• 2 Posts
  • 30 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: February 13th, 2024

help-circle


  • I literally provided concrete examples of shows doing just that. There are plenty of other examples such as Mr. Robot or V for Vendetta. Some are more subtle than others, but the message is always that resisting authority should be done by lone rebels, and loose self organizing groups. Some shows name anarchism explicitly, others merely imply it.

    The examples you provided are fictional movies popular for their alternative plot. If you are interested in anarchism read authors like Malatesta, Emma Goldman, Bakunin or Kropotkin. “Anarchism” is not a football team, saying anarchists have nothing to show in over a century sounds like a misinterpretation of anarchism and an insufficient knowledge of history.

    Anarchism and anti-authoritarianism are used as release valves to funnel this discontent away from serious organizing that might challenge the system.

    Organization does not imply authority or rulers. Authoritarian organizations can be used as a release valve too and one could argue they are easier to manipulate and control.

    They are in fact dependent on central authority as history clearly shows.

    A person can have discipline and be organized without a general or ruler.

    That’s the reality.

    I’ve been banned and censored before from this sub and lemmy.ml simply for challenging the narrative. I’m not going to reply here any further. You are welcome discussing authority in a less authoritarian sub where none of us will be silenced.


  • The promotion of anarchism within capitalist media, coupled with the suppression of Marxist thought, is damning evidence against anarchism as viable opposition to capitalist hegemony.

    Over here capitalist media and state media are the same outlet and never in my life i’ve seen them promoting anarchism. They don’t even mention anarchists as such unless when it’s useful to portrait “anarchism” under bad light, they are usually referred to “extremists” or “antagonists”.

    Meanwhile, history demonstrates time and again that revolutions require centralized authority to dismantle oppressive systems.

    This sound like a generalization that isn’t necessarily true and one could argue that replacing an oppressive system with another is no revolution at all.

    Capitalism tolerates anarchism precisely because it poses no systemic threat

    I’m not sure where you live, in pretty much every country in the world self thought is discouraged and education is rooted in conformism.

    while revolutionary movements succeed only by embracing disciplined, organized force.

    Discipline and organization are not dependent on a central authority. State media is working hard in making sure you don’t hear about success from “others”.