[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Debian stable and flatpaks, I don't see all the fuss

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 9 points 4 months ago

Why defenseless? The entire organization can defense itself from outsiders. No need of hierarchy for that.

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 months ago

Spain was not part of WW2. Facists won before that, though.

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 15 points 4 months ago

Actually, there seems to be a bit of a mix-up. Let me clarify.

In an anarchist group, enforcing anything goes against its fundamental principles.

If personal gain is the motive, one isn't truly aligned with the group's social contract and isn't considered part of it.

Decisions are made collectively, without hierarchy. Voting or delegating organisational tasks to sub-groups is the norm.

I won't go into words like "attacking," "defense," or "threats" as they are military terms, far from the anarchist ethos.

And I won't call you "bro" or make you read theory. I feel you won't.

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 51 points 4 months ago

Anarchy is not by nature disorganized. Lack of hierarchy doesn't mean lack of organization. Probably a well-functioning anarchist organization is better organized than most hierarchical ones.

If friends are not there to defend the group of three, mutual aid is missing. That's why it failed.

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 29 points 9 months ago

Business are soulless evils

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 13 points 11 months ago

The NeverEnding Story

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 9 points 11 months ago

I can't imagine a world with god in it.

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 year ago

Unions are not just for getting higher wages. They're not even just for when conditions start to get worse. Unions should be there for the best as well as the worst working conditions. Unions serve to maintain good and improve bad conditions, it's not about going against the "boss", it's about actively or passively defending the workers' conditions.

Would you trust your boss' lawyer saying "the trial will be fair, you won't need a lawyer"?

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 year ago

Wow, that would be the last straw. You have a link to his comments?

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago

Authoritarian semantics that is taken to a vote. Bravo, you live in a perpetual circlejerk.

[-] RedDoozer@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago

Your definition of "hate speech" is childish. Hate speech promotes a specific belief filled with prejudiced meanings, leading to disrespect to a certain group of people's dignity. It is defined by objective standards and has negative impacts on society. This kind of behavior can harm our community as a whole. Strongly in favor of defederating any server that cannot differentiate between "hate speech" and "free speech"

view more: next ›

RedDoozer

joined 1 year ago