r/Anarchism

This post is oriented towards discussion of an anti-car anarchism. If you disagree with it, I'm not really interested in debating this stance. The thread is here to discuss some practicalities of an anti-car anarchist society.

I've been an anarchist for basically as long as I remember to some extent. Despised borders and (nation-)States since I was a kid.

I also have always had strong feelings when it comes to owning and using cars. My family did not have a car when I was growing up, and I never did myself, nor do I plan on getting one. My brother bought one a few years after I moved out.

I'm pretty known in my social circle as being strongly anti car and people always seem to love to tell me how great it is to have a car and how awesome it would be if I got a driving license. No thank you.

Public transport and boots-made-for-walkin are pretty efficient most of the time in my opinion, at least when it comes to necessities. I grew up in a town deep in the mountains, which is connected to other towns and cities by bus or train. If, however, you want to spend a nice day at that lovely river two valleys over, you would need to travel there by car. Car, or leave two days earlier and hike there, or ride by bike (which could be intense depending on the road). Sure, it would be great, but very limiting to people who have major disabilities, that would have otherwise been able to reach the place in a car. Or the elderly or children who simply don't have the strength to put up with such an effort.

What is a potential solution to this? I thought of cars that would be available to borrow in case of need, which I assume would be pretty needed in case someone was interested in moving to a different city or country, to transport all their stuff. Would these cars be automated? You would need to know how to drive them otherwise. Would everyone be able to drive these cars?

As cool as it may sound to some, carts and carriages are out of question because we stand for animal liberation.

title

I've spent the last 10 - no. 15 years burying my face in books. I know theory. I know tactics. I'm fucking exhausted.

This is not a call to action. Do as you please. I am just frustrated.. annoyed even. I'm the bookiest of the Bookchins.

Maybe its just boredom. Idk. Im struggling to put a word to the feeling. Its well within the realm of anger, maybe impatience.

I've done shit, yknow. I've gotten involved, directly. Explicitly... and I donate sometimes. I give offerings to the gods, especially Lord Ganesh. But I could do more right? I feel like... idk man. Like i'm not doing enough. Like i'm a bad word, and then some, yknow?

Anyways.

What's your favorite song?

heyo, pretty much the title. any books, zines, videos, whatever about building community and conflict resolution etc. I've wanted to get better as this but literally have no idea where to start.

thank you

There is something very wrong with the institutions of science worldwide. Scientific research is publicly funded but its oversight and dissemination are currently controlled by institutions that work in direct contradiction to the tenets of scientific advancement. Universities which oversee the majority of this research are corporatized, profitable entities, with the highest decision-making power in the hands of overpaid non-academic administrators. Research dissemination is in the hands of a multi-billion-dollar corporate publishing monopoly, where scientists hand over ownership of their work. The authors, the public, and the rest of the scientific community are all barred from freely accessing the knowledge they fund and generate.

When research is motivated by financial and political gain rather than knowledge seeking, it is no longer scientific. Scientific inquiry is, at its core, neutral – and in this way, anarchism complements its aims. Anarchy is not chaos. It is taking the fruits of our labors out of the hands of anti-scientific authority and bringing it back to the people who fund and create and advance it. Science needs anarchism now more than ever. We need a revolution. And therefore, I propose an anarcho-scientists’ movement.

So what can we do as anarcho-scientists?

Already, many scientists are boycotting publishing their work in for-profit journals - that is, any journal that would put publicly funded research behind a paywall, charge extravagant APCs (article processing charges) or allow people to “pay to publish” poor quality or non-peer-reviewed work. Already the peer review and editorial processes are largely voluntary. With most journals being entirely digital (no printing services required), and typesetting automated, the majority of our money is going to pure profit of the publishers. Therefore, step 1 is the easiest in principle: anarcho-scientists must refuse to publish work in for-profit journals owned by publishers such as Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, and Taylor & Francis. Instead, we should strive to publish with non-profit publishers such as university presses, open archives (such as ArXiv and its affiliates and OSF), and the ultimate anarchist scientific platform currently, Peer Community In.

