Тег: Relationship

Ancap-chan, explain why you don’t share the views of Bitarch, Voluntarist and Agoristic, and why you recognize aggressive violence outside the framework of self-defense?

If it is unclear where exactly you are admitting it – here is the chat dialogue:

Purple Dragon: @ancapsan, I wonder, if Bitarch actually invents his libertarian vaccine, tests it, and gets approval from independent doctors, would you get vaccinated?

Ancap-chan: It’s important to understand exactly what changes will occur in the body and decide based on the specifics. If the effect is exactly as Bitarch dreams—which I don’t believe in, because genetics doesn’t seem to work that way—then why not? It wouldn’t affect self-defense capabilities, and if I needed to take violent revenge, I would still prefer to hire a specialist rather than act myself.

Lio Bertes (question accompanied by a donation of 0.0000427btc)

At first I thought about joking it off, but I think I’ll answer seriously.

The subject of my main disagreement with Bitarch is my dislike of operating with holistic constructs. I prefer to consider not violence as a phenomenon, but violence that one specific subject manifests toward another specific subject. And only then do I view this specific violence in the context of libertarian ideology, which proclaims freedom as its value. And this very freedom means that I reserve the right, among other things, to revenge, if I so wish. Naturally, I also leave others the right to try to stop me and hold me accountable.

My own moral views, which may prompt me to enter into a conflict, including a violent one, are higher for me than an abstract desire to have a world completely devoid of aggressive violence. Attempts to manipulate me in the spirit of “as long as violence remains in the world, humanity is in danger” might lead only to a shrug: “then let it remain in danger.” I would perhaps even sharpen the thesis. If we assume there is a button that, when pressed, destroys humanity, I would want to have it. Not to press it, but to know that I can do it. This is a very important incentive for a person—the expansion of possibilities, that is, degrees of freedom. Freedom.

And it is all the more important for me to have the ability to respond to violence against me, both directly at the moment of attack and ex post facto, if that is more convenient for me. I will not voluntarily destroy in myself the capacity for such a thing. So please forgive me, in the dialogue quoted above, I lied.

At the same time, I deeply appreciate Bitarch’s research with the Voluntarist regarding the investigation of mechanisms that influence people’s attitudes toward the manifestation of violence. Moreover, I respect Bitarch’s striving to obtain a button that eradicates the inclination toward aggressive violence in humanity. After all, how is this worse than the desire to have a button to destroy humanity? True, he craves this button in order to press it, and that changes the situation slightly: perhaps I will still have to stop him, as they stop mad scientists in classic action movies. Well, that would be interesting.

The rat demands another dose of gene therapy

How do you feel about anarcho-punks, being an anarchist yourself?

Mohawks, metal, port wine, speakers, Yegor Letov, Grazhdanskaya Oborona, Yuri Hoy and Viktor Tsoi! And of course, mother-anarchy!

But seriously, do you think there are common grounds between libertarians and anarcho-punks, and is interaction or even cooperation between them possible?

Ahmad (question accompanied by a donation of 0.00005166 btc)

Perhaps the most punk thing I’ve ever seen is the movie “Fight Club.” There, it’s no longer just Tsoi’s “you must be strong, you must be able to say don’t tread on me,” but an aggressive denial of the dominant system as a whole, in which, of course, the distinct contours of some anti-system are visible: how wonderful it is to destroy something beautiful, how wonderful it is to wage guerrilla warfare against the regime by any means from spitting in soup to blowing up buildings, and most importantly—how wonderful self-destruction is. Self-destruction proves the sincerity of one’s views and provides a person with a high platform, even if before that they were nobody and had no name. And here, everyone repeats in chorus—his name is Vladislav Roslyakov! That is impressive.

