Vanilla

I am sorry, you struggle with this so much. Perhaps try again with a calculator?

When I look at those neat American suburb grids and imagine to be a shop owner, I would love to put my store directly into the grid. Is it just not allowed to have a shop in those neighborhoods? Isn’t that anti-capitalist lol?

I eat a vegetarian diet my whole life, vegan on and off for most of my life and reached old person years with no Cholin deficiencies in sight.

No, you do not need to eat 2lbs of soybeans daily.

You can educate yourself on Cholin here, for example: Concentrations of Choline-Containing Compounds and Betaine in Common Foods

No I don’t. I don’t even have a driving license.

It’s also not just about cars. Oil is in other products people can try to avoid. Everyone can do something. Everything between voting for the right direction to changing your whole life around it. It doesn’t matter where, as an individual, you can exist on that spectrum. As long as people don’t just throw their hands to the air and deny all responsibility.

Many people also are prone to zero sum thinking. When you tell them that everyone is responsible, they hear “We shouldn’t blame corporations, YOU are to blame!”

Even though that’s neither what you said nor thought.

Zero sum thinking + cognitive dissonance.

“I can’t do it perfectly, so I better don’t do anything at all”

Choline is in many vegan foods: grains, nuts, brassicas, beans, lentils, everything made from Soja,…

Sure, but perhaps people could stop eating at that restaurant?

Because how some people currently are acting is that they continue to support these corporations, unwilling to switch to alternatives.

Ignoring the context, this image is quite hot. I hope there were no actual Nazis involved.

We do not know if the person was bullied or just had an extreme sense of entitlement or some other type of personality disorder which made them believe everyone who didn’t treat them a specific way was bullying them.

Each of your examples I looked up and there is either not eboug information about them to make these judgements or there is vague information that refutes your claims.

For example:

CNT/FAI had and used prisons.

In anarchist Ukraine you had the so called Black Guards which acted similar to police and they had groups like Black Banner and general tried to overpower each other all the time.

In the region reigned by Zapatistas the Mexican Army and National Guard’s handle crime with Zapatistas even claiming they don’t do enough and should do more against the violent crime there.

Wendat have hierarchical structures with a Grand Chief and a Chief of each family.

So, if a country can “decide” this, why can’t a community “decide” it?

I don’t say they can’t. I say they can’t do it without some form of police who enforces the rules they decided on in some way.

Ever heard of racism in the police? And you claim that I don’t acknowledge my privileges.

What makes you believe a smaller group of people is less racist? I’d say it’s the other way around.

You have to do so today. If you don’t notice that, that’s because you fit in.

I very much do not fit in. And everytime someone helped me in the past it was police or some other state infrastructure. Definitely not my neighbours who would probably just cast me out as a burden.

They won’t because they can’t. How to deal with people who aren’t nice is one of the biggest flaws in anarchist theory. Because there is no way to see whether their theory of “people will all turn into nice humans without a state” is actually true.

It’s basically an axiom of their ideology and some anarchists straight out reject all psychological or sociological theories that suggest humans aren’t naturally good.

In my experience most anarchists either just live with the fact that violence has to be accepted (I would put Stirner into that group, for example).

Or they believe in vigilante justice. So neighbours watching and judging each other. Which only works - again - if you believe the absolute majority of people will not seek to exploit or overpower each other.

But that’s what the person I reacted to suggested:

Let’s do that, and the remaining actual sociopaths can stay in prison for life.

No, it’s actually one of the most problematic points in anarchist theory. How to handle people who are cruel or who do not respect social contracts. The fact that many anarchists want to abolish police but than want to build a structure similar to police or do not discuss the topic at all is showing they don’t have a solution.

Stirner for example basically ignores the topic. Kropotkin only addresses crimes which have the state as basis (property and political crime).

Please share which Anarchist theoretist formulated a concrete plan on how to deal with non-political crime in practice.

How would anarchists enforce that these communities “wouldn’t be allowed to exist”? Seems a lot like power and authority to me.

Well, I am so happy that police exists because I know I’d be fucked up without it. There is not a single society without police that doesn’t oppress it’s children and women. I know that a lot of people believe in a natural order and in that order I am below them. The only thing that is stopping them from enforcing their believes is that the country I live in decided that it is wrong to treat people that way and to enforce this believe they have laws and police.

I would rather not live in a world where I have to creep up my neighbour’s butts in the hopes of them protecting me. I don’t want to have to fit in to be free and I don’t want to be scared of my neighbours all the time.

Anarchists just seem like a bunch of spoiled privileged people to me who’s only concern is that someone doesn’t allow them to consume drugs or whatever. I just wish they’d try living in a place without these structures in place for a while they privilege off but don’t acknowledge.

Do you live in a country without police, btw? How about you move to one without and see how well it works out for you.

What you misunderstand is that the same thinking you want to apply now lead to these first cities. They thought that was consensus then as well. We only in hindsight decided that, for example, it is unjust if people are enslaved or not allowed to vote. It still started with communities making up their rules and these grew. It’s the same thing as what anarchists are proposing is the way to do it.

You just have to look at any society without police and a legislative to see that they all oppress those who are perceived as weaker. Usually it is kids and women who don’t have rights in these communities.

So when you have 150 people in a society and 80 vote for people with red hair should be burned as witches what happens then?