Snowden on the Twitters

Juan juan.g71 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 2 13:00:42 PDT 2015


On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 18:59:29 +0200
rysiek <rysiek at hackerspace.pl> wrote:


 >> 
 >> “Any movement that seeks social justice through political
 >> involvement and attempting to hold public officials
 >> democratically accountable is doomed to failure. The only real
 >> way to achieve social justice is by bypassing the state,
 >> treating it as irrelevant, and building the kind of society we
 >> want without the government’s permission.”
 
 > Yo dawg, I herd yo don't liek the state, so yo should build one
 > of your own

	
	It says "building the kind of society" - *society*, not the
	state. Two different things. 



> My point was, rather, that ultimately this:
> "bypassing the state (...) and building the kind of society we want
> without the government's permission"
> 
> ...often ends up being this:
> "bypassing the *current* state (...) and building the kind of society
> we want without the *current* governments' permission, so that we can
> become the government that others need permission of"


	Well, that may happen although I don't think anarchists have
	built any *state*. For starters, if they did, they would not be
	anarchists, by definition.

> 
> One way or the other we end up with a "state" or some other
> state-like organisation. There will be rulers, and there will be
> ruled.

	Oh yes. Without slavery, who would pick the cotton.


> 
> But we can either choose to take what we can from what seems to be a
> set of good ideas (separation of powers, checks and balances,


	Wait rysiek, you are copypasting the most laughable nonsense
	that anglo fascism (masquerading as 'liberalism') ever
	produced? 

	You know, the first requirement to win an argument is to pick
	the right side. And statism isn't the right side of the
	argument. 


	re : 'division of power' - the incentives for people who have
	power lead them to COOPERATE to maintain or gain more power, not
	to 'check' each other's power. ABC of economics.



> etc)
> and build upon them or try implementing them in a more functional
> way, or... go the "ignore it altogether" route, end up reinventing
> the wheel, and arriving at a not-all- that-functional variation of it.
> 

	So, you are willing to 'cooperate' with the current criminals
	and justify them while accusing a bunch of anarchist of 'maybe'
	doing something that goes against their principles? 

	

	






More information about the cypherpunks mailing list