in marx's very works either, or under any application of socialism in a country already high-up in the hierarchy of imperialism (remember when a certain socialist country became one of the largest fossil fuel producers by drilling oil on indigenous land, effectively turning most of "its" territory into a settler colonial regime servicing the state oil industry? Talk about funding public expenses through imperialism!)

All of what you're saying sounds great and would be valid if they weren't objectively false. I don't think you're usamerican (the target audience of the post you're replying to) but you sure sound like one. If you aren't, we'll I'm sorry but you're just ignorant:

btw this is in relation to this post in case anyone wants to read it

"Blaming job precarity on labor protections sounds like neoliberalism" If by protecting labor you mean legalizing and protecting a type of work that allows workers to spend most of the year effectively unemployed, unable to claim unemployment because they're technically employed, and also prevents them from getting a second job because they are at the mercy of their first employer's needs? Then yeah, I am blaming labor protections for job precarity. This is one especially egregious example of what the socdems in this country have done, and it's funny you mention neolibs because this new law allowing "fixed discontinuous" work is a direct continuation of the 2012 labor reform done by neoliberals. I am blaming a precarious form of work which already has millions of contracts under it for precarious work.

I'll remind you also that marxists/communists are not just the people to the left of socdems or progressives or how you may call it. We reject the very system all those other ideologies operate within, therefore any criticism aimed towards social-democracy isn't comparable to neoliberalism because it's levied from a completely different framework.

"The recessions of 2008/2012/2014/2020 are a cause of precarious work and a consequences of right-wing attacks" it's funny you mention 4 crisis because it leads very well into the point about recessions. Capitalism, because of the anarchic nature of its production and focus on maximizing profit, has cyclical recessions regardless of who is managing capitalism at the moment. Recessions in capitalism have occurred since capitalism first took form, because of mechanisms like overproduction (capital tends to produce too much, inflating stockpiles and eventually necessitating a sudden drop in prices) and the falling rate of profit:

The rate of profit is the total portion of value that capitalists as a class are able to extract from the working class after paying off their costs. Because of reasons too complex to explain here (but you can look at graphs and verify that it always tends to fall), the rate of profit tends to fall and diminish. The only times it ever increases is because of destruction of capital and/or productive forces, such as during a war, or because of superprofits enabled by imperialism. This rate of profit has been getting smaller and smaller, it temporarily rises after recessions and it also means capitalism will either destroy itself or destroy the human race in an effort to raise it. The rate of profit is not applicable to individual companies or even sectors, it is a capitalist class wide trend.

Going back to the point of recessions, they aren't the sole reason for precarious work. they certainly worsen it, but the point of the post is that social-democracy not only does not alleviate this particular problem, but they are also fully capable of worsening it. They are doing this in Spain and in other countries too.

"Tolerance of employers who pay under the table is a cause of precarious work and a consequence of right-wing attacks" First of all, this wasn't the kind of precarious work I was talking about in the post innit?. Apart from that, who do you think is tolerating extralegal work. Is the right-wing forcing social-democrat governments across the world to tolerate this? Of course not. Work that isn't regulated by a contract is useful to the bourgeoisie because it keeps a portion of the working class in a limbo between unemployment and employment, allowing the reserve army of labor to not shrink while also exploiting a part of this reserve army and generally lowering costs. Social-democracy tolerates this because it is just one manager of capitalism, and they fundamentally serve the class interests of the infrastructure because they are part of the superstructure. This is true regardless of how much they like to talk like pro-worker communists and how much welfare they instate.

"Insufficient protection for people under irregular work contracts or no contracts, especially inmigrants, is a cause of precarious work and a consequence of right-wing attacks" This is also not the kind of precarious work I was talking about in the post. Regardless, the reason for this is similar to the one I explained above, it is convenient of capitalism to have workers halfway between employment and unemployment, and social-democracy protects capitalism. It's really insidious of you to bring up non-european workers and their exploitation while defending social-democracy, since the various European progressive and left-of-center governments have all contributed one way or another to NATO's interventions in SWANA and West Africa, the very places these inmigrant workers come from, escaping the violence these governments have caused, sponsored and benefitted from. I've already addressed who benefits from the cheap labor these inmigrants and refugees produce.

"Disregard of unions in labor law negotiations is a cause of precarious work and a consequence of right-wing attacks" Oh boy have I talked about unions on this blog. In short, unions are not the magic wand which makes exploitation disappear that so many people on this website and app seem to think they are. Their only function is to achieve temporary better working conditions while staying within the bounds of capitalism and salary work. This is also a point that's really funny to make while talking about the social-democrat precarious labor reforms because they signed it with the full approval of every big labor union in Spain. Another aspect of unions that I addressed in the linked post is that they also serve as the lapdogs of social-democracy. Something that happens in every single country where social-democrats are in power including the usamerican leftist's crush, the nordic countries.

