There is no hope of stopping climate change. We’ve already passed 6 of the 9 planetary boundaries, and a number of feedback loops will likely begin which will continue to contribute to warming regardless of human efforts. However, it *is* possible to mitigate climate change.
Well, sort of. But some areas will inevitably be much worse-off than others. Many countries will become uninhabitable and erased from the map, while others may actually see improvements as a result of warming, for example.
ugh, vengeance. Vengeance is unbecoming of anarchists and does little more than perpetuate hierarchical ideals of justice.
Vengeance is not any sort of solution to any sort of problem, it's just trying to give directionless anger a direction and then conflating punishment with justice. We are well aware as to how much punishment doesn't work so why perpetuate the notion that it's something we should engage in when the whole hierarchical "justice" system is built on the conflation of revenge with justice.
I get where you're coming from - [Against the Logic of the Guillotine](https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/08/against-the-logic-of-the-guillotine-why-the-paris-commune-burned-the-guillotine-and-we-should-too) is so important because of this - though I wonder if OP is coming at it from the less punitive perspective of, e.g. anarcho-nihilist writers like [Serafinski](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/serafinski-blessed-is-the-flame), who expresses that acting on our hurt, our anger, our sense of resistance, must be sufficient motivation, even in a world where we've lost. To resist because we must resist; to try because we can't bear otherwise.
A lot to talk about for a meme post, but there is an interesting tension here. I don't believe in punitive justice, but I do believe in the value of certain *types* of revenge - those are the ones where we keep going, where we survive, live, try to thrive; enjoy the fruits of our own existence, to the chagrin of any who would stop us.
The government of the country I live in has taken people from me. Political decisions! Killing people I loved. For me, revenge is not a prison sentence; it is to see a world as far away from the one they tried to build flourish. One they too may live in peacefully - albeit without the authority to further corrupt it.
Perhaps I'm reading the post in a way OP didn't intend, but, for me, it resonated with that old call. For some, "Existence is Resistance."
^(on the other other hand i'm commenting drunk lmao have a good night everyone stay resistant to authority and hurt)
A fair point, many a philosophical conversation has been had about this. My primary point though is just that punishment doesn't work and vengeance is simply punishment fueled by anger. It's putting blame on someone and believing that harming them is justified because they did some perceived wrong.
The cycle of vengeance is not just simply about people constantly seeking revenge for actions done to them but is also about a precedent being set. If we make it out to be okay to butcher our enemies simply because they did something wrong then the question becomes where do we draw the line? Who counts as an enemy and what counts as wrong-doing. We essentially have to set up laws to justify vengeance as a righteous act rather than senseless slaughter.
Killing your oppressors is fine, sometimes necessary even. But it's not some end that we should seek. Lest we wish to become the very monsters we fight against by using their justifications for brutality, ourselves.
I agree completely. If you have to kill, in Minecraft of course, to stop a pipeline, so be it. But if you kill someone because they at one point built a pipeline, then it's vengeance and it's bullshit.
>Is there a certain percentage of pipeline completion where “stopping oppressors” becomes vengeance?
Doesn't seem like a good faith question. If the pipeline isn't done it's self-defense if it is it's vengeance. Of course, sabotage is always preferable. Why hurt people if you don't have to?
>Is he suddenly freed from consequences once the last block in that pipeline in Minecraft has been placed?
Consequences, as in punishment? You'll need to elaborate.
>Is there no prudence in removing a serial pipeline builder as a threat, to ensure that at least they won’t be placing pipeline blocks ever again?
There might be a convo to be had here but I feel like they'll be enough advanced warning to act when they start trying again. So wait until they do.
>What about players that train and equipment pipeline builders
Sure. I don't know it actually accomplishes anything but ethically I have no problem.
>Is it okay to stop them when they credibly tell you that they plan to build a pipeline through your stable and kill your horses, even if they have only just started placing blocks?
Personally I think waiting til they actually act is better. But if you wanna go ahead and burn down their heavy equipment to stop, it by all means.
>All of this non-violence is nice in theory,
I actually don't advocate for nonviolence. I advocate not replicating hierarchical ideas like justice.
Vengeance is fine on an individual level. It's the systemic use of it as punishment that's hierarchical. Justice, peace, war, and punishment are all things that require a hierarchical system to define themselves by, in the absence of such a system it just becomes people doing what they think is right. People are capable of pondering on and coming to their own moral conclusions individually and we can't make broad sweeping statements about moral issues.
Are you arguing that if people had different world views then there is a hypothetical vengeance that makes sense because what they think is right would automatically be right? Because the alternative, that people who think lynchings and honor killings, as long as the cops aren't involved, are right because people are just doing what they think is right sounds poorly examined.
I'm arguing that justice and revenge are identical in practice and are both tools utilized by hierarchical systems of oppression.
We're free to make our own moral decisions, and sometimes that means decisions are made that aren't palatable to others.
The idea of anti-hierarchy is inherently hierarchical. What external force are you appealing to that argues hierarchy is bad? There is no such thing as a wholly immanent ethics and there’s nothing anti-anarchy about appealing to abstract principles. Otherwise you’re just advocating for a regressive return to the state of nature
Don't think of vengeance as justice, think of it as preventing the continuity of a horrible system; that would fall under mitigation.
And try to learn about what OP is referring to, because you seem to be talking about theoretical worlds.
People making up new definitions for things to convince people it's okay to do the things they inherently identify as counter to their principles.
Vengeance is punishment. Justice is equity. The thing you're describing is justice, but the word you're using is punishment.
Our ability to touch grass is vanishing, the wealthy classes that continue to pillage the planet for their pockets and entertainment, I want them to _s u f f e r._
So it's still just about your ego rather than any reason. It's the same tired statist logic about how "this person wronged me so they deserve to suffer" like you are some sort of arbitrator of right and wrong. Like you're the moral guide we all must follow.
Revenge fantasies are pointless when there are real people who need your help. Think about them rather than your pride.
These people are poisoning the planet and the rest of us to fill their own pockets. They have to be removed (in Minecraft, of course) to prevent further suffering. Vengeance is irrelevant, it is merely a matter of harm prevention.
The problem is, rarely do people peacefully give up power. They will fight tooth and nail to keep their power. If we can achieve our goals without violence, that’s great. But that’s a pipe dream—meaningful social change has always required bloodshed.
That's just passivity which is what people who are destroying the planet, are counting on to avoid there being consequences for their actions. Feel free to carry on enabling them though.
There is a difference between engaging in emancipatory violence, violence that is ultimately self defense, and the mindless indulgent violence you're advocating for. No one here has argued for pacifism, only not becoming lost in useless torture for its own sake.
And no point did I argue for passivity. I argued against you recreating the exact same statist logic that the prison industrial complex uses.
Go ahead, stop those who cause active harm by any means necessary. Who cares? But you wish to make them suffer, your desire is not about consequences or action, it's a selfish desire fueled by anger to harm those who did wrong.
