Was inspired by the article to draw this. Sadly It doesn’t make much sense without context.

First of all: Are you assuming I’m in America? If you are then you’re wrong. And moving to somewhere currently going through mass deportations is just taking a huge unnecessary risk.

Secondly: while an unstable political situation could be a good motivator to get people organizing collectively, It’s also equally likely that an authoritarian state emerges that will suppress any attempt to reduce peoples dependency to the state. While it would be exciting I don’t think I’m personally up for it.

I think that it is safer to begin collectivisation somewhere that’s more politically stable to grow a big enough following that when hostilities start you could hold your own. Unless some place already has a lot of anarchic/syndicalist thought then It’s going to be hard to start it with everyone at each-others throats.

And it’s also possible I’ve misunderstood you’re comment and you’re using anarchy as a synonym for chaos. In which case I just want to point out that my use is different. When I say anarchy I mean a power structure based on mutual aid and strong interpersonal relations without any leaders or hierarchy.

I am an EU citizen so Ireland will probably be easier but I’m wondering by how much. I’m much more drawn to the UK as I am more connected to It’s culture.

My biggest concern is finding new connections. I struggle with it here as well and I don’t think moving to another country will just magically make that go away. Although I do feel more confident in English than in my native language.

and people complain about wayland.

The Idea is that the enum acts as a union, capable of holding any of the member types, It’s not that different from using identifiers and when transpiling to rust I will probably only support variants beginning with string literals (or maybe generate them).

The main reason is that I could use type inference to define the variants in a returned anonymous enum.

I like the pipe symbol because it is useful for distinguishing between enums and structs without keywords. And I just personally think it looks better. And allow for pretty anonymous enums like (|String |Int) for something that can accept both a string and an integer.

Not having a license is “All Rights Reserved”. That’s why I bothered with the license section in the readme at all.

Thanks!

I intend for the language to have a similar borrow checker and type system. Which is why I’m targeting rust. It means I have something to check against when writing the tooling. (Although I’m not sure I’ll get that far. My computer is littered with dead projects).

I don’t really want to clutter the repo with something so frivolous. If they were links or an SPDX ID would that be enough?

I’m intending to use this for a custom language “OA” that I want to compile to Rust and JS to start with.

I don’t know enough about LLVM to compile directly to machine code although I would like to.

You can use Unicode pictures: ␜ ␝ ␞ ␟

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_Pictures

Lets ditch base10 entirely and use 0(freezing)-216(boiling). that means 0-1000 in base6.

I wonder if the people who downvoted actually listened to the song, or just did it based on the name.

Ideology. every cent a capitalist doesn’t make because of me is a small victory.

Yeah I understand and actually agree with the points you’ve raised. I just like using different mediums for different experiences and wanted to balance the conversation.

So does tone not enhance your learning experience in any way? Because for me some concepts are a lot easier to grasp when I have someone explain them to me. Also listening is a lot less effort and can be done passively while for me reading requires a lot more of a conscious effort.

Video is a fundamentally different form of media than text and so the goals it achieves are also different. Text might be more useful for getting ideas across because words can be reread but you cannot replicate tone in text and tone can be crucial to understanding the message.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq-full

At least for anarchism there does exist a comprehensive faq.

I do not want an anarchist revolution that forces anarchy onto the entire society. That would not work. The people wouldn’t accept it. I want a system where anarchism can be implemented alongside other systems so everyone, me included, can find their spot, their best way to live. I do not think everyone is an anarchist, and can live in an anarchist system. People have different values and those values impact their politics. I just want a space where anarchy can exist without being destroyed. If a person is fine working 9-5 for 5 days a week for just enough money to pay rent, buy food and maybe sometimes some clothes then that’s fine. I would rather die.

The entire first two paragraphs of your statement is exactly what the CCP and USSR attempted to set up but it failed miserably due to efficiency issues, They then consolidated in to sudo fascism. How many attempts do you need to see that people in aggregate cannot form that level of trust in society or social engagement?

I do not believe that’s what the USSR was trying to do, but because I wasn’t there I cannot say for certain. All I can say is that if they did try to do it they failed to stop authoritarians getting to power and that was on them, not on the ideology. If you try to force a bunch of people who do not care about running their own lives and give them the power to run their own lives they will walk up to the first person telling them what to do and mindlessly do it. This is why an anarchist revolution has to be cultural as well as political. People need to want it, otherwise they won’t get it.

A hundred years have past since then. Humanity has gone from an agrarian society to a post-industrial (robots) society. I think the circumstances have changed enough to make any assumptions based on past revolutions inaccurate.

Anarchism does not provide robust power to protect minorities so it does not matter if it does not allow discrimination, it cannot prevent it

The community prevents it. If someone is acting like a dick people come together and deal with it. Together. Anarchism does not provide this power because it is up to the community to decide how it works.

Okay, how to I even begin. I’m going to start with a Thank You! This comment has made me think about a lot of different aspects of my Ideology and I am genuinely grateful that your comment initiated that. Ensuring clearer understanding of my ideology is very important to me.

Let’s start with the easy response. The final statement of my previous comment was very absolute.

if you remove all of the things from capitalism that make it incompatible you will end up with anarchy.

I now see that was a mistake. What I should have said instead was that it would make it more anarchistic, and you have confirmed this by suggesting methods that I believe are anarchistic. All the steps have the purpose of lessening the power structures of current society and if I would have to think about how to transition a capitalist society into an anarchist society I imagine I would come up with similar steps.

Therefor I support this “small capitalism”. I see it as a stepping stone towards anarchism, because it is moving in the right direction. It just doesn’t go far enough. You seem to be okay with money as a concept (and maybe wage slavery unless it falls under “equity of at the lowest levels”), I am not. I think that as long as money is a necessity to live you have the means through witch you can coerce others and remove these freedoms and safeguards put in place so in the end you will have just capitalism. Cruel, unjust and uncaring capitalism.

Removing money does not prevent against this, because anarchism also requires a lot of oversight to prevent collapsing. Money is just another vector of collapse that capitalism has. Also unlike anarchism, capitalism also does not have oversight of society by all members of society. This is the cultural anarchism I am talking about. Anarchists have no representative democracy, No political laziness. Everyone has a voice and you can’t give your voice to someone else. All the individuals are collectively in charge of everything that happens in their commune, and the society is nothing more than a collection of communes.

I also believe both can coexist. Nothing about anarchism prevents collaboration with other political systems. In fact I believe that an anarchist society must have good relations with a neighboring capitalist system to survive, because otherwise the capitalists in the system have nowhere to go and will rebel, the other society functions like an overflow pipe. Also the effect works reversed as well.

Anarchism does not allow for discrimination. All forms of discrimination are antithetical to anarchism.

Also I would like to address the in anarchism capitalism is dissent argument. Is fascism dissent? or theocracy? because from an anarchist point of view all those are coercive unjust power structures, that should be dismantled. They are authoritarian and oppressive. anarchy does not allow capitalism of this. It is the same logic as the paradox of tolerance, but also I do not believe alternative systems should not be allowed to exists. as long as they respect our right to independence and self-determination I have no problem with alternate political systems existing, only if they are unreasonably oppressive (including genocidal).

I could also talk about economics but I think this comment is already long enough.