But many people did work on afaq, no?
Edit: what things do you think are biased on afaq? I feel like a link to a critique would help.
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
47 points (94.3% liked)
Anarchism
2378 readers
4 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
Other anarchist comms
- !anarchism@slrpnk.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- !anarchism@hexbear.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.ml
- !anarchism101@lemmy.ca
- !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Raddle is very post-left. For example:
Anarchists are not leftists, we side with neither monarchy nor republic, dictatorship nor democracy, free market capitalism nor state capitalism. We stand for anarchy. The absolute negation of all authority, including both wings of government.
Like I would argue that the items to the left of the bolded text make anarchists leftists, in the sense that we claim to support (and do support) non-hierarchical modes of living as the classical Left claims to do as well. Of course any serious left-wing anarchists do not want to replicate the left wing of the State. But making that critique and rejecting left unity where it conflicts with our anarchist values does not mean that we're not leftists and that there's nothing to be learned from classical Left literature.
So I would assume that the bias is towards the classical Left. Which...I think that the original FAQ is pretty critical of the classical Left? But a shorter FAQ for outsiders or classical-Left-averse people is still incredibly useful IMO.
Very informative! Thanks a lot! :)
I should have clarified in the post; this is not my opinion, nor am I a participant of Raddle. I just found a cool link that I wanted to share.
[An Anarchist FAQ] is written entirely by one man and often pushes a strong Bookchinite perspective, to the point of smearing the anarchist currents that Bookchin rallied against
Again, I don't have much of an opinion on this, as I don't know how much of it is true. I haven't read AFAQ in much detail: I preferred the digestibility of Peter Gelderloos' Anarchy Works.
nor am I a participant of Raddle.
Nothing about Raddle, or it's creator, deserves any kind of trust.
It's maker, Ziq, was caught red-handed on Raddle using an army of sock-puppet accounts to harass participants and manipulate narratives on Raddle itself - a method they were suspected of using to disrupt and hijack r/anarchism way back when.
They are literally a text-book example of a bad actor.
Yep, they're not exactly trust worthy. It's why I like db0 over Raddle.
Raddle has like 10% of the users and half of them are Ziq's alts.
I started the new FAQ, I can provide direct quotes from the old FAQ to outline its biases if you want. But biases aren't really a problem, that's to be expected in any project, the problem is the vicious smears it directs at anarchists of different schools, and the way it's tries to assert monolithic thought onto anarchy, especially the author's ideology of majoritarianism which he borrows from Murray Bookchin's theories.
Hi, I'm the one who started the new FAQ. I started it specifically because the old FAQ repeatedly claims anarchy is dedicated to majoritarianism i.e. direct democracy, and because of how readily it smears and dismisses green anarchy, while praising non-anarchists like Murray Bookchin. You can see some examples here: https://raddle.me/wiki/A_New_Anarchist_FAQ_Instructions
Thanks. I'll check that out. That said, I happen to be in a lot of anarchist groups and read quite a bit in between.
Afaik, the afaq rightfully claims that both direct democracy and consent are legit ways of anarchist group decisionmaking. I'd agree if you said it doesnt shed light of things like qualified majorities which are used in anarcho syndicalism quite a bit.
Am I missing something?
It says "most anarchists are in favour of direct democracy" i.e. majoritarianism. We're in favour of reaching consensus, not forcing the will of the majority on minorities. That's Bookchin who insists we all obey the will of the majority.
Well. Consensus is great but especially in a world where forcing others is commonly taught from early age, at least qualified majority isnt worth completely throwing it out. It feels very harsh to delegitimize the work instead of just criticizing.
As an anarchist, I don't think it's harsh to throw out systems of domination. It's basically my whole reason for being.
Would you agree that systems of domination are a central but not the only opponent of a worthy life?
I think of lack of education for example, taught helplessness as another.
As a practicing anarchist, I see people use domination to fill a void left by former dominating systems and others being held back by learned helplessness. This can lead to the project failing. I dont see how that makes sense. How do the existing anarchist groups you know do it? The ones i know start with consensus but are willing to change it if necessary.
A free society does not just exist from tomorrow but there is a process. This process involves people who have only ever known slavery.