What of the corporatized entities that dictate what research should be done, the modern university? Ideally, the anarcho-scientist would work for a non-profit research institute governed by academic administrators, such as Max Planck Institutes. Unfortunately, the reality is that the majority of research is conducted in public universities that funnel much of their overheads into the pockets of overpaid administrators, who actively work against their scientific employees. An apt example of this is the true story of Katalin Karikó, who was denied tenure by the University of Pennsylvania because administrators did not see the use of her fundamental work on mRNA. Years later, this work directly contributed to the development of the COVID vaccine that saved millions of lives and earned Dr Karikó a Nobel prize. Most scientific advancements start with such fundamental research that does not have a clear benefit to society, yet because there are extra steps between knowledge and application, it is the first type of research to go.

in lieu of dismantling the entire university system, a sensible step 2 would be to lobby for aggressive salary caps on all upper administrators at universities, including pro-/vice-/chancellors, presidents, provosts, and heads of institutes. Furthermore, individuals put in these positions should be academically qualified to the same degree as the academics they oversee (i.e., hold a non-honorary PhD). This would ensure the administrator is capable of adhering to the tenets of science and understanding the financially/politically neutral pursuit of knowledge.

Finally, we must change the way that publicly funded projects are selected by grant agencies and funding bodies. There is a funding crisis that has overtaken much of the world's science. With little funding comes high competition for resources and inevitable bias in decision making. Which projects should be funded? Only those with applied or industry value? Only those from applicants who already have a strong track record? Only groundbreaking ideas? All of these selection criteria come with enormous bias - not to mention there are currently no checks and balances on how reviewers (who have great influence in steering funding decisions) are selected. Therefore, step 3 is twofold: all publicly funded grants should include an open and transparent review process, as many academic journals have already adopted (but where funding bodies are woefully far behind). Funding bodies should further try to shift their models from making the final decision on which projects are funded, to a lottery system provided the project is deemed to pass a certain quality threshold. Lobbying for these changes will ensure a fairer and more neutral allocation of limited funds.

For anyone who knows there is a problem with the state of academia, who knows that things are wrong, but maybe doesn't know where to start - let's start here, with these 3 goals. Let's take back the oversight, funding, and dissemination of our research and become a community of anarcho-scientists.

In the end social democracy upholds the state, wage labour and capitalism just with a lot of social welfare. Is it just the petty capitalist's that dont want to be taxed although they already have everything they ever would need and then their tabloid's bash SOCDEMS as radical islamic communist's.

This post isnt meant as apologia for social democracy and electorialism. Im just curios about this question and wanted an anarchist perspective.

As the movement against Flock cameras gathers momentum, we have reprinted a sticker attacking surveillance.

Flock is not the only surveillance company, and cameras are not the only form of surveillance. There are many other corporations waiting to fill the role that Flock cameras are playing, and many other means by which those who aim to dominate us seek to monitor and control our activities. It is good to compel local governments to cancel Flock contracts or directly disable Flock cameras, but the movement against Flock must become a movement against all of the interlocking structures of domination or it will only function as a pressure valve as those structures tighten their grip on our lives.

Put these up everywhere to identify the root of the problem. 🏴

https://crimethinc.com/Surveillance2026

What you are reading, watching, or listening to? Or how far have you gotten in your chosen selection since last week?

In this video, I get to vent. It. All. Oooout!!!

An ongoing dispute between me, an anarchist, and the MAGA blood relatives that I live with.

Includes discussion of DIVISIONS OF LABOR, BOUNDARIES, WITCHCRAFT, and VIOLENCE.

People I cite include Kat Blaque, Reese Ireland, Sheraseven, Andrea Dworkin's famous quote "I favor violence", Peachkka, Mexie, Positive Leftist News, and Nicole from Pynk Spots.

Of particular interest to anarchists: (1) the politics of the home. (2) Patriarchal relations that often go unchecked and unanalyzed in anarchist spaces.