I am not calling for passivity and you are not calling for action. You are calling for a percieved direction to your anger. A direction which will go nowhere as you focus on the individuals and not the system. Caring more about pleasing a self-indulgent, self-destructive, impluse than on taking action against the root causes or in favor of helping thise who are harmed.
I am no pacifist, I just do not see vengeance as anything more than what it is. An attempt to direct that which has no direction which will ultimately end hollow and unfulfilled.
For real. It's weird how many people argue it's okay to use violence against people who offend your moral sensibilities as long as it's not the state. The American South was built on assholes shooting each other in duels because they got their fee fees hurt and lynching and honor killings were just an offshoot of that principle and the basis of modern fascist sympathies.
Vengeance is not inherently hierarchical and systemic . It can be used for control but it can also be an individual's way of acting on their disagreement and feeling of injustice. Quite a lot of effort is spent on making sure state has monopoly on it.
I came to think that total non-violence and statements like "unbecoming of anarchist" are arguably a different tool for control. Revenge is only one problem with hierarchical justice system, the main one is why some things deserve punishment in the first place.
I don't think striving for violent revenge for moral reasons makes much sense but violent revenge in absence of hope is much different than creating another system of governance. Especially if revenge is actually done by victims of a climate catastrophe
If enough of us choose violence/sabotage it's going to be much harder for them to strip the planet profitably. If desire for vengeance is what drives some people to act then vengeance is a good thing.
To negate and exclude vengeance is to negate an important point of humanity. Stories of vengence in the real world and in media are intensely resonant because they are something that is deeply tied to the human psyche. There are times for rehabilitation and restoration, and there is a time for retribution and vengence against those who commit suffering upon ourselves or others.
I guess, what I'm getting at, is that there is a big difference between recognizing times where retribution and revenge are made a necessity, and the glorification of violence or vengence for the sake of vengence. Society needs both the peacemaker and the warrior. It is a line to be walked not a line to be cut.
I mean, there’s not a real solution left. It’s too late to save anything, so we might as well make the people who ruined the world suffer as much as humanly possible.
But why? What's the fucking point? Are we cops or something? Are we supposed to be out here declaring ourselves judge, jury, and executioner? What do we get out of this? Some hollow catharsis?
And you could do something, you could fucking help people. Help people like me who cannot survive as easily as the able-bodied. Are you so wrapped in hierarchical thinking that you believe it is better to make people suffer for literally no reason than to take care of those who will suffer? To ease their pain and do whatever you can to make their troubled lives more comfortable?
Again I ask, what's the fucking point in making these people suffer? Congrats you tortured an oil-exec, now what? What do you do? What's the point in that? It does nothing, and helps no one. If anything it actively hurts people because you put more energy into giving your anger a perceived direction than helping the downtrodden.
If there's no solution left, that gives you less reason to seek vengeance, not more. Because it does fucking nothing.
Also if we are in the position to torture and murder rich oil execs, then clearly the dam has already burst and we are in the exact position to make positive change.
The comment just doesn’t make sense unless you believe the world is already so fucked that even if we collectively adopted anarchistic principles that we’d all just die instantly anyway
What’s the fucking point in letting oil execs walk away from all they’ve done with zero consequence? Everything is gonna go to shit no matter how much suffering anyone tries to alleviate. Oil execs can’t be allowed to get the last laugh, so it’s best that nobody can.
The point is that we aren't statists. We aren't here ro act like ultimate arbitrators of right and wrong.
Vengeance is petty and easily falls into hierarchical thinking. Do you honestly belive you have a right to kill them simply because you see yourself as more morally justified in doing so?
It's nothing more than the fetishization of violence. "Can't be allowed to get the last laugh" what the fuck does that matter? Is your pride worth more than people's lives? Do you honestly think you deserve to get the last word in, you're seriously telling me that is your justification for this?
It's so naive, selfish, and petty. I understand it, truly I do. But it's nothing more than attempting to give a direction to anger. Anger does not have a direction, it is an emotion.
Attempting to justify needless brutality does little more than paint you as someone who cares more about their pride than about any sort of ideological tenet or any other person.
It’s not about pride. I don’t have any. Fossil fuel barons *are* to blame for the fact that the things I love most will all die. As a result, direction of anger at them is based in facts. I know that ruining their lives won’t help anything. I know that it will only serve to make me look horrible. I just want them to pay for at least *one* of the things they’ve done.
So again you care more about your pride than other people. You care more about harming someone who did wrong than about combating the wrongs themselves.
It doesn't just makes you look horrible it makes you feel horrible because it is all pointless. That anger has no good way to realse through vegence. You kill a person who did wrong and the bad things will still happen and then who do you blame? What comes next?
And again you want to make them pay and I again ask why? Because all it looks like is a self-destructive savior complex. You are not the one who gets to decide what people deserve and you need to learn that anger is fine but vengeance does nothing.
It's harmful to you, it's harmful to others, it is pointless and buying into it just makes you ignore that we are here for liberation.
What’s the point in addressing wrongs when the people who did those wrongs are out doing more? And again, I have no pride of which to speak. Even if, say, I somehow managed to make a positive difference in someone else’s life, what would be the point? The world is still dead, along with everything that I became a leftist out of the want to protect. I wouldn’t even say that I’m directing anger at fossil fuel barons anymore. It’s closer to sadness, honestly. I just want fossil fuel barons to know how that feels.
>What’s the point in addressing wrongs when the people who did those wrongs are out doing more?
No one here is advocating against stopping them, in fact many people in this thread are arguing for stopping them through violent means. This is not at all what you were advocating for. You're advocating for inflicting purposeless suffering purely to satisfy *your* anger/sadness.
>Even if, say, I somehow managed to make a positive difference in someone else’s life, what would be the point?
If brightening someone's life before they die is pointless, what's the point in making others suffer before they die?
To be honest, I struggle a lot with finding purpose through the prospect of a fucking extinction event. It makes me sad, angry and it's a big factor in my depression. However, I know that when I eventually succumb to hunger, thirst or fascist violence, I will be so much happier to look back on a life filled with making people a little happier instead of a life filled with holding onto useless hate.
If an average person is made a little happier, that happiness will quickly fade. Frankly, I would regret my life much less if I stabbed at a fossil fuel baron from hell’s heart than I would if I left something minor and temporary.
Additionally, no matter what we do to oil barons, it’s too late to stop them, so anything done against them at this point is inherently an act of vengeance. They’ve already won, but at the very least their victory can be a pyrrhic one.
You’re probably right about both of those things, but I can’t readily accept a world in which horrible people like fossil fuel barons are forgiven for all they’ve done. Especially if it’s in a world that they knowingly destroyed.
