Too lazy to browse wiki, but genuinely curious. Anarchists, what exactly do you guys believe and how does it work?

that is either a faceberg filename or an instacuck filename. either way it's comical that you're sourcing that cancer from elsewhere when it already abounds on Jow Forums

Attached: 1557626123181.png (667x1000, 385K)

Anarchism is all about living in squalor and leeching off of welfare. We mostly compare dreads, listen to psytrance and use psychedelics while suffering from schizophrenia. You can sum our movement up in the following way: When faced with a decision, always choose the worst possible outcome imaginable.

>Judiasm

youtube.com/watch?v=seecIig0a7U

There are plenty of diffrent views, memes, and strawmen. So expect lots of diffrent anwsers.
I consider myself an anarchist, but not an utopian one, where anarchy needs to be achived. Its simply the most logical way to represent politics imo.
>anarchy
Objectivly speaking, and from an international politics perspective, we already live in anarchy. As all political views are created by and for the public, there is no overrarching ruler (if you aren't religious at least) that controls the political state of things. Anarchy is objective /realist politics. We live in an anarchist society where simply the most powerfull take power. This has always been the case, and always will be the case.
>syndicalism
What are the mechanisms of objective reality, in terms of politics at least? Individuals, and groups form groups with special interests, who then go on and challange other groups for power. These groups are classes, ethnisitis,races, religions, ect. Anything that is of interest to the individual can be made into a talking point for power.
>How should we act within this state of objective politics?
We should try to reach common ground based on ouer diffrent interest, and if that isn't possible, we should simply split, and create communities that share this commonality.
As i see it, even fascists would be able to agree with this, and authoritarians too. If they simply wheren't obsessed with power, and imposing their views on others, we would be able to create both communities of ethnisity, race, class, religion ect.
But its not like the bootlickers would allow for others to do the same thing they want to achive on their terms. They cry about opression, until they are the opressors. Like most authoritarian groups
But such are the dynamics of power within a reality that doesn't hold any rulers above it all

>the most powerfull take power.
Yes, but when we really examine their power, we find that its been built upon greed and expediency rather upon a rock like Jesus said. Their power is impotence and when they ever meet someone with less to lose than them, impotence is all they'll find. Those with the true power have nothing to loose and everything to gain.

marxist anarchism (as in, not the gay capitalist kind) is about getting rid of all unjustified heirarchies. think of a real meritocratic society in which the "bosses" actually got to be the boss purely on their knowledge and skill, rather than by being friends with someone higher up. and by boss, i dont mean they own the place of work, because under anarchism things would be collectively owned. they are workers just like everyone else. this is because ownership leads to exploitation re: marx. it differs from marx in that, rather than going through socialism first, in which the state becomes controlled by the workers and the workers use the state to enforce collective ownership and keeping the bourgeoisie from retaking power, anarchists will attempt to bypass the state entirely, which i think is the right move. the corrupt state cannot ever be taken over by proles. much better to develop systems of distribution of resources organically, from the bottom on up, without empowering the state.

however, its difficult to say how the bourgeoisie would be prevented from retaking power without a state to enforce some kind of laws. also, since power is highly localized, i dont know how people would react to, for example, a white ethnostate with legal race slavery like some of you want. that would be against anarchist principles.

sure, power is a fickle thing.

Power is an illusion. When I slit the throats of your wife and kids in front of you, you will come to know.

if the ability to do so, without me stopping it isn't power then i don't know what is.

Thats the illusion. Even if i win, i still have no power except that which was granted to me by God.

only pragmatic truth matters, call it what you want, illusion or real, you wished for somethign to happen, and it happend. God is as interchangable as the world, or the will of the world. Whatever is allowed to happen, can happen. No need to postulate god if we can't see any miracles that can't happen by themselves.
Power is simply the ability to do what you want to happen, and seeing it manifest into the world. Thats no illusion, what happens happens