StrayCatFrump

A liberal who waves a red flag and pretends they aren't liberal. Often they call everyone else (including us) liberal. 😂 😉

Thusly, any violent revolution stands a STRONG chance of being shunned by those who do not want a government with sanctioned violence.

I disagree with this part. Violent revolution—violent opposition to our oppression—is absolutely necessary. However, turning it on ourselves—that is, in any direction other than that which opposes authority—is a recipe for disaster as you say.

It's not violence itself that is the problem. There are literally always forms of violence sanctioned by every single political philosophy (including absolute pacifism/non-violence, which sanctions violence performed by the state even if its subscribers often don't realize this). The question is how and when that violence is performed and by whom, and the anarchist/non-authoritarian answer is that it must only be in the struggle for liberation, not the fight to gain and maintain power over others.

You're really bad at logic. "You can be violent without a government" does not imply you can necessarily protect private property without a government. Because being violent isn't enough to protect private property. Only certain forms of violence are (forms which you haven't done anything to show can be performed without a government).

As already pointed out, it absolutely will stop you. Also, try doing any of those things on land claimed by private entities such as capitalists, and watch how quickly the state's goons arrest and/or shoot you.

It's only "expected" to perform other services because its violence prevents us from doing those things apart from it.

Not all forms of violence are useful for protecting private property.

You refuse to do the labor needed for their hoarding. You should really learn about models of ownership-by-use. People just aren't capable of protecting/maintaining/using that much personally.

That last line in the video. That's exactly what happens when they finally realize you caught them in the racist/revisionist shit. They go on the attack with something absolutely inane.

It is extremely relevant, because the pollution and waste don't come from nowhere; they come from capitalism and its profit motive. Yes, the oppressed (that's the whole working class, not just people who are typically categorized as "poor") must act in order to gain the autonomy and power to be able to shape our environment. The onus is 100% on us. Simply "expecting" the oppressive institutions of nation-state governments to suddenly stop being beholden to the capitalists they were designed to protect and serve is not going to do it. Of course it isn't "fair" for the onus to be on the oppressed and not the oppressors, but it's how power fucking works.

I guess that could be aimed at what the post is criticizing, sure. I'd call it a stretch to say "We need to 'eat the rich' " is doing such blaming. Maybe I misread the "still" in your original comment, though.

It's good to document the resulting problems, but the analysis of the root cause is absolute shit and is clearly done by liberals (confirmed by them interviewing AOC and uncritically broadcasting what she says without calling her on her own support of colonialism, genocide, and capitalist exploitation). They blame this on a "lack of rules." Bullshit. If there were no rules (laws), the local population would simply kick the rich people out and expropriate their shit. I think you'll find there are plenty of rules and plenty of enforcement. The problem is just that all of that law and order is directed squarely against the working class and indigenous populations.

"More rules" isn't a recipe for fixing anything. People rising up is. Fortunately there was a little anarchist graffiti on that school's wall. So these liberal journalists are not the only people advocating for solutions.

Unwrap every item you buy at the store that's wrapped in plastic and leave the wrappers on the counter. Hopefully others will catch on and follow your lead.