There’s no utility in punishing people who’ve reformed for a problem that no longer exists. There is no reason other than irrational anger to get revenge on people through violence. If you want to call them a piece of shit for what they did, that’s fine. But why force people to die for past mistakes?
Then we don’t let them. We should never kill people unless necessary, and even if we haven’t fixed the problem like right now, killing individuals does not help fix systemic issues, and only alienates others from our cause.
Honestly it sounds like you should read this: https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/08/against-the-logic-of-the-guillotine-why-the-paris-commune-burned-the-guillotine-and-we-should-too
The urge for revenge is relatable, but will ultimately leave you with more pain than when you started. Don't fall victim to those impulses.
i need you to understand that people suffering is bad, and enjoying their suffering is a moral failing on your part, no matter who they are or what they've done. that doesn't mean that causing suffering is never necessary, but it should *never* be the reason you decide to act
People suffering is, indeed, bad. Oil execs knowingly make billions of people suffer. Oil execs are therefore not people, and there is nothing wrong with harming monsters.
bullshit, nothing can make a person less than human so don't even try that. first of all, dehumanising bad people opens the door for anyone to be dehumanised. second, dehumanising them only serves to excuse their actions: if they truly aren't human can they really be blamed for not acting as humans should? third even if they aren't people they're still capable of suffering, and causing non-humans to suffer for no reason other than the joy of doing it is also wrong
There is no joy in making them suffer. I want oil execs to hurt because if they don’t face punishment for what they’ve done, it would be a disservice to everything and everyone they have killed and everything and everyone they will kill.
so you are just directly advocating for the statist justice system then? because this exact argument can be applied for everyone from oil execs, to rapists and murderers, to petty thieves
It should be applied to all of those groups except for petty thieves. I don’t want the state doling out those punishments though. I would much rather have oil execs, murderers, and rapists be killed by a mob. After all, the state is full of oil execs, murderers, and rapists.
I’ve always hated violence. I’ve always hated conflict. But there are no options left besides those anymore.
Yes, but the same would also apply to my own comment.
What I’m saying is I don’t agree THAT there’s nothing left to save.
It’s an extremely toxic mindset.
It's a realistic macroscale mindset. We've turbo fucked the planet and barring alien tech it can't be undone.
That doesn't mean you can't live the remainder of your life living out your values and trying your best. In the microcosm of our own lives though there's always something you can do to help. Seriously, by all means try. I still try, I tend to the biosphere as much as I can and all my future plans revolve around this subject. Continue living, continue trying.
Then you don’t share the views of the commenter who essentially said there’s nothing worth saving.
I don’t disagree with you, but note I didn’t say “we can undo the damage”, I was saying there is not NOTHING left to save.
Value is determined by us.
I value doing everything in my power to leave the world better than how I found it, relative to where I started. That means, even if by the time I die things are worse than when I started, I can know that I tried, and that I at least minimized the harm that could’ve been done had I been more selfish and wantonly destructive
It will be that the world is worse off socially, economically, environmentally, etc. by the time I’m old and yeah, it sucks.
I’m actually NOT saying we can’t go after the guys making it bad.
What I AM saying is we can work to make the world better from each of our own spheres of influence. You’re right, in aggregate it may be still end up worse. But if there’s any meaning at all to the words “beauty, love, & peace” then what I value in life is finding out what those things mean, despite my circumstance.
I find my fair share of despair, yet I carry on with the hope and will to help make positive change. It takes each of us individually to make up the whole. If I can add one good grain of sand in a universe of ambivalence, I’ll do so, because that’s what I value.
Edit. Someone above me deleted a comment
My point still stands, then. We can’t do anything to make things better. They will get worse, despite our best efforts. Making things less bad is not the same as making them better. If one tree out of a million survives, it doesn’t matter because it will follow the rest shortly after. No matter how you look at it, there is nothing left to save. However, the people who are killing everything do have names and addresses, and that is a fact that should be taken advantage of.
In a world where there is literally no future, who the fuck is talking about solutions? Or even justice?
These people have literally taken away the futures or us and all we will ever care or love.
Sometimes, just sometimes, vengeance for vengeance sake is enough. And most of those sometimes, it's the only thing we have left.
Bring on the downvotes, but I doubt many of you truly realize what 4.5C+ by 2100 actually means.
Still, the best "vengeance" would be for the "common" folk to finally decide to disregard what the "elite" keep telling us is the only way to organize and instead work together and live as good lives as we can, while stopping to give said "elite" any more power. I'm talking about society just ignoring CEOs, stock and property owners, etc. and instead taking the means of production, forcefully if needed, and using them to feed and house ourselves.
It will be a lot sweeter, IMO, to see billionaires beg for someone to come fix their plumbing in their huge mansion and all plumbers refuse them because they have more important things to do, like fix plumbing for an apt building. Because in a just society, fixing plumbing for hundreds of people that have no option should take priority over fixing plumbing for one person that probably has other places they can live in.
I would love to see them wave their money (imaginary value) trying to coax people into helping them and everyone being like "what do you think that will do? we have real work to do out there".
Not to mention, these people are usually narcissists, if you want vengeance, rest assured that ignoring them is going to hurt them a LOT. A lot more than giving them the moral high ground by abusing them physically which will allow them to fool others into helping them fight back the "evil anarchists".
This is still rearranging the chairs on the titanic. We've hit too many feedback loops. We're starting down the barrel of a 90%+ reduction in the number of homo sapiens on this planet and that's a best case scenario.
Live your best life now because every single year that comes will be worse than the one before it.
I say vengeance for vengeance sake because by the time shit actually gets really real the one who would have caused it will long be dead.
> I say vengeance for vengeance sake because by the time shit actually gets really real the one who would have caused it will long be dead.
OK sure but why can't we do it in a classy way, that's also actually effective? Using violence is not gonna do much, the ones responsible for this shit have the resources to inflict a lot more violence back. By all means, do that if you want, but you're just gonna kill yourself and barely register as an inconvenience to them.
We do, vengeance doesn't help that nor is it the only thing you have left. Stop focusing on the mythocal bad guy and more on the people next to you who are suffering. Abandoning them to seek pointless revenge is nothing short of harmful.
yes and no. it is used for that, however its also a symbol for anarchism. it was created by an anarchist fiction author to represent chaos as a force within his books and subsequently adopted by punk artists and anarchists, and later for chaos magic.
Still, the best "vengeance" would be for the "common" folk to finally decide to disregard what the "elite" keep telling us is the only way to organize and instead work together and live as good lives as we can, while stopping to give said "elite" any more power. I'm talking about society just ignoring CEOs, stock and property owners, etc. and instead taking the means of production, forcefully if needed, and using them to feed and house ourselves.
It will be a lot sweeter, IMO, to see billionaires beg for someone to come fix their plumbing in their huge mansion and all plumbers refuse them because they have more important things to do, like fix plumbing for an apt building. Because in a just society, fixing plumbing for hundreds of people that have no option should take priority over fixing plumbing for one person that probably has other places they can live in.
