#unjust hierarchies

[somerandomg33k]

Question

Is it a good thing to make money? Cause I think Liberals general think it is a good thing to make money. But of course, freaking Liberals and their love of unjust hierarchies.

[wishesofeternity]

My problem with The Dragon Prince is that while it preaches about "breaking the cycle" and "choosing love", it repeatedly does so in a way that echoes the age-old idea of telling victims to passively accept their lot in life and the injustices inflicted upon them while their perpetrators never have to acknowledge their wrongs or face consequences for their actions. This is the kind of narrative they follow on both a personal and systematic axis, and it's exactly why the show will always frustrate me.

[edwardseymour]

on the topic of stanne's being incapable of viewing feminism through any other lens than 'not like the other girls'... would anne even be regarded as so exceptional if she wasn't as privileged as she was? would the idea of her innate exceptionalism, her standing out at court as more fashionable/passionate/moral/intellectual/exotic still persist? i just have to wonder how many women could have been remembered by history as exceptional, if only given the ability to — if they had the resources from birth that anne had etc.

[the-avaricious-meddler]

Resisting the urge to scream when people miss that the Judgements are only at the top of the chain because they put themselves there and in fact the chain only exists because they created it and instead read FL as a generic "some beings are just naturally above others Because" story

[bisexual-magneto]

I mean, I feel like it is a natural outcome considering that both the jury and the public seemed to completely forget that Depp v Heard was about defamation, not abuse, but it terrifies me that a lot of people don't realise me what a giant blow to women's freedom of speech this was. She didn't name Depp as an abuser in that article, she said she was a figure representing abuse. The article was co-written with the ACLU and one of the contested lines was written by the editors but she got sued for it. Not the Washington Post, not the ACLU. Which definitely is at least partially because she had the worst lawyers and partially to get back at the ex, but Depp sued the Sun in the UK. He does sue newspapers.

And this is another facet of the larger phenomenon where all those big Western values of liberty and individualism, the personal pursuit of happiness, civil liberties for everyone etc etc etc - is and always have been directed at (white) men, with anyone else being granted some of that as a concession. So many of the lauded works in our literature are about how any person has the right to take charge of their own fate and needs civil liberties to be able to take responsibility for their lives - but at any of those points of time, it was always clear that this does not apply to women.

That since men have decided that women are happier as housewives, they have to be housewives, it had to be made law and there had to be social pressure. Since men have decided that women are better wives if they're uneducated, they barred them from education. That since men had decided that women cannot handle stress, they have to be banned from all sorts of things. And so on. The ideal of self-determination has always been a gendered one. It is about the man as the special crown jewel of creation, the being of infinite value, intelligence and depth, alleviated to personal power by the Enlightenment - and the woman as the NPC beside him. The rib. Remember, the same phase in history when male philosophers and scholars started to push for the idea that every (white) man is created equal, has the same abilities barred by circumstances - that was the same time that othering was more and more transferred from a religious rationale to a scientific one.

And much in the same way, if a man - any man but especially a white man - had lost a defamation trial on such shaky, shaky grounds, men would be taking his side, sharing 1984 quotes or whatever and consider it a dark day for human rights. In fact, think of all the male pundits who will spin outright lies about some celebrity being part of a cannibal paedo cult - and when they're found out to be lying, their fans defend them and say that "well it's their freedom of speech!"

For the public, there is no urgency to defend women's right to freedom of speech, especially when they're talking about gendered issues, because quite classically, they think a woman has nothing meaningful to say and "should be seen, not Heard".

[yuriartillery]

it must be extremely tiring to be a real anarchist on tumblr. imagine having coherent beliefs but being forced to share a space and labels with idiots who say vote blue no matter who. id be looking for the nearest bridge

[zukkacore]

The Fountain Of Magical Brethren statue in the 5th Harry Potter book really was the Rosetta Stone for me understanding that Jk Rowling really has always just been a White Man’s Burden kind of freak

[thedragonagelesbian]

head in hands why did i do this to myself*

*make my canon inquisitor a trevelyan

[geoffrey]

just read the first snowpiercer comic. that was literally one of the worst things ive ever read

[the-avaricious-meddler]

Also speaking of the great chain I'm drawn to Hell specifically. And the bit in Heart's Desire where Beechwood is put on trial for going *down* the chain, because to Hell only going *up* is allowed.

And it makes me think: Hell, in all its stated rejection of Law, still wants to use The Chain for its own benefit rather than get rid of it. They claim to be subverting it, when in reality they just want to do Unjust Hierarchies but in a different flavor.

No wonder there are groups of Devils who want to rebel against Hell.

[flango87]

Everyday I think of the time I was watching the hunger games and my dad came in and I was explaining where I was in the movie and what snow was doing and such and he went “oh yeah bc snow is doing that communism thing like Trudeau is” and I just. No Sir. You Must be Confused.

