#market anarchist

[miochimochi]

A good time to bring these texts to the table:

Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You! by David Graeber

Anarchy Works by Peter Gelderloos

if it helps, i very genuinely believe an anarchist future is possible and i believe people have already started building it

[miochimochi]

Made 2 new lino cuts. The fabric here isn't the best for stamping it seems but it's enough to show off.

[guavagyal]

leftism, communism, socialism & anarchism need a major brand & PR re-haul in the West, mainly America.

too many people think we're white, cringey, and sanctimonious assholes who preach about North Korea & the USSR (you're scaring away the maidens & being weird). they gotta be stylish, funny, and know how to speak to people. that whole litmus test for leftists is played out. you need to be populist, central, & not weird.

[dragonpilot]

What kind of material thing would you like rn? I would love a lobter dinner 🦞

[aardwolfpunx]

tidbits from a really good gale article about capitalism and free stores

while here do your daily clicks for palestine 🇵🇸

Under the logic of capitalism, you only deserve to "make a living" if you sell yourself and your labor power to a capitalist. At a free store, the criteria for participating is simply being alive.

People who benefit from the current system—landlords, police, politicians and bosses—rely on mass media and our schooling systems to deceive and dull the population into believing capitalism is the most efficient way, or the only viable way of producing and distributing resources.

But what currently exists is one way of organizing a society of many, and it isn't serving most of us. An ability to imagine and create non-hierarchical alternatives threatens the authority of people benefiting from the current system. At a free store, we can begin to glimpse a world where everything is free and built on voluntary exchange of labor, resources and knowledge.

More recently, anarchists started organizing "Really Really Free Markets" (RRFMs) throughout the 2000s, which tend to be pop-up events, across the United States. These markets never completely dwindled but, if media coverage is to be an accurate benchmark of organizing efforts, there seems to have been an uptick in RRFMs over the past couple years. Collectives are organizing them in cities large and small, from Louisville, Kentucky; Corvallis, Oregon; Avon, North Carolina; Ypsilanti, Michigan; Tempe, Arizona; New Paltz, New York; Athens, Georgia; Jersey City, New Jersey; and in many other locations.

Sohal also emphasized the collective's desire to facilitate connections and relationships in the neighborhood. "People can come in with their kids and sit down or sit outside and rest and chat. We've been talking about having a really big, comfy seating area, and sitting options outside," she said. "We know the power of talking to your neighbors, and we're hoping that having a physical free store will allow conversations between neighbors so that people are letting people around them know that this resource exists. Maybe neighbors will pick up groceries for each other."

"There's a really high rate of poverty in Pulaski County, and in a lot of Southwest Virginia and its really common for a lot of places that do offer help to do a lot of means testing and put other barriers in-between people and help," Hazel Wines, an organizer involved in the free store told VPM News. "And we wanted to remove as those barriers and just be a place where people could help each other. It's not just food, it's not just clothes.… Everyone deserves to live a life of dignity and we want to help provide that."

[homoqueerjewhobbit]

The secret rule of who gets a plus one to my wedding is how happy I am that you're in a relationship. Cousin who's dragged a different weeb into every family photo for a decade? Nah, this weeb isn't drinking on my dime. Friend who finally found a genuinely nice boy after dating a string of abusive Maoists? Hell, invite his mom, too.

[somerandomg33k]

I wonder

I am kind of curious about the history of the Stock Market. My Anarcho-Syndicalist instinct is that there is some horribleness attached to the Stock Market's history. After all, we are talking about Capitalism. Do any socialists, communists, or anarchists have sources on the history of the Stock Market?

[clowningaroundmars]

the way that i am now downloading stock market news apps......... and squinting at these crazy ass news articles and learning finance terms n shit.... trying to read these number and graphs........

i am morphing into a middle aged dad of 3 kids. 🧍‍♂️

[deepseacityunderground]

its always really funny to me when leftists on this site try and claim that all other leftists on the Side They Disagree With are chauvanists and sheltered middle class babies

[miochimochi]

Tim Walz is not just a politician, he's a brown shirt.

[headmateeconomy]

my friend, we are anti-revisionist marxist-leninists. not only do we not support headmate markets - we don’t support markets at all lol. I just wanted to make my position (and Minty’s position) very clear on this.