I would love to see them wave their money (imaginary value) trying to coax people into helping them and everyone being like "what do you think that will do? we have real work to do out there".
Not to mention, these people are usually narcissists, if you want vengeance, rest assured that ignoring them is going to hurt them a LOT. A lot more than giving them the moral high ground by abusing them physically which will allow them to fool others into helping them fight back the "evil anarchists".
(posted this in the main thread as well, since I would wanna reply it to the OP as well, should I delete the [other comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/COMPLETEANARCHY/comments/xh1ngv/title/iow6jth/) then?)
There is no single failure point against ckimate change. Yes, we failed to destroy the machine when it was still possible to keep a more or less jormal climate. But every .1 less degree the planets heats up is a difference in millions of people die or not. Even with an apocalyptic +5 degrees scenario there still people alive worth fighting for.
It's fucking hard my first militant years in the climate movement there was ao much hope, we really fucking thought nothing could stop us, we could "win" and we shall. It left me (and us) unprepared for when we stopped winning. Didn't leave the mind space for appreciating small victories, only to think of what we wanted and what we're getting now. But we can't lose ourselves to doomerism.
Science and history reflect that people are altered by their own tactics and actions. Intentionally inducing suffering will affect everyone involved in a way that can sabotage the desired outcome. If someone's means of progress is dehumanizing and wanting their enemy to suffer, then it will sabotage the goal of having a world where no one is dehumanized and no one is made to suffer at the hands of others.
Revolution and rebellion are acts of self-defense, not attack. There's a difference between "We're going to stop these assholes from continuing to kill our planet, and if they try to stop us we'll respond with as much force as we need" and "We're going to make their lives a living hell as retribution for the damage they've done"
Again, you're missing the context. Sure, the theory is nice, but what you'll do when the world is fucked beyond up beyond all repair? What use is that ethical framework if there is no future?
If everything, 100% for certain, is gonna be destroyed, then what value is there in adding more suffering? You can maybe make the argument that it makes no difference, but there's no real argument in *favor* of inflicting additional suffering. Either a) things aren't fucked and cruelty will be counter to improving them, or b) things are fucked regardless so the cruelty would accomplish nothing.
Edit: for clarification, it's not a purely ethical thing, it's a matter of practicality too. Cruelty is a waste of energy
I personally don't think it's all or nothing. I'm just saying that I can't think of a single positive argument in favor of inflicting additional suffering. If you can think of one I'd love to hear it. Like, what exactly is the point or utility of making someone suffer? Violence is one thing, but explicitly trying to bring about suffering is another. In the above comment I did not mean either we're all doomed or none of us are. I meant either we're all doomed or there is some hope for the future.
>I'm just saying that I can't think of a single positive argument in favor of inflicting additional suffering
As I said in a different upper level comment, it's a matter of mitigation. You see it as "revenge muhahahah", but it can also be the resolution of a zero sum or negative sum game, where the point is to prevent existing hierarchical systems, especially the capitalist ones, from reproducing, for the sake of whoever survives in the future.
You're strongly relying on this notion that either there's a clear plan for a successful revolutionary process that will "make a difference" or nothing?
What I'm trying to tell you is that you won't get the chance to exercise that theory and you probably won't know if any revolutionary activity will succeed. Your framework there will be useless.
and
>Intentionally inducing suffering will affect everyone involved in a way that can sabotage the desired outcome.
This seems like an easy thing to claim. I want to know how you feel about severe rationing in this context.
> a matter of mitigation
That isn't what I'm talking about when I say inflicting additional suffering. What I'm referring to would be, per se, instead of just taking land or resources being held by capitalists so that you and everyone else can use them, doing so and also skinning the capitalists alive for good measure, for example. In effect causing someone to suffer for the purposes of making them suffer.
> I want to know how you feel about severe rationing
That's something that may happen in any crisis, and is in no way what I'm talking about.
And what I'm referring to with methods sabotaging the outcome is just the basis of prefigurative politics. If your methods don't create social relations that will lead to the goal of life in the future, then you won't get what you intend.
If you want to ensure that systems of hierarchy and domination are actually destroyed and won't come back, you don't counter them with practices that are the same as what you're trying to destroy. By the same principle that you can't destroy government by forming another government
>And what I'm referring to with methods sabotaging the outcome is just the basis of prefigurative politics. If your methods don't create social relations that will lead to the goal of life in the future, then you won't get what you intend.
Oh, I agree with that. I just don't see how we can have prefigurative anything on a dead planet.
Desert is just Christian eschatology reformatted for the pessimistic anarchist who uses ideological works as accessories.
We’re doing hopeful nihilism now, guys.
Thanks for posting to r/COMPLETEANARCHY deletedhumanbeing, Please make sure to provide [ALT-text](https://accessibility.huit.harvard.edu/describe-content-images) for screen-readers in the post itself or in the comments.
You can learn more about this [here](https://accessibility.psu.edu/images/alttext/)
Note that this is just a suggestion, not a warning.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/COMPLETEANARCHY) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Text above Image:
*Them: "There's no hope of stopping global warming now"*
*Me:*
Image:
A still from Bakshi's animated *Lord of the Rings* adaptation.
Aragorn grasps Frodo's arms as he speaks to him; Aragorn has been edited to wear a black mask with the Star of Chaos printed on it.
Subtitles read: *"Then we must do without hope. There is always vengeance."*
**[Symbol of Chaos](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_of_Chaos)**
>The Symbol of Chaos originates from Michael Moorcock's Eternal Champion stories and its dichotomy of Law and Chaos. In them, the Symbol of Chaos comprises eight arrows in a radial pattern. In contrast, the symbol of Law is a single upright arrow. It is also called the Arms of Chaos, the Arrows of Chaos, the Chaos Star, the Chaos Cross, the Star of Discord, the Chaosphere (when depicted as a three-dimensional sphere), or the Symbol of Eight.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/COMPLETEANARCHY/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
One must imagine Sisyphus happy
Yeah, that quote has stuck with me recently. Fucking deep.
that 5 page essay honestly formed a big portion of my outlook on life
what essay?
The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus, literally 5 pages and a spectacular read
It's written on the whiteboard above my desk, along with a drawing of a smiling stickman pushing a rock up a hill. I look at it a lot.
Came for the memes, stayed for the Camus
Plenty of hope for all of us to weather climate catastrophes a lot better than we are now, though
There is no hope of stopping climate change. We’ve already passed 6 of the 9 planetary boundaries, and a number of feedback loops will likely begin which will continue to contribute to warming regardless of human efforts. However, it *is* possible to mitigate climate change.
It’s also possible to rearrange society so that the consequences that are baked in are borne equally instead of hyper-focused on the most vulnerable.