Of course, the punk movement is a product of the twentieth century with its disregard for individual human life and very large-scale thinking. Punks did not defend their own individual freedom (freedom within the existing system is shit), because it is only possible through a transition to anarchy, and that primarily means the breakdown of the existing system. It is pointless to discuss whether punks have a positive agenda and to make its presence a condition for cooperation with them. It is quite enough that a punk will fight not against every system, but only against the one that spawned him. We are all a bit like virologists now, so I think the analogy of punks as antibodies to the state would be quite appropriate.

I think it’s clear from the above that there are common grounds between anarcho-punks and anarcho-libertarians. But what about interaction and cooperation? Here, I’m afraid, anarcho-libertarians will seem like boring, stifling and useless theorists to anarcho-punks. What is this “respect for private property”? The state holds you as property tighter than it holds your balls; forget about it. As long as you are afraid of living in shit, they will scare you by dipping you in shit, and in the fight against the system, one cannot be distracted by such trivial fears.

Punks are guerrillas. I think they could have quite mutually beneficial and mutually understandable cooperation with sufficiently hardcore agorists, who are also essentially guerrillas. But still, I would like to see a lecture, say, by Pavel Usanov before an audience of anarcho-punks, dedicated to some kind of brutality. Well, for example, a talk on the economics of Mexican cartels from the position of AEL. Naturally, Pavel should be in full dress, with a bow tie, otherwise the picture won’t be right.

The image is very important in terms of influence on society, so there should, of course, also be many carnival punks in a strong subculture, who mostly copy visual images rather than the style of thinking and, most importantly, actions. But please forgive me for not dwelling in detail on the visual component, such as mohawks and studs: that’s for the designers, they understand the language of material culture better.

An outside look at Russia and the protests

I won’t venture to judge the details of another round of protests in Russia that took place yesterday, but I am glad that it has increased in size, and it seems to me that either people have learned how to avoid detention, or the Moscow authorities are no longer daring to be so fierce. Either way, there are fewer detainees than a week ago, and no particularly mass cruelty is visible in the photos.

In Georgia, everyone I talk to, upon learning that I am from Russia, immediately asks what is happening in Moscow, from which it can be concluded that in the information space, the protest has long since overcome local boundaries. Moreover, this cannot be attributed to biased coverage of the situation by Georgian media: I was asked questions by tourists from Turkey, Romania, and the Netherlands. I should also note that I am not at some political conference here—all around are carefree vacationers; one would think they wouldn’t care.

Naturally, the sympathy of the global public is on the side of the protesters. However, it is equally on the side of the protesters in Hong Kong, the yellow vests, the Venezuelan opposition, and so on. When volunteers are on one side and salaried employees are on the other, people sympathize with the volunteers. Even regarding the events in Kyrgyzstan, where it seems to be a matter of “the toad and the viper,” the mere fact that people are ready to voluntarily stand up for the former president and fight for him against the authorities already tells people that the government probably shouldn’t have started this whole assault.

I am also constantly assured that I have nothing to fear, that the attitude toward Russians here is still just as friendly. To be honest, this sometimes looks like a mantra for self-convincing. Evidence to the contrary also turns up. I won’t say much, I’ll just provide a few photos.

Suggesting not to feel at home
Ruining good drawings because of the author’s Russian language
But there are also statements that any Russian patriot would sign

Why don’t “Schemes and Memes” love you?

анонимный вопрос

Don’t they love it? I would say it is more like touching courtship. When three or four channels I follow posted their ads, I was somehow too lazy to go and see what they were writing, but here I finally got around to it, so well done, they used a winning tactic.

I have exactly one complaint regarding the “Libertarianism in Schemes and Memes” channel, which Grigory Bazhenov voiced to them some time ago: where are the schemes? I looked, and they really aren’t there. A shortcoming.

A picture posted in schemememes brought me 15 new subscribers. Guys, make yourselves comfortable; I will try to avoid long delays in publications in the future.

As for “memes for Russians,” I am still too lazy to drop by. But if they post something interesting there, let me know and I’ll take a look. For now, schemememes reliably protect them from my attention, for which the protected ones, I hope, will thank them.