[read-marx-and-lenin]

There is no magic "abolish the state" button, which is why I'm an anarchist, as "when the state has socialismed enough it will just magically poof away in a cloud of smoke" is the leninist position.

That is not the Leninist position, the Leninist position is and always has been that the state cannot disappear until the material conditions for its disappearance are achieved. The withering away of the state, first outlined by Engels, is not a magic process but one that proceeds from the abolition of class and the dissolution of the bourgeoisie.

How are you going to get rid of the bourgeoisie without a state? Are you going to simply ask them nicely to leave you alone? If you are organized and if your organization is suppressing the bourgeoisie as a class, then you have created a state, you have created an authoritarian imposition on the free organization of some section of the people. If you are not doing any of this, then the bourgeoisie who you have left unmolested will invariably come to dominate you once more.

Anarchists have always played word games to get around these simple facts. There are the practical anarchists who will admit to some amount of authority, but always with the caveat that theirs is *just* authority, *necessary* authority, and that is is the *unjust* authority that they condemn. Just authority is not the State, because the State is unjust, and so if they see an authority as just then it cannot be the State. Fair enough, you can call things by whatever names you like, but if you put these ideas in practice you basically end up with Leninism. You want to create dual power? You want to abolish the bourgeois state and replace it with a democratic organ of the working class? Well so did Lenin, and now you know why the Mensheviks accused him of anarchism.

Then there are the quite impractical capital-A Anarchists, who are adamant that anarchy means anarchy and that even voluntary hierarchy and submission to democratic authority is impermissible. Whether pacifistic or militaristic, they are generally unremarkable and ineffective at their goals because they eschew most effective forms of organization as ideologically impure. Even the most advanced anarchists, the CNT in Spain and the Maknovists in Russia, were plagued by economic confusion and disorganization. Their lack of discipline led to their downfall.

If you want to read more, here are some pertinent links:

[mrsblackruby]

Wanted to compliment your definition of anarchism and say this looks fire🔥

Goody two shoes

Hobie Brown is an anarchist he doesn't believe in the state of hierarchy, authority . He's against globalisation and classism

He believes that society doesn't need rules/commands

Gloria Obi aka Spider-Thorn or just Thorn is the spider woman of Earth 3012.

Gloria comes from a Nigerian immigrant family, unlike Hobie she follows the rules.

Gloria is a model student (like many spider people), she's a shy girl

It's not really shyness it's rather a lack of confidence

Even though it's been a year since she was bitten, she thinks she's not the person who should be Spiderman.

So let's recap what do an anarchist and a model student have in common besides being spiderman? Nothing or maybe....

AN: So Gloria is an Oc obviously she comes from a made up universe, pratically our universe but Marvel you know. She is plus size. I will not write anything that connects to the movie because I don't want to spoiler people who haven't watched yet. She

There is a 3 year time skip so miles is 18/19 I don't how old Hobie is so here is going to be 19/20

[queeranarchism]

At least once a month someone will write “anarchism isn’t about no hierarchies, anarchism is about no UNJUST hierarchies” and will then name the most extremely fucked up hierarchy as their example of a ‘just’ hierarchy.

Like, no, comrade, the doctor-patient relationship is NOT a just hierarchy. The power that doctors have to not just give advice but to decide for us which care we get and which care we don’t get is deeply fucked up. Speak to a woman and you will get on average like 4 stories about medical abuse by sexist doctors who didn’t want to google ‘endometriosis’. Then speak to trans people. Then speak to fat people. Then speak to people of color. Then speak to a disabled person. I promise you will be horrified by what marginalized people endure under the doctor-patient hierarchy. Our bodies should definitely be ours to control.

[psychotrenny]

I do have some small respect for how Anarchists are willing to critique things that most people take for granted; it's part of what drew me to the ideology in the first place. However they always do so on terms that are every bit as idealist and dogmatic as the mainstream society that upholds them, which is why I no longer associate with it. Like for example, it's very true that "time" as we understand it is a social construct that was shaped by a particular set of conditions and is technically something humans can live without (indeed as many have throughout history). However it's also to be a very useful social construct that exists and continues to exist for very good reasons. Like it's one thing if you think there are better ways to treat it, but it's incredibly foolish how so many Anarchists reject things like that purely on the basis of "uhhh it's an unjust hierarchy that makes you have less freedom".

Like Anarchists can understand social context on an idealist level, but the constraints of material reality are simply not a concern. Their critiques are potentially interesting but always limited, and their solutions are completely useless whenever they even exist. It's simply not a good framework of analysis

[transit-fag]

Is a mayorship an unjust hierarchy and will the mayor be executed in the revolution?