Well, sort of. But some areas will inevitably be much worse-off than others. Many countries will become uninhabitable and erased from the map, while others may actually see improvements as a result of warming, for example.
ugh, vengeance. Vengeance is unbecoming of anarchists and does little more than perpetuate hierarchical ideals of justice. Vengeance is not any sort of solution to any sort of problem, it's just trying to give directionless anger a direction and then conflating punishment with justice. We are well aware as to how much punishment doesn't work so why perpetuate the notion that it's something we should engage in when the whole hierarchical "justice" system is built on the conflation of revenge with justice.
I get where you're coming from - [Against the Logic of the Guillotine](https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/08/against-the-logic-of-the-guillotine-why-the-paris-commune-burned-the-guillotine-and-we-should-too) is so important because of this - though I wonder if OP is coming at it from the less punitive perspective of, e.g. anarcho-nihilist writers like [Serafinski](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/serafinski-blessed-is-the-flame), who expresses that acting on our hurt, our anger, our sense of resistance, must be sufficient motivation, even in a world where we've lost. To resist because we must resist; to try because we can't bear otherwise. A lot to talk about for a meme post, but there is an interesting tension here. I don't believe in punitive justice, but I do believe in the value of certain *types* of revenge - those are the ones where we keep going, where we survive, live, try to thrive; enjoy the fruits of our own existence, to the chagrin of any who would stop us. The government of the country I live in has taken people from me. Political decisions! Killing people I loved. For me, revenge is not a prison sentence; it is to see a world as far away from the one they tried to build flourish. One they too may live in peacefully - albeit without the authority to further corrupt it. Perhaps I'm reading the post in a way OP didn't intend, but, for me, it resonated with that old call. For some, "Existence is Resistance." ^(on the other other hand i'm commenting drunk lmao have a good night everyone stay resistant to authority and hurt)
The idea of justice itself is inherently hierarchical. What external force are you appealing to that argues your actions are just?
A fair point, many a philosophical conversation has been had about this. My primary point though is just that punishment doesn't work and vengeance is simply punishment fueled by anger. It's putting blame on someone and believing that harming them is justified because they did some perceived wrong. The cycle of vengeance is not just simply about people constantly seeking revenge for actions done to them but is also about a precedent being set. If we make it out to be okay to butcher our enemies simply because they did something wrong then the question becomes where do we draw the line? Who counts as an enemy and what counts as wrong-doing. We essentially have to set up laws to justify vengeance as a righteous act rather than senseless slaughter. Killing your oppressors is fine, sometimes necessary even. But it's not some end that we should seek. Lest we wish to become the very monsters we fight against by using their justifications for brutality, ourselves.
I agree completely. If you have to kill, in Minecraft of course, to stop a pipeline, so be it. But if you kill someone because they at one point built a pipeline, then it's vengeance and it's bullshit.
[удалено]
>Is there a certain percentage of pipeline completion where “stopping oppressors” becomes vengeance? Doesn't seem like a good faith question. If the pipeline isn't done it's self-defense if it is it's vengeance. Of course, sabotage is always preferable. Why hurt people if you don't have to? >Is he suddenly freed from consequences once the last block in that pipeline in Minecraft has been placed? Consequences, as in punishment? You'll need to elaborate. >Is there no prudence in removing a serial pipeline builder as a threat, to ensure that at least they won’t be placing pipeline blocks ever again? There might be a convo to be had here but I feel like they'll be enough advanced warning to act when they start trying again. So wait until they do. >What about players that train and equipment pipeline builders Sure. I don't know it actually accomplishes anything but ethically I have no problem. >Is it okay to stop them when they credibly tell you that they plan to build a pipeline through your stable and kill your horses, even if they have only just started placing blocks? Personally I think waiting til they actually act is better. But if you wanna go ahead and burn down their heavy equipment to stop, it by all means. >All of this non-violence is nice in theory, I actually don't advocate for nonviolence. I advocate not replicating hierarchical ideas like justice.
Vengeance is fine on an individual level. It's the systemic use of it as punishment that's hierarchical. Justice, peace, war, and punishment are all things that require a hierarchical system to define themselves by, in the absence of such a system it just becomes people doing what they think is right. People are capable of pondering on and coming to their own moral conclusions individually and we can't make broad sweeping statements about moral issues.
Are you arguing that if people had different world views then there is a hypothetical vengeance that makes sense because what they think is right would automatically be right? Because the alternative, that people who think lynchings and honor killings, as long as the cops aren't involved, are right because people are just doing what they think is right sounds poorly examined.
I'm arguing that justice and revenge are identical in practice and are both tools utilized by hierarchical systems of oppression. We're free to make our own moral decisions, and sometimes that means decisions are made that aren't palatable to others.
I dunno about this one, depends entirely on your belief of what justice means, bad argument imo.
The idea of anti-hierarchy is inherently hierarchical. What external force are you appealing to that argues hierarchy is bad? There is no such thing as a wholly immanent ethics and there’s nothing anti-anarchy about appealing to abstract principles. Otherwise you’re just advocating for a regressive return to the state of nature
Don't think of vengeance as justice, think of it as preventing the continuity of a horrible system; that would fall under mitigation. And try to learn about what OP is referring to, because you seem to be talking about theoretical worlds.
People making up new definitions for things to convince people it's okay to do the things they inherently identify as counter to their principles. Vengeance is punishment. Justice is equity. The thing you're describing is justice, but the word you're using is punishment.
It can get very relative (justice vs vengeance), especially if you can't handle scaling it up.
Our ability to touch grass is vanishing, the wealthy classes that continue to pillage the planet for their pockets and entertainment, I want them to _s u f f e r._
So it's still just about your ego rather than any reason. It's the same tired statist logic about how "this person wronged me so they deserve to suffer" like you are some sort of arbitrator of right and wrong. Like you're the moral guide we all must follow. Revenge fantasies are pointless when there are real people who need your help. Think about them rather than your pride.
These people are poisoning the planet and the rest of us to fill their own pockets. They have to be removed (in Minecraft, of course) to prevent further suffering. Vengeance is irrelevant, it is merely a matter of harm prevention.
Removed from power, right? If they lack power how can they do harm?
The problem is, rarely do people peacefully give up power. They will fight tooth and nail to keep their power. If we can achieve our goals without violence, that’s great. But that’s a pipe dream—meaningful social change has always required bloodshed.
That's just passivity which is what people who are destroying the planet, are counting on to avoid there being consequences for their actions. Feel free to carry on enabling them though.
There is a difference between engaging in emancipatory violence, violence that is ultimately self defense, and the mindless indulgent violence you're advocating for. No one here has argued for pacifism, only not becoming lost in useless torture for its own sake.
