Anarchist Andy
LightNews LightNews
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Anarchist Andy
@anarchistandy.bsky.social
130 followers 240 following 150 posts
Love for humans, not institutions
Posts Replies Media Videos
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Seeing rainbow crosswalks makes me feel so nostalgic, like it’s a relic from a time when everyone used to be woke. Posted a racist comment somewhere? You’re canceled immediately, your workplace gets contacted and you’re fired the next day. Different times for sure.
August 4, 2025 at 11:14 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
"Hey bro just twist this pipe for a few minutes, we're shooting some propaganda video"
April 24, 2025 at 6:43 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Seeing Bradley Martyn host Andrew Tate is not surprising: Gym bro culture is all about creating the perfect body, my body is superior to others, I deserve to be high up in the hierarchy. The gym bro to alt-right pipeline is very real. And I’m a (leftist) gym bro myself, seen it a lot.
March 13, 2025 at 8:15 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Very relevant words, written in 1933.
A few profit – and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can't end it by disarmament conferences. You can't eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can't wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war. The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the nations manhood can be conscripted. One month before the Government can conscript the young men of the nation – it must conscript capital and industry and labor. Let the officers and the directors and the high-powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators, be conscripted – to get $30 a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get. Let the workers in these plants get the same wages – all the workers, all presidents, all executives, all directors, all managers, all bankers – yes, and all generals and all admirals and all officers and all politicians and all government office holders – everyone in the nation be restricted to a total monthly income not to exceed that paid to the soldier in the trenches! Let all these kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors pay half of their monthly $30 wage to their families and pay war risk insurance and buy Liberty Bonds. Why shouldn't they? They aren't running any risk of being killed or of having their bodies mangled or their minds shattered. They aren't sleeping in muddy trenches. They aren't hungry. The soldiers are! Give capital and industry and labor thirty days to think it over and you will find, by that time, there will be no war. That will smash the war racket – that and nothing else.
February 23, 2025 at 7:04 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
They will be put to work as free slave labor, which was the plan all along.
February 4, 2025 at 4:03 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
They will be using them as free labor, which was the plan all along
February 4, 2025 at 3:59 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
We need more John Brown energy in 2025 🙏
January 30, 2025 at 4:27 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Sam Altman when he asks his AI how to improve the world and it says it’s by getting rid of people like him.
Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI
December 26, 2024 at 6:19 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
I’m reading this book right now and I can’t recommend it enough. While communist revolutions eventually devolved into totalitarian dictatorships, revealing the communist State to be an even more corrupt and oppressive system than the capitalism they vowed to replace, Spanish Anarchists 1/
Cover of The Anarchist Collectives by Sam Dalgoff
December 25, 2024 at 9:38 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Another great quote showing the difference between Marxist and anarchist ideology. Marxism values loyalty to “the party” over anything, which Spanish anarchists found genuinely horrifying. For anarchists, human liberation comes first.
Accordingly, the “Solidarios” resembled a community rather than a cdhventional political organization. To fully understand the close personal relationships within this typical grupo de afinidad, we must try to compare it with the type of organization favored by the Socialists and Communists. A Marxian party consisted of a hierarchical cadre—a bureaucracy composed of paid officials—forming a distinct, clearly defined chain of command. The Communists, and to a lesser extent the Socialists, demanded obedience ffom those below. Authority was vested in a supreme executive body which made all decisions of policy and administration in the interims between party congresses. The party’s complex cadre was fleshed out by a well-disciplined membership, each individual marching in step with the others in accordance with the decisions of the party congresses and leading committees. The preferred type of relationship within this political army verged on the impersonal. Although it would have been impossible for individuals in any group exposed to some degree of persecution not to feel a kinship for each other, Marxists tended to stress the value of morally and emotionally neutral ties within their organizations. Today’s comrade might well be tomorrow’s political foe or factional opponent. “Scientific socialism” demanded a certain detachment toward people and ideas, a severe rationalism that could prevail over passions, impulses, and personal intimacy. One owed one’s primary loyalties to the party, that is to say, to its apparatus, not to those who shared one’s struggles, risks, and responsibilities. The Anarchists were genuinely horrified by this arrangement. They regarded it as passionless, soulless, even morally indecent. The revolution for them was, above all, a great moral transformation which was expected to liberate individuals, to restore their freedom and spontaneity of development. Individuals had to be remade, not merely as producers of goods but as new totalities, free to take full command of their destiny and daily life. Any lesser goal was not worth fighting for. Accordingly, the Anarchists regarded the Marxist party as another statist form, a hierarchy that, if it succeeded in “seizing power,” would preserve the power of one human being over another, the authority of the leader over the led. The Marxist party, in their eyes, was a mirror image of the very society it professed to oppose, an invasion of the camp of the revolution by bourgeois values, methods, and structures. The Marxists argued that their organizational forms gave them greater efficiency and effectiveness, a claim the Anarchists emphatically denied. To the contrary, they insisted that the most efficient and effective organization was ultimately based on voluntarism, not on coercion or formal obedience. A movement that sought to promote a liberatory revolution had to develop liberatory and revolutionary forms. This meant, as we already have noted, that it had to mirror the free society it was trying to achieve, not the repressive one it was trying to overthrow. If a movement sought to achieve a world united by solidarity and mutual aid, it had to be guided by these precepts; if it sought a decentralized, stateless, nonauthoritarian society, it had to be structured in accordance with these goals. With voluntaristic aims in mind, the Anarchists tried to build an organic movement in which individuals were drawn to each other by a sense of “affinity,” by like interests and proclivities, not held together by bureaucratic tendons and ideological abstractions. And just as individual revolutionaries were drawn together into groups freely, by “affinity,” so too the individual groups federated by voluntary agreement, never impairing the exercise of initiative and independence of will. It will be recalled that the Anarchists continually stressed the importance of education and the need to live by Anarchist precepts—the need, indeed, to create a countersociety that could provide the space for people to begin to remake themselves. Accordingly, they placed a great deal of emphasis on leisure and moral excellence. The Socialists were despised because their demands focused primarily on wage increases and material improvements. Far more important, in the Anarchists eyes, was the need to shorten working hours so that, as Anselmo Lorenzo argued, people “would have the liberty in which to think, to study ... to satisfy their moral instincts.” This type of language—words like “liberty” and “moral instincts”—was alien to the Socialist and Communist parties. In Saragossa, the Anarchists developed a proletarian following that was unique in the history of revolutionary movements. These Aragonese workers began to emphasize moral, political, humanistic struggles over economic ones. As E.H. Carr has observed, their strikes “were characterized by their scorn for economic demands and the toughness of their revolutionary solidarity: strikes for comrades in prison were more popular than strikes for better conditions.