Honestly thats fine with us, were eco-anarchist so we get where youre coming from -🎰

[publicuniversalenemy]

am i perhaps THEE luckiest guy inthe world? sources point to Yes

[butchstalinist]

---

[czolgosz]

it's really disappointing to me how of all the leon czolgosz fiction things i've read, leon has been a main character in only two of them. like i know that the market for these books isn't people interested in leon czolgosz as an individual but still

[undead-moth]

Because this is such an excellent post I'm going to try to keep my infodump here brief but I can't pass it up:

Whether or not something that happens within a story is "realistic" is determined by an agreement made between the writer and the audience in the premise.

The writer establishes the rules of the world and promises not to break them as long as you, the audience, promise to believe anything that happens without breaking them is real even if they aren't plausible or possible (re: realistic) in real life.

This is where the term "suspension of disbelief" comes from. If the writer asks you to suspend your disbelief higher than they initially promised in the premise, that means they broke one of the rules, and something has happened that goes against what you agreed to believe is plausible or possible for the purposes of immersing yourself in the story. If a story asks you to suspend your disbelief too high from the outset, that means something about this story is just too implausible or impossible as a premise for you to immerse yourself in personally.

When something "unrealistic" happens within a story, it very specifically refers to what shouldn't be plausible or possible within the story's universe -

It does not refer to what is implausible or impossible in real life.

This is why criticism of tragedies, horror, and musicals are often missing the point, and don't offer productive analysis. It doesn't matter if someone in real life would "wait a few minutes" to see if Juliet wakes up. It doesn't matter if losing cell service is "convenient." It doesn't matter if no one "bursts into song" in real life. None of these genres have the same rules as real life and they're not meant to.

If these genres are asking you to suspend your disbelief higher than you're able to, it's fair to not be a fan of them. It's not fair to insist all of these genres actually suck just because they don't conform to the specific height at which you personally prefer a story to suspend your disbelief.

This is a dangerous sentiment for me to express, as an editor who spends most of my working life telling writers to knock it off with the 45-word sentences and the adverbs and tortured metaphors, but I do think we're living through a period of weird pragmatic puritanism in mainstream literary taste.

e.g. I keep seeing people talk about 'purple prose' when they actually mean 'the writer uses vivid and/or metaphorical descriptive language'. I've seen people who present themselves as educators offer some of the best genre writing in western canon as examples of 'purple prose' because it engages strategically in prose-poetry to evoke mood and I guess that's sheer decadence when you could instead say "it was dark and scary outside". But that's not what purple prose means. Purple means the construction of the prose itself gets in the way of conveying meaning. mid-00s horse RPers know what I'm talking about. Cerulean orbs flash'd fire as they turn'd 'pon rollforth land, yonder horizonways. <= if I had to read this when I was 12, you don't get to call Ray Bradbury's prose 'purple'.

I griped on here recently about the prepossession with fictional characters in fictional narratives behaving 'rationally' and 'realistically' as if the sole purpose of a made-up story is to convince you it could have happened. No wonder the epistolary form is having a tumblr renaissance. One million billion arguments and thought experiments about The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas that almost all evade the point of the story: that you can't wriggle out of it. The narrator is telling you how it was, is and will be, and you must confront the dissonances it evokes and digest your discomfort. 'Realistic' begins on the author's terms, that's what gives them the power to reach into your brain and fiddle about until sparks happen. You kind of have to trust the process a little bit.

This ultra-orthodox attitude to writing shares a lot of common ground with the tight, tight commodification of art in online spaces. And I mean commodification in the truest sense - the reconstruction of the thing to maximise its capacity to interface with markets. Form and function are overwhelmingly privileged over cloudy ideas like meaning, intent and possibility, because you can apply a sliding value scale to the material aspects of a work. But you can't charge extra for 'more challenging conceptual response to the milieu' in a commission drive. So that shit becomes vestigial. It isn't valued, it isn't taught, so eventually it isn't sought out. At best it's mystified as part of a given writer/artist's 'talent', but either way it grows incumbent on the individual to care enough about that kind of skill to cultivate it.

And it's risky, because unmeasurables come with the possibility of rejection or failure. Drop in too many allegorical descriptions of the rose garden and someone will decide your prose is 'purple' and unserious. A lot of online audiences seem to be terrified of being considered pretentious in their tastes. That creates a real unwillingness to step out into discursive spaces where you 🫵 are expected to develop and explore a personal relationship with each element of a work. No guard rails, no right answers. Word of god is shit to us out here. But fear of getting that kind of analysis wrong makes people hove to work that slavishly explains itself on every page. And I'm left wondering, what's the point of art that leads every single participant to the same conclusion? See Spot run. Run, Spot, run. Down the rollforth land, yonder horizonways. I just want to read more weird stuff.

[isabellthebitchyghost]

almost the weekend 😌