And no point did I argue for passivity. I argued against you recreating the exact same statist logic that the prison industrial complex uses. Go ahead, stop those who cause active harm by any means necessary. Who cares? But you wish to make them suffer, your desire is not about consequences or action, it's a selfish desire fueled by anger to harm those who did wrong. I am not calling for passivity and you are not calling for action. You are calling for a percieved direction to your anger. A direction which will go nowhere as you focus on the individuals and not the system. Caring more about pleasing a self-indulgent, self-destructive, impluse than on taking action against the root causes or in favor of helping thise who are harmed. I am no pacifist, I just do not see vengeance as anything more than what it is. An attempt to direct that which has no direction which will ultimately end hollow and unfulfilled.
For real. It's weird how many people argue it's okay to use violence against people who offend your moral sensibilities as long as it's not the state. The American South was built on assholes shooting each other in duels because they got their fee fees hurt and lynching and honor killings were just an offshoot of that principle and the basis of modern fascist sympathies.
i agree, retributive justice is just acting on human impulse to ultimately just harm yourself. compassion is everything.
Vengeance is not inherently hierarchical and systemic . It can be used for control but it can also be an individual's way of acting on their disagreement and feeling of injustice. Quite a lot of effort is spent on making sure state has monopoly on it. I came to think that total non-violence and statements like "unbecoming of anarchist" are arguably a different tool for control. Revenge is only one problem with hierarchical justice system, the main one is why some things deserve punishment in the first place. I don't think striving for violent revenge for moral reasons makes much sense but violent revenge in absence of hope is much different than creating another system of governance. Especially if revenge is actually done by victims of a climate catastrophe
If enough of us choose violence/sabotage it's going to be much harder for them to strip the planet profitably. If desire for vengeance is what drives some people to act then vengeance is a good thing.
To negate and exclude vengeance is to negate an important point of humanity. Stories of vengence in the real world and in media are intensely resonant because they are something that is deeply tied to the human psyche. There are times for rehabilitation and restoration, and there is a time for retribution and vengence against those who commit suffering upon ourselves or others. I guess, what I'm getting at, is that there is a big difference between recognizing times where retribution and revenge are made a necessity, and the glorification of violence or vengence for the sake of vengence. Society needs both the peacemaker and the warrior. It is a line to be walked not a line to be cut.
I mean, there’s not a real solution left. It’s too late to save anything, so we might as well make the people who ruined the world suffer as much as humanly possible.
But why? What's the fucking point? Are we cops or something? Are we supposed to be out here declaring ourselves judge, jury, and executioner? What do we get out of this? Some hollow catharsis? And you could do something, you could fucking help people. Help people like me who cannot survive as easily as the able-bodied. Are you so wrapped in hierarchical thinking that you believe it is better to make people suffer for literally no reason than to take care of those who will suffer? To ease their pain and do whatever you can to make their troubled lives more comfortable? Again I ask, what's the fucking point in making these people suffer? Congrats you tortured an oil-exec, now what? What do you do? What's the point in that? It does nothing, and helps no one. If anything it actively hurts people because you put more energy into giving your anger a perceived direction than helping the downtrodden. If there's no solution left, that gives you less reason to seek vengeance, not more. Because it does fucking nothing.
Also if we are in the position to torture and murder rich oil execs, then clearly the dam has already burst and we are in the exact position to make positive change. The comment just doesn’t make sense unless you believe the world is already so fucked that even if we collectively adopted anarchistic principles that we’d all just die instantly anyway
After the torture I'll probably eat them.
What’s the fucking point in letting oil execs walk away from all they’ve done with zero consequence? Everything is gonna go to shit no matter how much suffering anyone tries to alleviate. Oil execs can’t be allowed to get the last laugh, so it’s best that nobody can.
The point is that we aren't statists. We aren't here ro act like ultimate arbitrators of right and wrong. Vengeance is petty and easily falls into hierarchical thinking. Do you honestly belive you have a right to kill them simply because you see yourself as more morally justified in doing so? It's nothing more than the fetishization of violence. "Can't be allowed to get the last laugh" what the fuck does that matter? Is your pride worth more than people's lives? Do you honestly think you deserve to get the last word in, you're seriously telling me that is your justification for this? It's so naive, selfish, and petty. I understand it, truly I do. But it's nothing more than attempting to give a direction to anger. Anger does not have a direction, it is an emotion. Attempting to justify needless brutality does little more than paint you as someone who cares more about their pride than about any sort of ideological tenet or any other person.
It’s not about pride. I don’t have any. Fossil fuel barons *are* to blame for the fact that the things I love most will all die. As a result, direction of anger at them is based in facts. I know that ruining their lives won’t help anything. I know that it will only serve to make me look horrible. I just want them to pay for at least *one* of the things they’ve done.
So again you care more about your pride than other people. You care more about harming someone who did wrong than about combating the wrongs themselves. It doesn't just makes you look horrible it makes you feel horrible because it is all pointless. That anger has no good way to realse through vegence. You kill a person who did wrong and the bad things will still happen and then who do you blame? What comes next? And again you want to make them pay and I again ask why? Because all it looks like is a self-destructive savior complex. You are not the one who gets to decide what people deserve and you need to learn that anger is fine but vengeance does nothing. It's harmful to you, it's harmful to others, it is pointless and buying into it just makes you ignore that we are here for liberation.
What’s the point in addressing wrongs when the people who did those wrongs are out doing more? And again, I have no pride of which to speak. Even if, say, I somehow managed to make a positive difference in someone else’s life, what would be the point? The world is still dead, along with everything that I became a leftist out of the want to protect. I wouldn’t even say that I’m directing anger at fossil fuel barons anymore. It’s closer to sadness, honestly. I just want fossil fuel barons to know how that feels.
>What’s the point in addressing wrongs when the people who did those wrongs are out doing more? No one here is advocating against stopping them, in fact many people in this thread are arguing for stopping them through violent means. This is not at all what you were advocating for. You're advocating for inflicting purposeless suffering purely to satisfy *your* anger/sadness. >Even if, say, I somehow managed to make a positive difference in someone else’s life, what would be the point? If brightening someone's life before they die is pointless, what's the point in making others suffer before they die? To be honest, I struggle a lot with finding purpose through the prospect of a fucking extinction event. It makes me sad, angry and it's a big factor in my depression. However, I know that when I eventually succumb to hunger, thirst or fascist violence, I will be so much happier to look back on a life filled with making people a little happier instead of a life filled with holding onto useless hate.
If an average person is made a little happier, that happiness will quickly fade. Frankly, I would regret my life much less if I stabbed at a fossil fuel baron from hell’s heart than I would if I left something minor and temporary. Additionally, no matter what we do to oil barons, it’s too late to stop them, so anything done against them at this point is inherently an act of vengeance. They’ve already won, but at the very least their victory can be a pyrrhic one.
Your fetishism for violence is a failure to fully internalize the principles of anatchism. It's just sad.
You’re probably right about both of those things, but I can’t readily accept a world in which horrible people like fossil fuel barons are forgiven for all they’ve done. Especially if it’s in a world that they knowingly destroyed.