Socialism-communism isn't when UBI, good wages and beating the capitalists at their own game. It's the complete overthrow of a bourgeois system to replace it with a proletariat system, it is rejecting the workings of the game at which social-democrats and labor unions pretend to try to win.

"Inequalities in infrastructure distribution is a cause of precarious work and a consequence of right-wing attacks" I'm not exactly sure if by infrastructure you're referring to like, roads and railways, or infrastructure in the sense of the avenues through which the state provides welfare, subsidies, etc. Either way, the inequality in the distribution of things like communication networks, utilities and state programs is one of the many contradictions inseparable from capitalism. I thought the point of "inequality is inherent to capitalism" was like, leftism 101. Is anon aware that social-democracy is still capitalism? Universal healthcare and government programs are not going to solve the unavoidable effects of the capitalist mode of production. That's what revolutionary marxism is for.

"So many more things are a cause for precarious work and a consequence of right-wing attacks" I can't answer if you don't give me more concrete examples, sadly. But I hope it's become clear to the reader why social-democracy is not the way to solve all of this issues, and why it is actually interested in keeping it around.

"None of those things are essential to social-democracy, and Spain's particular case isn't reflective of social-democracy in general" If I were a lesser man I'd say you sound like what "tankies" sound like to anti-communists when we address the mistakes and failings of proletariat states. But I don't think this would be a good answer to you, and I get the point you're making. Social-democracy is one variant of government in bourgeois democracies.

For this point to make sense to you, anon, (im really trying to be patient here, if I come across as condescending it's not intentional) you have to first understand that marxists believe, noht without reason, that the primary character of any state is the economic system that it protects. In our case, this system, the infrastructure, is capitalism, so the state and any party that governs it (part of the superstructure) will keep protecting capitalism because that is what's in its class interests. Individual people are able to go against class interests, but individual actions are close to irrelevant when we talk about the infrastructure.

It's not that every aspect discussed is essential to social-democracy, it's that social-democracy is essential to capitalism, which in turn ensures the existence of these problems. You're putting the cart before the horse.

With that denser part out of the way, regarding Spain's case. The post you're replying to wasn't meant to be an exhaustive treaty on the class character of social-democracy. It's a rant complaining about seeing usamericans championing the very fucking same talking points and policies that I see every single day fail. I know that social-democracy across various countries is different when it comes to these particular cases. But their class character is the same and their function within imperialist capitalism is the same.

To the second part of the ask now.

"The issue of colonialism wasn't very discussed in Marx's works" Yeah I know. Maybe you're under the impression that marxists are blind followers of Marx, I understand. But if you ask any actual marxist or communist, they'll acknowledge that Marx and Engels lacked in a lot of places (especially Engels in anthropology, he was very racist and uninformed in that regard). Which is why we also recommend people read other works such as Lenin's, which as far as I'm aware popularized the term of imperialism as a descriptor for capitalism, and the concept of dividing capitalism into stages, so many pseudo-communists like to say. There is also a myriad of work about imperialist capitalism written by colonialized people, such as Frantz Fanon or Eduardo Galeano. These are the places where marxist theory is most developed regarding colonialism, and it's where the idea of social-democracies in imperial core countries benefitting from imperialism in every instance comes from.

As a side note on marxism, the reason it's called that is not because we treat every work of Marx like holy texts, but because the analytical framework that his works establish and develop is the basis for any analysis and criticism of class conflict and revolutionary communism. We do not blindly follow what he says, we take his works (or any marxist work for that matter), instead, we analyze, critique and explore the ideas presented.

"The USSR was imperialist" (this is basically what anon is saying in the last portion of the ask) Imperialism is a specific stage in the development of capitalism, characterized by the export and tendency to monopoly of capital. It is a concrete economic descriptor that is useful to a specific timeframe in history. It is not, however, when a big country does something in a small country and expands. This definition, while simpler and more useful to the liberal status-quo, is functionally useless to define a state when it can be applied to the Greek colonization of the Mediterranean in the 6th century BC, the trading kingdoms of South East Asia, the Roman state before Caesar and the prinicipate, the germanic tribes that moved into souther Europe, the mongol state (and later states) that stretched from the sea of Japan to Hungary and from the arctic circle to Persia, the Incas and Aztecs, the HRE, the Iriquois confederacy (I'm not that sure on this one, but I'm including it because they were quite big and that's what qualifies as an empire to some people), the various rich kingdoms of west Africa, the modern USA and a long etcetera.

