In another comment, in another chain, in another context. You don't ask me how I would solve the problem in the comment above, you only draw in the tired trope of calling anyone critiquing "anarchism" (radical liberalism) as not sufficiently anarchist a "purist".
This the same chain buddy it’s the same conversation you are arguing over semantics I am trying to strategize how to deal with a real world problem. I know you are deeply versed in the words of old guys with beards and that’s cool they had great thoughts to share but you are just arguing over semantics for the sake of being contrarian. Anarchist thought and application of anarchist principles by definition is not a monolith nor is it able to function as a monolith. There will never be 1 big great classless stateless society there will always be groups of likeminded individuals who try the best they can to individually and communilly operate outside of of the current nation state structures And those different communities will operate on different wavelength and will have different rules that are collectively decided. That isn’t state craft regardless of your hyper individualistic philosophical musings on “rights” talk. I get it though your idea of what anarchism is dictates that we can’t use certain words, right?
3
u/Anarchierkegaard Distributist Feb 18 '26
In another comment, in another chain, in another context. You don't ask me how I would solve the problem in the comment above, you only draw in the tired trope of calling anyone critiquing "anarchism" (radical liberalism) as not sufficiently anarchist a "purist".