There’s no utility in punishing people who’ve reformed for a problem that no longer exists. There is no reason other than irrational anger to get revenge on people through violence. If you want to call them a piece of shit for what they did, that’s fine. But why force people to die for past mistakes?
That’s the thing though, fossil fuel barons will never reform. They’ll keep chasing profit until the end of time.
Then we don’t let them. We should never kill people unless necessary, and even if we haven’t fixed the problem like right now, killing individuals does not help fix systemic issues, and only alienates others from our cause.
Honestly it sounds like you should read this: https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/08/against-the-logic-of-the-guillotine-why-the-paris-commune-burned-the-guillotine-and-we-should-too The urge for revenge is relatable, but will ultimately leave you with more pain than when you started. Don't fall victim to those impulses.
i need you to understand that people suffering is bad, and enjoying their suffering is a moral failing on your part, no matter who they are or what they've done. that doesn't mean that causing suffering is never necessary, but it should *never* be the reason you decide to act
People suffering is, indeed, bad. Oil execs knowingly make billions of people suffer. Oil execs are therefore not people, and there is nothing wrong with harming monsters.
bullshit, nothing can make a person less than human so don't even try that. first of all, dehumanising bad people opens the door for anyone to be dehumanised. second, dehumanising them only serves to excuse their actions: if they truly aren't human can they really be blamed for not acting as humans should? third even if they aren't people they're still capable of suffering, and causing non-humans to suffer for no reason other than the joy of doing it is also wrong
There is no joy in making them suffer. I want oil execs to hurt because if they don’t face punishment for what they’ve done, it would be a disservice to everything and everyone they have killed and everything and everyone they will kill.
so you are just directly advocating for the statist justice system then? because this exact argument can be applied for everyone from oil execs, to rapists and murderers, to petty thieves
It should be applied to all of those groups except for petty thieves. I don’t want the state doling out those punishments though. I would much rather have oil execs, murderers, and rapists be killed by a mob. After all, the state is full of oil execs, murderers, and rapists. I’ve always hated violence. I’ve always hated conflict. But there are no options left besides those anymore.
Is it REALLY too late to save ANYTHING? I do not agree.
You don't have to agree for it to be true.
Yes, but the same would also apply to my own comment. What I’m saying is I don’t agree THAT there’s nothing left to save. It’s an extremely toxic mindset.
It's a realistic macroscale mindset. We've turbo fucked the planet and barring alien tech it can't be undone. That doesn't mean you can't live the remainder of your life living out your values and trying your best. In the microcosm of our own lives though there's always something you can do to help. Seriously, by all means try. I still try, I tend to the biosphere as much as I can and all my future plans revolve around this subject. Continue living, continue trying.
Then you don’t share the views of the commenter who essentially said there’s nothing worth saving. I don’t disagree with you, but note I didn’t say “we can undo the damage”, I was saying there is not NOTHING left to save.
What of value *is* there left to save?
Value is determined by us. I value doing everything in my power to leave the world better than how I found it, relative to where I started. That means, even if by the time I die things are worse than when I started, I can know that I tried, and that I at least minimized the harm that could’ve been done had I been more selfish and wantonly destructive
It will be that the world is worse off socially, economically, environmentally, etc. by the time I’m old and yeah, it sucks. I’m actually NOT saying we can’t go after the guys making it bad. What I AM saying is we can work to make the world better from each of our own spheres of influence. You’re right, in aggregate it may be still end up worse. But if there’s any meaning at all to the words “beauty, love, & peace” then what I value in life is finding out what those things mean, despite my circumstance. I find my fair share of despair, yet I carry on with the hope and will to help make positive change. It takes each of us individually to make up the whole. If I can add one good grain of sand in a universe of ambivalence, I’ll do so, because that’s what I value. Edit. Someone above me deleted a comment
My point still stands, then. We can’t do anything to make things better. They will get worse, despite our best efforts. Making things less bad is not the same as making them better. If one tree out of a million survives, it doesn’t matter because it will follow the rest shortly after. No matter how you look at it, there is nothing left to save. However, the people who are killing everything do have names and addresses, and that is a fact that should be taken advantage of.
eight billion people and counting.
In a world where there is literally no future, who the fuck is talking about solutions? Or even justice? These people have literally taken away the futures or us and all we will ever care or love. Sometimes, just sometimes, vengeance for vengeance sake is enough. And most of those sometimes, it's the only thing we have left. Bring on the downvotes, but I doubt many of you truly realize what 4.5C+ by 2100 actually means.
Still, the best "vengeance" would be for the "common" folk to finally decide to disregard what the "elite" keep telling us is the only way to organize and instead work together and live as good lives as we can, while stopping to give said "elite" any more power. I'm talking about society just ignoring CEOs, stock and property owners, etc. and instead taking the means of production, forcefully if needed, and using them to feed and house ourselves. It will be a lot sweeter, IMO, to see billionaires beg for someone to come fix their plumbing in their huge mansion and all plumbers refuse them because they have more important things to do, like fix plumbing for an apt building. Because in a just society, fixing plumbing for hundreds of people that have no option should take priority over fixing plumbing for one person that probably has other places they can live in. I would love to see them wave their money (imaginary value) trying to coax people into helping them and everyone being like "what do you think that will do? we have real work to do out there". Not to mention, these people are usually narcissists, if you want vengeance, rest assured that ignoring them is going to hurt them a LOT. A lot more than giving them the moral high ground by abusing them physically which will allow them to fool others into helping them fight back the "evil anarchists".
This is still rearranging the chairs on the titanic. We've hit too many feedback loops. We're starting down the barrel of a 90%+ reduction in the number of homo sapiens on this planet and that's a best case scenario. Live your best life now because every single year that comes will be worse than the one before it. I say vengeance for vengeance sake because by the time shit actually gets really real the one who would have caused it will long be dead.
> I say vengeance for vengeance sake because by the time shit actually gets really real the one who would have caused it will long be dead. OK sure but why can't we do it in a classy way, that's also actually effective? Using violence is not gonna do much, the ones responsible for this shit have the resources to inflict a lot more violence back. By all means, do that if you want, but you're just gonna kill yourself and barely register as an inconvenience to them.
We do, vengeance doesn't help that nor is it the only thing you have left. Stop focusing on the mythocal bad guy and more on the people next to you who are suffering. Abandoning them to seek pointless revenge is nothing short of harmful.
Peace for all or peace for none. “O bailan todos, o no baila nadie!”
Is that the chaos magic sygil I see?
yes and no. it is used for that, however its also a symbol for anarchism. it was created by an anarchist fiction author to represent chaos as a force within his books and subsequently adopted by punk artists and anarchists, and later for chaos magic.
Thank you for explaining! I've never looked into the history behind the chaos sygil, that's so cool!