The more popular definition of imperialism, the one that somehow tries to coherently categorize all of the examples above and more under the same word, essentially boils down to territorial expansion. It should be called expanisonism, not imperialism. So if you're using that definition, and it looks like it, then yeah, the USSR was expanisonist. Extending the proletariat state against bourgeois states is good, actually.

I don't know what you think settler-colonialism is, but extracting fossil fuels definitely isn't it. Also, the oil and gas was extracted by the corresponding republics within the USSR. Many smaller republics, such as Turkmenistan, could specialize in fossil fuel extraction because the USSR guaranteed that the goods they didn't produce would reach them regardless. This is one of the reason the capitalist shock therapy posg-1991 forced onto the ex-soviet republics was so catastrophic, their production was organized under the assumption that they wouldn't need to sell off half their country to access basic consumer goods from a capitalist market.

Goddamn was that a long post to type on a phone. If anyone, including anon, replies to this with a low effort insult or to what they think I said instead of what was written on the post, I'm going to block you without exception. you've all been warned

#real marxist hours #you better fucking read this anon

56 notes · View notes

anarchy-and-piglins · 8 months

Note

More DSMP Techno thoughts.

Technoblade is literally one of the most generous people on the server. Like, in fic, Niki is always the one most characterized as generous (which is still accurate), but Technoblade is GENUINELY the most generous. From Netherite Armor, to helping Connor even though he had no reason to. To going to see Dream, even knowing it was a trap because he needed to make sure he wasn't dead. His whole rational behind his Anarchism is that People over Government. Helping others until they can stand on their own. Literally the most generous on the server.

Techno's generosity is such an endearing trait of his not to mention very important in analysing him as a character since it actually ties into a lot of other aspects about him I really adore.

Firstly, there's his planning and how he never wants to be caught off guard (sometimes to the point of paranoia). Technoblade is a great fighter and some of that is his impressive raw skill - as demonstrated when fighting Quackity in the tunnel post failed execution with low gear - but he's also an amazing tactician and strategist and he knows coming prepared is half the battle (as Sun Tzu's teachings also invoke). cc!Techno found this important enough to highlight when he went over dsmp lore, how he hated it when people boiled down c!Techno to being a good fighter because he's just 'that cracked' and not because he spends so much time and effort on preparation. Techno gives very freely to his allies during Pogtopia and to those he considers on his side, because it's the smart thing to do. Being generous there is simply clever battle tactics.

Then later on we see his generosity become extremely relevant as Techno digs more into the theoretics of anarchism and how to effectively spread it on the server (cc!Techno did the research and by extension c!Techno shows the growth and changing perspective). Mutual aid is one of the main pillars of most anarchistic beliefs, with the idea that goods should be shared among people so everybody can be self-sufficient and there's no dependency on government. This also means no hoarding of resources and giving without expecting anything in return. We see this come to fruition in the Arctic commune and among the syndicate too, where people definitely own things but there's little care for going into other people's chests and taking stuff when needed. Sometimes even without asking (though often with asking because it's the polite thing to do). Techno does not seem to view his own actions as generosity but rather as self-evident.

Lastly, there's of course the fact that Gift Giving very much seems to be Techno's main love language. He clearly values gifts he gets from others, including those that have no practicality or 'worth' (ie the blue from Ghostbur he refuses to throw away). Getting the ax from Ranboo was one of the more significant shows of care and consideration anybody on the dsmp had ever given Techno and he was clearly touched by it, plus it's a turning point in their relationship. And he's prone to giving his loved ones gifts too. Tying in with the first point and with the fact that Techno is very protective of his friends, a lot of his gifts do serve a very practical use of being the kind of things that will keep them safe (armor, weapons, supplies,...). I think that's very telling for who Techno is as a person.

A last thing I want to touch on is that Techno's generosity is nicely contrasted with his disdain for people taking advantage of him (falls in the category of betrayal and 'using him' that Techno is particularly wary of). When Tommy took his gapples without asking repeatedly even while Techno told him to stop, Techno was clearly very annoyed. It was not the taking itself that bothered him as much, but the fact that Tommy refused to respect a clear boundary.

