One thing that absolutely should stop happening is naive liberals thinking that cops are going to impede, arrest, or investigate ICE instead of helping ICE and arresting protesters.

#uspol #ACAB

@richpuchalsky

I've been thinking about this. Mamdani took power and instantly became a cop lover. The weird ammosexuals took power and instantly stopped hating the idea of federal cops. Progressives are losing power and so are becoming less pro-cop. Communists love cops when they're in charge and hate them otherwise. Poor gay people chant "bottoms, tops, we all hate cops" but rich gay people support them.

I'm beginning to think that one's relationship to the police is not a matter of ideology, but a matter of specifically whether you have power or not. I think anyone who gains power (or who becomes part of the ingroup) is going to be corrupted into a cop-lover.

The implications of this, as an anarchist, are something I've been thinking through.

@passenger

It's not so such an implication of anarchism as it *is* anarchism. You can not be in power in a hierarchical system without loving cops (or whoever the equivalent enforcers are in your society). The hierarchy doesn't maintain itself and always requires physical force.

@richpuchalsky

I mean, if loving cops is something that comes and goes from ideologies depending upon their power in society, what does that mean for us when we win? Are we going to become bootlickers, and if so, how can we avoid that?

I'm not an anarchist because I like the idea. My anarchism is based on it being the most pragmatic and realistic way forward, and I think we have a real chance of winning in my lifetime (I think we came closer than people realise to a successful revolution in 2020.)

As anarchists, however, we have a tradition of thinking things through carefully before we do them. We don't rush in heedless of the consequences like communists or liberals do. We understand that no system outgrows the circumstances of its birth, so we need to be careful about those circumstances. If there's a chance of us becoming cop-lovers, then I think we need to take that seriously.

@passenger @richpuchalsky

As an outsider who is very anarchy-curious, and who tries to educate myself when I have the spoons, one thing I've noticed about the anarchist community on Masto is that a lot of (English-speaking) anarchists still carry significant cultural baggage from their Western upbringing, specifically the more pernicious parts of individualism and the Hobbesian idea that men are intrinsically evil, covetous, and unfaithful.

Add to that conflating power and authority, and...

@johnzajac

I don't know about this, because the least totalitarian and autocratic states in the world are largely the western ones.

@passenger @richpuchalsky

@alessandro @johnzajac @richpuchalsky

You're Canadian, go ask some First Nations people about whether they'd like their lands back and what's stopping them.

Totalitarianism is by nature invisible to those who agree with its ideology, and the core ideology of Canada (and other settler countries) is "this is our land now." And that will be defended with force and the threat of force.

@passenger

Got it, a country can only be 100% good or 100% bad. Enjoy your conversation.

@johnzajac @richpuchalsky

@alessandro @passenger @richpuchalsky

Most of the people in this thread are avowed anarchists, so they honestly think the *concept* of the State is 100% bad.

Which is not really all that controversial a point of view, imho

What you're feeling right now is probably something worth interrogating, tbh

@johnzajac

The implication of your post was that non-western countries are closer to the anarchist ideal, which I really don't think is the case. I'm not saying that western states are perfect, much less that they are anywhere close to anarchism - I'm just saying that states elsewhere are no closer. I've read Kropotkin and others, I'm not coming here to defend anything.

@passenger @richpuchalsky