this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
263 points (91.7% liked)

Flippanarchy

1362 readers
356 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

  7. No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Cross-posted from "TRUE communism!" by @Muaddib@sopuli.xyz in !politicalmemes@lemmy.world


you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 days ago (32 children)

... You don't get it?

This is an Anarchist instance.

Anarchists are extremely critical of the concept of 'the State' itself, tend to want to either totally abolish it, or at least strip it down so much or break it apart that it essentially isn't a 'State' any more.

Tankies embrace, and essentially worship the State.

... Also, in basically every single recorded instance of a succesful or attempted leftist revolution in modern human history, tankies ally with anarchists to overthrow the existing State, and then murder all of them after they've established themselves as the new State or proto-State.

One could argue that it seems to be in the material interest of authoritarian statists to extend false allyship to 'fellow leftists', and then betray them as quickly as they abandon their ideal of a 'classless society' and begin to assert themselves as the new ruling class.

There's a 101 level answer for your 'why so antagonistic' question.

Tankies historically cry 'Unity! Unity!' and do exactly what you are doing, trying to shame those who are skeptical... and then the rhetoric flips on a dime and the cry switches to 'Purity! Faith!'

...

Also worth noting is your framing of this as antagonistic in the first place.

I guess you find the evidence of history thus far to largely be antagonistic to your worldview?

I don't know, I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth, but that is my assumption.

I could be wrong though.

[–] Sphere@hexbear.net 20 points 4 days ago (18 children)

Ah yes, the evidence of history. Like all the successful anarchist revolutions?

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 6 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Ukraine for example, before the "allied" communists betrayed and hunted down the anarchists

[–] Sphere@hexbear.net 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Look, I'm not trying to justify everything the Bolsheviks did during the Russian Civil War. I don't know enough of the history to make a judgment call on most of that stuff. So I'm going to leave the question of morality entirely aside on this one.

But I don't think you can call your revolution successful if, within a few years, some external force is able to show up, wreck everything you were doing, and take over. It's not enough to just temporarily wrest control away and set up your committees and your resource distribution system and declare victory. You have to establish long-term security and stability. If you don't, you haven't had a successful revolution.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Valid point. I'd say that it's inevitable for a large force with popular legitimacy and support to best a force with a similar percentage of but less-due-to-geographical-resources popular legitimacy and support, but I see arguing that would be moving the goalposts. So to engage that directly I would say that the AANES (Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, commonly known as Rojava) is as anarchist as the USSR was communist. It's been there for well over a decade now.

[–] Sphere@hexbear.net 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I could quibble over the circumstances (and, unfortunately, likely outcomes in the near future), or argue about your dig at the USSR, but honestly I'm more inclined to cede the point on this. I don't really have anything against anarchists or anarchism; I was mostly just giving a flippant answer to that other commenter, who was being a smug jerk.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)