🚨Support one half of the Armstrong 2 with their legal fees!🚨 Scan the QR code or go to https://bit.ly/tommie-armstrong2

Tommie is a mental health worker who allegedly took action against #RafaelAdvancedDefenceSystems in May this year with one other comrade, in an action referred to as the '#Armstrong2'. They don't qualify for legal aid, so need your help with fundraising!

Tommie says "As someone working in healthcare, I want to express particular solidarity to #Palestinian healthcare workers (and international colleagues who have travelled to help)- saving lives in a care system intentionally targeted by the #Israeli military. The ongoing imprisonment and torture of many of them horrifies me."

Support them by sharing this post and donating what you can to bit.ly/tommie-armstrong2

https://www.instagram.com/p/DSVWLyIiJDb

#FreePalestine 🇵🇸 #UKfascism #FreeAllPoliticalPrisoners #IsupportPA #IopposeGenocide

I've been lecturing (technically tutoring) someone recently on economy for economy classes. So far it's been easy. But we often get sucked into the topic of price haggling. It always goes the same.

She asks something like "why does what people say affect a price? You either value something to the extent you value it or you don't. It seems dishonest."

Usually my response to that is to first mention how, if all prices were fixed, money wouldn't go anywhere. If everyone just sold pizzas, and everyone sold them at the same price, everyone would live and die with the same amount of value in their possession. I also compare it to a captcha and say it's like tipping them for their human-to-human time.

That's a good point I think. Anyone in our same recurring conversation should start there. I bring up the small details and allow the ideas to converge. Especially the ones she knows.

However, I must admit, that's where my ability to explain it ends.

She then asks something like "how do you haggle then? What kind of talking is considered haggling and then at what point does it just become price bickering?" And in my mind, as I try to define it for her, I think to myself "forgive her, she's on the spectrum."

I'm not like her. I like to price haggle freely and think price haggling should be protected by law in the same way religion is protected by Freedom of Religion laws. If someone comes into a pharmacy and wants to haggle, in my perfect world, it would be enforced by the authorities. Perhaps you can tell me in your answer to this if you think this is a good idea (please).

How immersed are you in the practice? Immersed enough you've taken a long time doing it before (how long) or do it frequently? A lot of the people here have passionate views on the economy; how do you square the practice of price haggling with your views? Is it considered "good" in your viewpoint?

I'm new to the concept of anarchism, at least as a vision of society that actually has had thought put into it, so my apologies if this question seems stupid of self centered.

Risking losing context as I ask this, I'm curious about how advanced medicines like insulin (things that aren't small molecules, require rDNA, multinational logistics, supply chains and quality assurance, etc) would work and be distributed. What about advanced medical devices like insulin pumps, subcutaneous glucose monitors, etc?

I know there are some types of anarchist who would say those things wouldn't be needed without industrialization (im not going to gratify that take with a reaponse), but I suspect most still recognize the need for things like this, since millions of people would die without them.

I guess the root of my question is what the motivation would even be for someone to work on projects like that. Type 1 diabetics make up ~0.1% of the population at the highest, and a major hurdle from my perspective would be getting people to work on something needed by so small a population, but requiring such intensive resources to produce. And especially in any kind of transition period, I find it basically impossible to imagine the able bodied revolutionary actually giving a shit whether people like me live to see the "after."

I've done some looking and it seems like broadly, the attitudes range from "you'd make it yourself and its okay because you'd have time to if all your basic needs are met" to "well surely someone would do it altruistically." I also found a few people who just said "people die, get over it," and "the real problem is you should've died when you were 7 but we played god," but I have to assume (hope?) that such ideas are fringe. I'm hoping especially to hear from someone who actually understands why insulin (and pumps and CGMs and all that) are complicated, hard things that probably won't get made purely by volunteer labor at the huge scale needed. Like, it's not one of those things you can whip up at a local pharmacy, its far too complex for that.

I guess in all, I like the idea of a society without hierarchy, where self determination and community engagement become the de facto environment...but from my admittedly novice perspective, it sure doesn't feel like much thought has been given to how those of us with extremely short expiration dates should stability evaporate actually survive the transition.

Over the last week that I've been reading and thinking about this, I keep coming back to the inherent (though hopefully temporary) loss of stability that comes with any revolution. In that kind of scenario, I just...die. Along with millions like me. Either from supply chains failing during transition, or my own bullet because I'm staring down the barrel of an agonizing final week that ends with me dehydrated, starving, vomiting blood and gasping for air. From here it's really hard to see a place for me in an anarchist future.

Sorry, I recognize thats a little dark. But its something im finding myself having to think about more and more as collapse seems to draw ever closer.

Just hoping anyone has insights to share. And if i respond in the comments and i seem a little forceful, I promise I'm not trying to be a dick, its just that this is kind of existential for me, so I am probably going to be prone to pushing back or really pressing on certain aspects. If im being rude, please dont hesitate to tell me and I'll try to reframe to avoid that. It's neither the goal nor the intended process.

As a highlight of the article, the author recommend's Dennis Danver’s 'The Watch', which I thought had a particularly fun concept.

arguably one of the best time travel books I’ve read, drops Peter Kropotkin into 1989 Richmond, Virginia and observes as he deals with anarcho-punks, precarious labor, and race relations. The book tells a low-key and beautiful story with compelling characters, yet introduces the reader to some of the most basic of anarchist political and philosophical concepts.

And as an added bonus for Sci-fi fans specifically, Fifth Estate did a more recent article last year recommending some very interesting sounding Sci-fi, with each story having a quick synopsis of what it's about.

so the article is a fun diversion for me, but the takeaway i get is capital hindering removal of failing leaders for profit by maintainance of the appearance of authority. even in beekeeping. like a matroska doll or a fractal: the same thing shows up over and over again.

idk what i mean to say with this post or why i make it

cross-posted from: https://gregtech.eu/post/21712488

I would like to connect. Maybe discuss direct action opportunities and share literature. If you are not Iraqi and have any information about active iraqi or arabic speaking anarchist communities please share. the anarchist movement is nonexistent in iraq but i know there are individual anarchists afraid of speaking.

I'm not very knowledgeable on economics but as someone passionate about politics, I do have some interest in it as they're tightly linked. I would love to listen to economist communicators who explain things to a non-economist audience.

In contrast to those who tow the standard capitalist line, I have only come across Cahal Moran (AKA Unlearning Economics) and Richard D. Wolff who both seem to promote statist market socialism. There's also Gary Chartier who promotes mutualist market anarchism, but he doesn't communicate nearly as often or as effectively as the previous two so I'd hardly count him.

Marxist-Leninists surely have their own economists in their "actually existing socialist" countries and even ancaps have the Austrian school of economics. Where are the social anarchist economists? If there aren't any, why?

I'm aware there are critiques of economics as a field but how could we hope to transition to either a gift economy or decentrally planned economy without any experts to make a case for it or to serve in an advisory capacity if the time to transition ever comes?

It ain't all emperors and kings back then

Just came across this croudfunded cooperative publishing house.

https://bio.site/egalite_publishing_house

Apparently, they translate books into Russian, but also reach out to prominent authors with original material writing proposals (learned about them from one of the philosophers they commissioned), just like regular publishing institutions. The quality of publications looks impressive, something for general public, not just us punks. And all within one of the most oppressive and totalitarian societies.

I suppose this is an example of an activist success to learn from?