I'm not the type of anarchist who believes there can ever be such a thing as a 'free society'. I see anarchy as a constant fight against domination. I'm not an anarchist because I believe anarchy will create a perfect utopia, I'm an anarchist because when I see domination and oppression, it infuriates me into action. Here's my ode to anarchy: https://raddle.me/wiki/what_anarchy_means
Consensus has to come with freedom of association. When people don't agree on a course of action, they don't need to work together on the project. They can go their separate ways and come back together later on a project where their interests and needs better align. More here: https://raddle.me/wiki/friendship
Accepting structures of domination with the reasoning that compromising our ethics is justified in the service of "a better tomorrow" is how you get the USSR. Ethical compromises don't lead to freedom, they lead to tyranny. I don't have it in me to accept forced obedience in the name of collectivity.
On the other hand, I'm all for adapting methods to fit each unique situation. But I won't personally participate in methods that force conformity.
And thats the point. Everyone can have different opinions. I'm no type of anarchist at all. I'm just myself. I do believe in a world where everyone can be free and I'm willing to put effort into it.
I also dont care in general if we get the ussr back. It was the far superior system to today imo. But of course I would much prefer if we could do it from the bottom up like the many communes that exist today and have, historically.
I also dont care in general if we get the ussr back
yikes are we not on the same page or even in the same book..
And thats the attitude that keeps us from getting anywhere.
My goals are simple. Nobody starves, nobody goes homeless. Down the line i also dont want animals to be eaten either but thats absolutely nowhere as easy to get a majority on than the other two.
I think you and i differ somewhere on the breakline between social anarchists and individualist anarchists but not sure.
Wait, are you Ziq?
EDIT: It seems so. So, still steadfastly opposed to postmill joining the fediverse? Then you wouldn't need accounts like these to interact :D
Watch out for Ziq, the mods of anarchist subreddit had to ban them several times for stiring up shit.
And they use sock puppets on raddle.me to mod and comment as other users.
Lol you peeps don't realize I used to be a mod in /r/anarchism for more than a decade and was in that sub since 2009. That is to say, I'm familiar with ziq 😅
Had no idea about that part. But glad to know you're aware of Ziq being weird.
Maybe don't let them spread the lie that I'm banned from r/anarchism when you know first hand it's not true? You know, uphold your own rules about jacketing?
You did that yourself didn't you? And I honestly haven't kept track of whom they banned since I've been gone.
I mean you can easily look and see for yourself:
https://old.reddit.com/user/ChanceHappening/
Raddle being prominently linked in r/anarchism's sidebar is another indication they're spreading disinfo.
OK, then easy to point that out to them like you just did. And people getting their memory wrong on the internet (your anarchist subs did get banned on reddit, which is why you started raddle) is not badjacketing.
load more comments
(2 replies)
-
Don't gender me.
-
I was not banned from r/anarchism.
-
Raddle's moderator log is completely transparent, you can look at it and see I openly moderate it everyday. I have no reason to use a 'sock puppet' to mod.
-
If I want to comment anywhere anonymously, I'll do so. I don't need to show you my passport to post on the internet.
I have amended the pronouns to be consistently they/them. My apologies on that front.
Yeah, I made an account because someone told me your site was being used to attack me and the FAQ I started.
I'm not against postmill joining the fediverse, I'm against lemmy.
I'm not against postmill joining the fediverse, I'm against lemmy.
By now both piefed and mbin also exist. Anyway why not add apub support to postmill then?
it's foss, go ahead and add it. i don't have the skills to.
Why don't you ask the developer to do so?
It's not important to me. Being here has reinforced that. It's as toxic as ever. Also these reasons: https://raddle.me/f/meta/127272/on-federation
I'm not against postmill joining the fediverse, I'm against lemmy.
OK so you're then reversing that statement because people outside your bubble might be rude to you?
I'm not reversing that statement. I'm not against it but I'm not enthusiastic about it either and not because people "might be rude to me", but because this technology comes with an ideological component that actively curtails freedom of association, regardless of whatever ceremonial safeguards you claim are in place.
Short version:
-
No that's a straw man. There are too many cool options for how to solve that problem, and no i cant explain every detail of my ideal society at its peak to you, because im not the god queen of it, and i want everyone to have a say.
-
We tend to propose starting by not putting so many of our combined resources towards doing the bad thing on purpose, then finding the reasons why the bad thing happens and fixing those.
-
Can i get some of what you're smoking? It sounds wild.
-
No. If you touch me with your toothbrush i will scream.
I think that covers all the standard questions and accusations.
Fuck off, Ziq.
And take your shitty personality cult masquerading as "anarchism" with you.
I didn't post this, don't attack random people for linking to anarchist literature because of whatever ancient drama you're fixated on.
load more comments
(3 replies)
view more: next ›