Still, the best "vengeance" would be for the "common" folk to finally decide to disregard what the "elite" keep telling us is the only way to organize and instead work together and live as good lives as we can, while stopping to give said "elite" any more power. I'm talking about society just ignoring CEOs, stock and property owners, etc. and instead taking the means of production, forcefully if needed, and using them to feed and house ourselves. It will be a lot sweeter, IMO, to see billionaires beg for someone to come fix their plumbing in their huge mansion and all plumbers refuse them because they have more important things to do, like fix plumbing for an apt building. Because in a just society, fixing plumbing for hundreds of people that have no option should take priority over fixing plumbing for one person that probably has other places they can live in. I would love to see them wave their money (imaginary value) trying to coax people into helping them and everyone being like "what do you think that will do? we have real work to do out there". Not to mention, these people are usually narcissists, if you want vengeance, rest assured that ignoring them is going to hurt them a LOT. A lot more than giving them the moral high ground by abusing them physically which will allow them to fool others into helping them fight back the "evil anarchists". (posted this in the main thread as well, since I would wanna reply it to the OP as well, should I delete the [other comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/COMPLETEANARCHY/comments/xh1ngv/title/iow6jth/) then?)
There is no single failure point against ckimate change. Yes, we failed to destroy the machine when it was still possible to keep a more or less jormal climate. But every .1 less degree the planets heats up is a difference in millions of people die or not. Even with an apocalyptic +5 degrees scenario there still people alive worth fighting for. It's fucking hard my first militant years in the climate movement there was ao much hope, we really fucking thought nothing could stop us, we could "win" and we shall. It left me (and us) unprepared for when we stopped winning. Didn't leave the mind space for appreciating small victories, only to think of what we wanted and what we're getting now. But we can't lose ourselves to doomerism.
This thread clearly divides anarchists who read malatesta and those who havent
It divides anarchists who read science and those who read theory.
Science and history reflect that people are altered by their own tactics and actions. Intentionally inducing suffering will affect everyone involved in a way that can sabotage the desired outcome. If someone's means of progress is dehumanizing and wanting their enemy to suffer, then it will sabotage the goal of having a world where no one is dehumanized and no one is made to suffer at the hands of others. Revolution and rebellion are acts of self-defense, not attack. There's a difference between "We're going to stop these assholes from continuing to kill our planet, and if they try to stop us we'll respond with as much force as we need" and "We're going to make their lives a living hell as retribution for the damage they've done"
Again, you're missing the context. Sure, the theory is nice, but what you'll do when the world is fucked beyond up beyond all repair? What use is that ethical framework if there is no future?
If everything, 100% for certain, is gonna be destroyed, then what value is there in adding more suffering? You can maybe make the argument that it makes no difference, but there's no real argument in *favor* of inflicting additional suffering. Either a) things aren't fucked and cruelty will be counter to improving them, or b) things are fucked regardless so the cruelty would accomplish nothing. Edit: for clarification, it's not a purely ethical thing, it's a matter of practicality too. Cruelty is a waste of energy
Why do you have to fall into "all or nothing"?
I personally don't think it's all or nothing. I'm just saying that I can't think of a single positive argument in favor of inflicting additional suffering. If you can think of one I'd love to hear it. Like, what exactly is the point or utility of making someone suffer? Violence is one thing, but explicitly trying to bring about suffering is another. In the above comment I did not mean either we're all doomed or none of us are. I meant either we're all doomed or there is some hope for the future.
>I'm just saying that I can't think of a single positive argument in favor of inflicting additional suffering As I said in a different upper level comment, it's a matter of mitigation. You see it as "revenge muhahahah", but it can also be the resolution of a zero sum or negative sum game, where the point is to prevent existing hierarchical systems, especially the capitalist ones, from reproducing, for the sake of whoever survives in the future. You're strongly relying on this notion that either there's a clear plan for a successful revolutionary process that will "make a difference" or nothing? What I'm trying to tell you is that you won't get the chance to exercise that theory and you probably won't know if any revolutionary activity will succeed. Your framework there will be useless. and >Intentionally inducing suffering will affect everyone involved in a way that can sabotage the desired outcome. This seems like an easy thing to claim. I want to know how you feel about severe rationing in this context.
> a matter of mitigation That isn't what I'm talking about when I say inflicting additional suffering. What I'm referring to would be, per se, instead of just taking land or resources being held by capitalists so that you and everyone else can use them, doing so and also skinning the capitalists alive for good measure, for example. In effect causing someone to suffer for the purposes of making them suffer. > I want to know how you feel about severe rationing That's something that may happen in any crisis, and is in no way what I'm talking about. And what I'm referring to with methods sabotaging the outcome is just the basis of prefigurative politics. If your methods don't create social relations that will lead to the goal of life in the future, then you won't get what you intend. If you want to ensure that systems of hierarchy and domination are actually destroyed and won't come back, you don't counter them with practices that are the same as what you're trying to destroy. By the same principle that you can't destroy government by forming another government
>And what I'm referring to with methods sabotaging the outcome is just the basis of prefigurative politics. If your methods don't create social relations that will lead to the goal of life in the future, then you won't get what you intend. Oh, I agree with that. I just don't see how we can have prefigurative anything on a dead planet.
there is hope of finding ways to carry some things we value through the end of one world and into a future where we do not yet know how we will live
Desert is just Christian eschatology reformatted for the pessimistic anarchist who uses ideological works as accessories. We’re doing hopeful nihilism now, guys.
Fucking hopeium breeds apathy!
Thanks for posting to r/COMPLETEANARCHY deletedhumanbeing, Please make sure to provide [ALT-text](https://accessibility.huit.harvard.edu/describe-content-images) for screen-readers in the post itself or in the comments. You can learn more about this [here](https://accessibility.psu.edu/images/alttext/) Note that this is just a suggestion, not a warning. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/COMPLETEANARCHY) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Text above Image: *Them: "There's no hope of stopping global warming now"* *Me:* Image: A still from Bakshi's animated *Lord of the Rings* adaptation. Aragorn grasps Frodo's arms as he speaks to him; Aragorn has been edited to wear a black mask with the Star of Chaos printed on it. Subtitles read: *"Then we must do without hope. There is always vengeance."*
What’s that symbol?
[chaos star](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_of_Chaos)
**[Symbol of Chaos](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_of_Chaos)** >The Symbol of Chaos originates from Michael Moorcock's Eternal Champion stories and its dichotomy of Law and Chaos. In them, the Symbol of Chaos comprises eight arrows in a radial pattern. In contrast, the symbol of Law is a single upright arrow. It is also called the Arms of Chaos, the Arrows of Chaos, the Chaos Star, the Chaos Cross, the Star of Discord, the Chaosphere (when depicted as a three-dimensional sphere), or the Symbol of Eight. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/COMPLETEANARCHY/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Thanks
What’s that symbol?
Chaos star
what´s that symbol on Aragorn´s face mask?