Funnily enough, he also got annoyed that one time somebody yoinked his foxes, though he was not annoyed somebody took them or even that they took them without asking.... he was annoyed because the person that took his foxes took the ones he could use to breed more. He even remarked that if they had yoinked a baby and an adult - leaving Techno with two breedable adults himself - he would not have cared. He specifically got upset because they took the foxes from him in a way that created a scarcity of resources. This is also very mutual aid/anarchy aligned and that amuses me.

#technoblade #thoughts #this got so long LMAO lenn i'm sorry #the techno lorehead brain got activated #asks

159 notes · View notes

workingclasshistory · 11 months

Photo

On this day, 30 May 1814, Mikhail Bakunin, Russian revolutionary and founder of collectivist anarchism was born. Born in Tsarist Russia, Bakunin developed a burning hatred of injustice. He left the army and threw himself into the radical movement, playing a leading role in the 1848 insurrection in Dresden. He was deported from France, arrested and sentenced to death in Germany, extradited and sentenced to death in Austria, extradited and jailed in Russia then exiled to Siberia, from where he escaped. Although flawed, his experiences led him to develop the ideas which formed the basis of the modern anarchist movement in the last decade of his life. He and Karl Marx then became effective ideological leaders of two factions of the International Working Men's Association. This book tells the story of the debate and schism within the organisation: https://shop.workingclasshistory.com/products/the-first-socialist-schism-bakunin-vs-marx-in-the-international-working-mens-association-wolfgang-eckhardt https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=634977422008810&set=a.602588028581083&type=3

149 notes · View notes

dailyanarchistposts · 4 days

Text

A.2.8 Is it possible to be an anarchist without opposing hierarchy?

No. We have seen that anarchists abhor authoritarianism. But if one is an anti-authoritarian, one must oppose all hierarchical institutions, since they embody the principle of authority. For, as Emma Goldman argued, “it is not only government in the sense of the state which is destructive of every individual value and quality. It is the whole complex authority and institutional domination which strangles life. It is the superstition, myth, pretence, evasions, and subservience which support authority and institutional domination.” [Red Emma Speaks, p. 435] This means that “there is and will always be a need to discover and overcome structures of hierarchy, authority and domination and constraints on freedom: slavery, wage-slavery [i.e. capitalism], racism, sexism, authoritarian schools, etc.” [Noam Chomsky, Language and Politics, p. 364]

Thus the consistent anarchist must oppose hierarchical relationships as well as the state. Whether economic, social or political, to be an anarchist means to oppose hierarchy. The argument for this (if anybody needs one) is as follows:

“All authoritarian institutions are organised as pyramids: the state, the private or public corporation, the army, the police, the church, the university, the hospital: they are all pyramidal structures with a small group of decision-makers at the top and a broad base of people whose decisions are made for them at the bottom. Anarchism does not demand the changing of labels on the layers, it doesn’t want different people on top, it wants us to clamber out from underneath.” [Colin Ward, Anarchy in Action, p. 22]

Hierarchies “share a common feature: they are organised systems of command and obedience” and so anarchists seek “to eliminate hierarchy per se, not simply replace one form of hierarchy with another.” [Bookchin, The Ecology of Freedom, p. 27] A hierarchy is a pyramidally-structured organisation composed of a series of grades, ranks, or offices of increasing power, prestige, and (usually) remuneration. Scholars who have investigated the hierarchical form have found that the two primary principles it embodies are domination and exploitation. For example, in his classic article “What Do Bosses Do?” (Review of Radical Political Economy, Vol. 6, No. 2), a study of the modern factory, Steven Marglin found that the main function of the corporate hierarchy is not greater productive efficiency (as capitalists claim), but greater control over workers, the purpose of such control being more effective exploitation.

Control in a hierarchy is maintained by coercion, that is, by the threat of negative sanctions of one kind or another: physical, economic, psychological, social, etc. Such control, including the repression of dissent and rebellion, therefore necessitates centralisation: a set of power relations in which the greatest control is exercised by the few at the top (particularly the head of the organisation), while those in the middle ranks have much less control and the many at the bottom have virtually none.