I hope I don't come across as whiny or ignorant but I have had some thoughts on the idea of being what you do, not what you believe. Many people say they're leftist or anarchist or whatever and don't really do too much when the time to act comes, and unfortunately that describes me excellently. I've become extremely sympathetic to Anarchists and feel disgusted by the new understanding I have of the world, and yet, all I can do is glue myself to the screen and daydream about being a somebody. I've thought of using my interests in art to spread awareness on campus, and I've thought of reading more theory, but it seems I can never commit to anything (a common struggle in my life really). Part of it is... procrastination? Hopefully not laziness but it feels like that most of the time. The other part is how little it seems. I hate to downplay the efforts of those in Minnesota or New Jersey but the truth is most Americans aren't doing shit wether they're aware of the dystopia or not, so when a father gets shot after being tracked down by ICE using flock cameras, the hell does a little zine some loser made for their college matter? Why aren't I rigging bombs under fascist's vehicles?

And I also notice how some hesitation comes from the fear of things, fear that people much more courageous than me have overcome. The kids of Nepal didn't twiddle their thumbs worrying about getting hit by batons because liberation was worth the fight to them, but I'm over here worried of being made an example in a way that doesn't compare to what others have. It's quite selfish, and it's really made me feel useless. Like the best thing I could do for mankind is get out the way if you know what I mean. I guess I'm just wondering if some of you have felt the same way and been able to jumpstart into action, or reframe this thought. I don't think turning my hobbies into activism is any more useful than voting, and telling myself to "suck it up" just brings me closer to terrible things.

It’s the only anarchist bookstore we have

I'm gonna try to keep this short on account of me being depressed, and not having a lot of energy.

I've been trying to get involved in, and become part of prefigurative structures. This presents difficulties on two accounts.

The first is that I live somewhat off the beaten path, meaning I can't easily be present without significant investment of time, and money for transportation. I generally have either one, or the other, never both.

The second is the topic I'm here to talk about today. I'm autistic with ADHD, and to put it bluntly, while I want to be a part of dual power, dual power doesn't seem to care for me. On the few occasions I've been able to fight through my issues to try to get involved, I've been told my presence is unwanted, with little to no explanation why. I assume I somehow made people uncomfortable. That's usually the problem.

So, what do I do? I want to do anarchism. I want to live in shared economy, and real community with other people, but other people don't want me around. I'm not gonna lie, this hurts. A lot. I'm starting to lose hope.

I'm not really sure where I'm going with this. I just need something to keep hope alive, I guess. Let me know if you have anything.

What does a protest look like at 2am? Not speeches. Dosas being handed out by strangers. Graffiti covering every wall. People dancing to a Bluetooth speaker like the fear didn't exist, right alongside the fear itself. I followed this across Bangalore, Mumbai and Delhi over two months, and wrote it all down just in time for our 80th Independence Day. Read it when you get a moment, I'd really love to know what you think.

So, hear me out and please know I'm not trying to kink shame or to be judgemental on the choices that people do in bed. With that said, this is what's happening:

I 42F met a man on a dating app (38M) the chat was great, we moved off the app, met in person and went on a fun date.

We share many important things like our personal values, political opinions and societal beliefs, we both say we are anarchists.

But then we are talking about sex, and he mentions he is a Dom and that it's important for him that the person who is with him can fully be a sub and enjoy being cuffed, denied orgasms, become a servant, respond with "yes Sir" and other things that gave me the ick. Obviously this is where for me there was a big disconnect.

I cannot see myself, as an anarchist and an empowered woman getting on my knees in front of this man and accepting to serve him and respond to his every demand with "yes, sir" as if he was above me or something... As a woman of color I can't imagine being handcuffed and denied free movement of my body, and worse off that some dude holds the "power" to tell me if I can or cannot have an orgasm.

This power play in my mind contradicts with the idea of no authority, no subordination, no masters, no gods... It makes me wonder, is he really an anarchist when he needs this hierarchical system to get off sexually?

Thanks for taking the time to read and reflect on this and tell me your thoughts.

I won't be dating this man anymore, but it's something that hasn't left my mind since.