Baaahb

This is an america vs Americans definition issue. Americans litigate when its useful or required usually. America litigates every chance it gets. The mish derstanding is easy as america is full of Americans, but really america is a collection of wealth holding entities known as corporations that give zero shits about Americans except for when it comes to extracting wealth.

Of course there are a lot of Americans that participate in this cause those corporations pay to put food on the table. You too will dance when your corporate overlords snap.

Thing is, that behavior is often the envy of the rest off the planet. I see it as a trade off, but its often viewed as an exclusively good trait.

An outsiders perspective on German efficiency: it seems like you're all taught that there is a correct way to do everything.

Non Germans may be taught that there is a correct way for one or two things and maybe other correct ways are acknowledged, but for the most part, we only need to do those few things actually correctly. Good enough is good enough for everything else

Yep, I am agreeing with you. The statement was never snap and deb are identical, its that canonical is making them do identical things.

You are missing the attribution. The person you are replying to is making a joke that Canonical says they are the same, not that they are actually the same.

You are missing the attribution. The person you are replying to is making a joke that Canonical says they are the same, not that they are actually the same.

Thats something I find fascinating. People hear anarchy and assume the end of commerce because it would inherently mean an end to capitalism, presuming we arent talking about some weird ancap philosophy that I can't make sense.

Commerce has happened for forever, and changing forms of government will not change that.

Thats not the part I find fascinating though, its that people discussing anarchy tend to cede this argument without a fight.

If you do so, an implied argument of anarchy gets lost: "there is no such thing as unskilled labor."

This isnt generally considered a point for anarchy, but it is. In an anarchist system, you have the agency to decide your role in your community. This means you WILL specialize, as we all do as humans; even the generalists of us aren't generalists at everything. I for one would make a shitty translator, as i only speak English.

There would need to be some means of getting labor done by someone who knew how to do it, this ought to feel natural to most of us anyway... I mean I assume you guys try to help your friends at stuff you are good at that they aren't. I similarly assume you're generally compensated for this behavior, even if it isnt with currency as we generally consider it.

I'm of the opinion that an anarchist society is probably the wrong way, but incorporating anarchist ideals into things, such as "no really you actually are responsible for everyTHING (not everyone) around you" and "you are the only person who is capable of being responsible for your own choices, opinions and decisions." and "consider the consequences of your actions before doing what you are told" and "a just hierarchy is one you are free to join and leave as required, and without coersion", we can actually improve even our current system.

I think you may underestimate the impact of sewage backing up into your home :D

You are right though. Tragedy of the commons is a catch22. When everything is everyone's problem, nothing is anyone's problem. This occurs in EVERY political system though, and they still function.

It would. An anarchist system requires participation at all ends from just about everyone. If you forfeith your vote once, you'll forfeight it again, not because of a conscious choice, but because you empowered others to make your choice for you in the first place.

Anarchy is not about comfort. Its about freedom, as nebulous as that term is, and freedom, as has been said many many times, is not free.

Neither Notch nor Joan Roling (I am aware this is not her name, but if she decides others names for them I can decide hers for her) did it on their own. It is literally impossible to do so. Both of them 1) got insanely lucky, 2) got major investment behind them.

That major investment is were the billions actually came from. Its important to recognize "i recieved billions of dollars from shit fucks who got their billions the old fashions way, murder and exploitation, in order to promote my creation and make those billionaires even more wealth" is not the same as "the singular work of art that I produced generated a billion dollars of value for me without accepting tremendous amounts of blood money from the ruling class."

It is not possible to become a billionaire without being guilty by association. You MUST participate in oppression because of the nature of capital.

Relocating people from a problem area to somewhere else does have the effect of making it look like a problem has been fixed. Doesnt actually fix anything but it looks like it does.

Also daily mail? Really? Nah, gtfo