December 24, 2024 at 8:14 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Important account showing the difference between libertarian socialism (anarchism) and authoritarian communism in Spain leading up to the Spanish revolution. While anarchists were building a worker-controlled libertarian society communists were preoccupied installing a military dictatorship.
This difference is vividly conveyed by Avelino Gonzalez Mellada, who compares Anarchist-controlled La Felguera with Marxist-controlled Sama. Both towns, he observes, were of equal size and were separated from each other only by the Nalon river. They were linked to each other by two bridges. The October Insurrection, triumphed immediately in the metallurgical and in the mining town.... Sama was organized along military lines. Dictatorship of the proletariat, red army, Central Committee, discipline, authority.... La Felguera opted for comunismo libertario: the people in arms, liberty to come and go, respect for the technicians of the Duro-Felguera metallurgical plant, public deliberations of all issues, abolition of money, the rational distribution of food and clothing. Enthusiasm and gaiety in La Felguera; the sullenness of the barracks in Sama. The bridges [of Sama] were held by a corp of guards complete with officers and all. No one could enter or leave Sama without a safe-conduct pass, or walk through the streets without passwords. All of this was ridiculously useless, because the government troops were far away and the Sama bourgeoisie was disarmed and neutralized.... The workers of Sama who did not adhere to the Marxist religion preferred to go to La Felguera, where at least they could breathe. Side by side there were two concepts of socialism: the authoritarian and the libertarian; on each bank of the Nalon, two populations of brothers began a new life; with a dictatorship in Sam a; with liberty in La Felgeura.... In contrast to the severely delimited Marxist committee in Sama, La Felguera workers met in popular assembly, where they socialized the industrial city’s economy. The population was divided into wards, each of which elected delegates to supply and distribution committees. The committees determined the consumption needs of the wards, managed transport facilities, and assumed responsibility for the medical and sanitary needs of the city. The La Felguera commune, so rarely mentioned in most accounts of the Spanish labor movement, proved to be so successful, indeed so admirable, that surrounding communities invited the La Felguera Anarchists to advise them on reorganizing their own social order. Rarely were comparable institutions created by the Socialists and, where they did emerge, it was on the insistence of the rank-and-file workers. At Mieres, by contrast, the Communists established a crassly authoritarian comite de guerra, which even preempted the rights of the town’s revolutionary committee. So preoccupied were the Socialists and Communists with asserting their sectarian control over Asturian towns that Marxist militias which should have been fighting in desperately beleaguered Oviedo were kept at home for strictly political purposes.
December 24, 2024 at 8:00 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
December 20, 2024 at 4:03 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
The online image of a leftist is this loud pink-haired feminist always starting arguments about ‘woke’ stuff. In real life they’re the sweetest, most thoughtful people I know. Most are actually surprisingly shy and quiet.
Leftists will post “we’re doomed because the rest of y’all don’t organize” meanwhile the organizing in question is a queer marxist book club that meets every other week and half the members eventually get kicked out for either “speaking over” someone or being another members’ ex
December 19, 2024 at 12:03 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
December 10, 2024 at 4:01 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Quote by Thomas Sankara
November 29, 2024 at 5:37 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Many European settlers, after living among indigenous Americans for a while, never wanted to return.
From ‘A people’s history of the United States’
November 27, 2024 at 4:14 PM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
People really are making accounts to tell everyone how much they hate it here. It’s like going to a restaurant you hate and then shouting at everyone you don’t like their food. You could have just stayed home, buddy.
BlueCry - A safe space for pussies
November 24, 2024 at 9:36 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
November 24, 2024 at 4:27 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Are you even a real anarchist if you’re not sitting around a campfire like this discussing the next revolution?
Cowboys sitting around a campfire
November 23, 2024 at 3:47 AM
anarchistandy.bsky.social
Inca’s were pretty fucking weird
(From The Dawn of Everything, David Graeber and David Wengrow)
Being a god, the Sapa Inca never really died. The bodies of former kings were preserved, wrapped and mummified, much like the pharaohs of ancient Egypt; like the pharaohs, too, they held court from beyond the grave, receiving regular offerings of food and clothing from their former rural estates — though unlike the mummifieol Coaches of Egyptian pharaohs, which at least remained confined to their tombs, their Peruvian equivalents were wheeled out to attend public events and sponsored festivals. (One reason why each new ruler was obliged to expand the empire was precisely this: they only inherited the old ruler's army. His court, lands and retainers remained in the dead Inca's hands.)
November 21, 2024 at 1:59 AM