Since domination, coercion, and centralisation are essential features of authoritarianism, and as those features are embodied in hierarchies, all hierarchical institutions are authoritarian. Moreover, for anarchists, any organisation marked by hierarchy, centralism and authoritarianism is state-like, or “statist.” And as anarchists oppose both the state and authoritarian relations, anyone who does not seek to dismantle all forms of hierarchy cannot be called an anarchist. This applies to capitalist firms. As Noam Chomsky points out, the structure of the capitalist firm is extremely hierarchical, indeed fascist, in nature:

“a fascist system… [is] absolutist — power goes from top down … the ideal state is top down control with the public essentially following orders. “Let’s take a look at a corporation… [I]f you look at what they are, power goes strictly top down, from the board of directors to managers to lower managers to ultimately the people on the shop floor, typing messages, and so on. There’s no flow of power or planning from the bottom up. People can disrupt and make suggestions, but the same is true of a slave society. The structure of power is linear, from the top down.” [Keeping the Rabble in Line, p. 237]

David Deleon indicates these similarities between the company and the state well when he writes:

“Most factories are like military dictatorships. Those at the bottom are privates, the supervisors are sergeants, and on up through the hierarchy. The organisation can dictate everything from our clothing and hair style to how we spend a large portion of our lives, during work. It can compel overtime; it can require us to see a company doctor if we have a medical complaint; it can forbid us free time to engage in political activity; it can suppress freedom of speech, press and assembly — it can use ID cards and armed security police, along with closed-circuit TVs to watch us; it can punish dissenters with ‘disciplinary layoffs’ (as GM calls them), or it can fire us. We are forced, by circumstances, to accept much of this, or join the millions of unemployed… In almost every job, we have only the ‘right’ to quit. Major decisions are made at the top and we are expected to obey, whether we work in an ivory tower or a mine shaft.” [“For Democracy Where We Work: A rationale for social self-management”, Reinventing Anarchy, Again, Howard J. Ehrlich (ed.), pp. 193–4]

Thus the consistent anarchist must oppose hierarchy in all its forms, including the capitalist firm. Not to do so is to support archy — which an anarchist, by definition, cannot do. In other words, for anarchists, ”[p]romises to obey, contracts of (wage) slavery, agreements requiring the acceptance of a subordinate status, are all illegitimate because they do restrict and restrain individual autonomy.” [Robert Graham, “The Anarchist Contract, Reinventing Anarchy, Again, Howard J. Ehrlich (ed.), p. 77] Hierarchy, therefore, is against the basic principles which drive anarchism. It denies what makes us human and “divest[s] the personality of its most integral traits; it denies the very notion that the individual is competent to deal not only with the management of his or her personal life but with its most important context: the social context.” [Murray Bookchin, Op. Cit., p. 202]

Some argue that as long as an association is voluntary, whether it has a hierarchical structure is irrelevant. Anarchists disagree. This is for two reasons. Firstly, under capitalism workers are driven by economic necessity to sell their labour (and so liberty) to those who own the means of life. This process re-enforces the economic conditions workers face by creating “massive disparities in wealth … [as] workers… sell their labour to the capitalist at a price which does not reflect its real value.” Therefore:

“To portray the parties to an employment contract, for example, as free and equal to each other is to ignore the serious inequality of bargaining power which exists between the worker and the employer. To then go on to portray the relationship of subordination and exploitation which naturally results as the epitome of freedom is to make a mockery of both individual liberty and social justice.” [Robert Graham, Op. Cit., p. 70]

It is for this reason that anarchists support collective action and organisation: it increases the bargaining power of working people and allows them to assert their autonomy (see section J).

Secondly, if we take the key element as being whether an association is voluntary or not we would have to argue that the current state system must be considered as “anarchy.” In a modern democracy no one forces an individual to live in a specific state. We are free to leave and go somewhere else. By ignoring the hierarchical nature of an association, you can end up supporting organisations based upon the denial of freedom (including capitalist companies, the armed forces, states even) all because they are “voluntary.” As Bob Black argues, ”[t]o demonise state authoritarianism while ignoring identical albeit contract-consecrated subservient arrangements in the large-scale corporations which control the world economy is fetishism at its worst.” [The Libertarian as Conservative, The Abolition of Work and other essays, p. 142] Anarchy is more than being free to pick a master.

Therefore opposition to hierarchy is a key anarchist position, otherwise you just become a “voluntary archist” — which is hardly anarchistic. For more on this see section A.2.14 ( Why is voluntarism not enough?).

Anarchists argue that organisations do not need to be hierarchical, they can be based upon co-operation between equals who manage their own affairs directly. In this way we can do without hierarchical structures (i.e. the delegation of power in the hands of a few). Only when an association is self-managed by its members can it be considered truly anarchistic.

We are sorry to belabour this point, but some capitalist apologists, apparently wanting to appropriate the “anarchist” name because of its association with freedom, have recently claimed that one can be both a capitalist and an anarchist at the same time (as in so-called “anarcho” capitalism). It should now be clear that since capitalism is based on hierarchy (not to mention statism and exploitation), “anarcho”-capitalism is a contradiction in terms. (For more on this, see Section F)

31 notes · View notes