He is such a disciplined campaigner.

Along with an extremely strong platform, he is possibly the best ive seen at being relentless about staying on message.

Fuck the democrats for hanging him out to dry, they should be running Mamdani’s in every state.

Then I guess it bears repeating that marxism is also concerned with those outcomes.

I’m taller than you. I leave some important stuff up on a high shelf. You have to ask me for the stuff

This is definitely not the type of hierarchy anarchism or marxism seek to dismantle. Natural formations of ‘power’ that come from biological differences arent the ones we’re concerned with, but the larger structures built around them are. If you’re taller than me and can reach things I cant, we can structure our organization so that either I can reach it wothout you (stairs) or so that I dont need whatever those things are (a job that doesnt require those things). What anarchism definitely isnt going to do is either make me taller or you shorter.

And oh yes gerontocracy absolutely can and does assert itself without a state

Same deal. Being older and less able is a natural ‘hierarchy’, but what concerns us isnt the handicaps that naturally arise but the structures we build around them. If we distribute food and resources according to ability but make no consideration for less-abled people, thats the problem we are solving for, not the eradication of handicaps entirely.

Maybe you know this and it’ll sound like I’m being patronizing, but ultimately both anarchism and marxism seek to arrive at the same place of ‘to each according to need, from each according to ability’, and that will require structures that replace the things states do with more involved community organizations.

I guess I would disagree with Marx on this then, as I think even the mere differences between individuals can lead to power hierarchies if left socially unchecked

I think we’d need specific examples to come to an agreement, but frankly I can’t think of a relationship like this that isn’t voluntary. Maybe you mean something like patriarchal family relationships - but those types of structures can’t really enforce themselves without class and state. Someone cant force their spouse to stay in their relationship if neither one can withhold the means of reproduction from the other

enact cooperative legislation through upward synthesis rather than downward prescription

This is what I mean: this is still a hierarchy, it’s simply a consensual one. When one self-governed group then comes together with another to agree on collective organizing, that becomes a kind of hierarchy. Consent can be withdrawn at any time - and that’s what makes it a more ethical structure than liberal democracy

I think this is a bit of a misconception.

Marx would agree that state and class are not the only forms power and hierarchy take, but his stance is that unjustifiable hierarchy needs the state to enforce itself.

Marx conceptualized the ‘stateless, classless’ society in much the same way anarchists do, but the traditions largely imagine the path to it very differently. Ultimately anarchists still see utility in civic structures and participation, which are still expressions of 'power 'and ‘hierarchy’, but are organized around “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs” just as Marx imagined.

Listening to her interview on NPR was kind of wild

She had nothing but praise for Trump and defended the decision to bomb the boats in the Caribbean. Then she made a bunch of proclamations about accepting US intervention for enforcing regime change, and then advocated for doing the same in Cuba and Nicaragua

Once Maduro goes and we liberate our country, the Cuban regime will follow, the Nicaraguan regime will follow.

And for the first time in history, for the first time in history, we will have the Americas free of communism and narco dictatorships

Ive heard a few people ask if she’s a CIA asset, amd while I don’t think it’s appropriate to speculate, I can see why the question is asked. The American State Department has been trying to install western-backed regimes in central and south America since the cold war.

Part of the reason we even have narco states in the south is because of the decades long proxy battle happening there.

The Nobel prize has a weird amount of legitimacy for how often it backs western regime change

People can have room for more than one opinion at the same time

Apparently not.

“Why are people eager to litigate this incident?”

nobody stans […] abusers

Yes, that’s the motivation i’m pointing to.

Oh, so a different thing from someone qualified coming in and trying to help Hasan understand

How are you coming to the conclusion that they are “someone qualified”? Maybe there’s more to that interaction that you clipped out of the video - i have no idea

Noam Chomsky

Interesting you list Chomsky as an example because he’s made exactly the same arguments about the Ukraine war as Piker was in that video.

I strongly dislike the reaction slop. This stuff is that, sure

If this were true then you wouldn’t be spending so much emotional energy weighing in on it.

I would actually really like for someone from Hasan’s followers to try to explain why this post is not factually solid

To what end? Honestly - setting aside the forensic analysis you’ve compiled for a second - what’s the point of spending so much time on litigating the details of this interaction?

Anyone who watches this person regularly aren’t going to judge his character on the one clip - that’s probably why you feel so frustrated by their ambivalence. Let alone the spurious conclusions you’re so eager to draw from it.

No, i’m looking for literally anyone you think is a good representation of your geopolitical perspective that might better inform what you consider “someone who knows what they’re talking about”.

You’ve only shared content of piker responding to twitch chat, which is certainly evocative but not helpful in supporting your claim that ‘he doesn’t know what he’s talking about’. I could certainly share an example of his geopolitical stance that I think is well-supported, but I’m really just trying to gain a better understanding of your worldview beyond the reaction slop you keep pointing to.

Which claim? That his dog wears a shock collar? That he used it during a stream? Or that (granting the two previous claims) this stands as evidence that he abuses his dog?

I’m far more interested in why some people are so eager to litigate a political commentator’s relationship with his dog when the bulk of his commentary is pointed at western-backed genocidal apartheid states.

I haven’t spent a single comment debunking anything in this story.

Yes i’ve seen you post this a couple times. I’m still looking for an example of who you think ‘knows what they’re talking about’

So far it just seems like its anyone who shares your perspective, including any old twitch chatter or outspoken genocidal zionist, but you’re being a little cagey. Is it willymac? Is that your go-to foreign policy expert? I just want to make sure we’re on the same page.

incredibly hostile to anyone who does know what they’re talking about who disagrees with him

Hmmm, now who would that be

It also doesn’t make the conclusion of abuse any less spurious.

Yes, your well-documented interest in dogs, and not your woefully underrepresented distaste for a specific type of leftist commentary that piker happens to advocate for.

I dont think anyone invested in this actually cares about the specifics of training collars, they’re just excited to have a reason to be angry with this person.

I don’t care

Yes i think that’s pretty emblematic of the situation

You’re parasocially obsessing over a political streamer who has primarily been covering the Palestinian genocide, alongside streamers who have primarily defended it while mercilessly attacking streamers and artists speaking against Israel. Either you don’t know you’re stepping into two years worth of streamer drama slop, or you’re opportunistically jumping on because of your own distaste for his politics.

Either way, the situation you’ve dedicated the last three days to on this account is certainly not worth yours or anyone else’s time unless you happen to be personally invested in the relative influence of this specific political commentator.

No, I mean the guy in this video.