Most of you know I grew up in the borough of the Bronx in New York City. What you may not know is that there are wealthy parts of the Bronx. Some sections of the Bronx are historic, and the architecture—particularly on homes—is from the 1700s and 1800s. That, however is not where I grew up. I didn’t live in the worst part of the Bronx, but it was only a small step up. Many people who grow up in more ghetto neighborhoods often turn their surroundings into an important part of who they are. It becomes a part of their personality. When I left the Bronx, more than a few of the people I grew up with viewed my leaving as me abandoning them or thinking I was better than them. With the exception of a select few, no one wished me well or even said goodbye. I wanted out of that hellhole. I desired a change. I’ve never regretted the decision to leave.
It used to be nice having a political identity that lead itself to being an identity. "Oh, rights are important and i want more liberty"
You and Paul Gottfried basically summed up the whole of our position on your most recent interview with him. The regime fucking blows and we need an authoritarian rightwing to beat it.
Until someone willing to cross the rubicon comes around, we don't really have much to discuss. We all know that every issue is kayfabe, every policy is about power, all the arguments dont matter. They are in power and we hate it. There's plenty to learn, it's fun and exciting to get new perspectives, but we can't really build an identity around what we aren't.
I do think that once our side has something to rally around, a positive vision and an identity to offer people that it will catch like wildfire.
Strong opinions, loosely held. Have strong, deep convictions but do not close your eyes and bury your head to information that might open your eyes to things in contrast to your current position just because you’ve built an identity around it. That helps no one, least of all oneself
Apr 24, 2023·edited Apr 24, 2023Liked by Peter R. Quiñones
I may be wrong, but I honestly believe there are thresholds to pass through. Some of the ideologies we hold for a time are necessary, and crucially so, to get us to the next place in our politically based directives. I think it would be harder for a Trump voter to get to a place of localism, communitarianism without giving up faith in the possibility of a federal or other overarching savior stepping in and maintaining the status quo for us. A certain part of the anarchy philosophy that is helpful, anarchy, autonomy, agorism, etc is the acceptance of self reliance. I think there's a major step to consider, "I would be willing to do it all on my own if I must, and I realize that anyone attempting to save the whole world does not share my regional values and isn't worth relying on." That isn't necessarily the final step. I don't have to act alone. It's folly to presume I'll be left alone just because I'm caring for myself. Furthermore, it's better if we work together, those who share values in our value-based communities. But we apparently, obviously, need to be bigger than The Branch Davidians and smaller than the USA or even a whole state (a lot smaller, maybe) to build these value based communities.
One of the things I heard another commentator say was how much he loved changing his mind and how liberating it was. It's so true. If a person has never changed their mind or even just fine-tuned their thinking, then they are in a trap and there is no growth happening.
It used to be nice having a political identity that lead itself to being an identity. "Oh, rights are important and i want more liberty"
You and Paul Gottfried basically summed up the whole of our position on your most recent interview with him. The regime fucking blows and we need an authoritarian rightwing to beat it.
Until someone willing to cross the rubicon comes around, we don't really have much to discuss. We all know that every issue is kayfabe, every policy is about power, all the arguments dont matter. They are in power and we hate it. There's plenty to learn, it's fun and exciting to get new perspectives, but we can't really build an identity around what we aren't.
I do think that once our side has something to rally around, a positive vision and an identity to offer people that it will catch like wildfire.
Strong opinions, loosely held. Have strong, deep convictions but do not close your eyes and bury your head to information that might open your eyes to things in contrast to your current position just because you’ve built an identity around it. That helps no one, least of all oneself
I may be wrong, but I honestly believe there are thresholds to pass through. Some of the ideologies we hold for a time are necessary, and crucially so, to get us to the next place in our politically based directives. I think it would be harder for a Trump voter to get to a place of localism, communitarianism without giving up faith in the possibility of a federal or other overarching savior stepping in and maintaining the status quo for us. A certain part of the anarchy philosophy that is helpful, anarchy, autonomy, agorism, etc is the acceptance of self reliance. I think there's a major step to consider, "I would be willing to do it all on my own if I must, and I realize that anyone attempting to save the whole world does not share my regional values and isn't worth relying on." That isn't necessarily the final step. I don't have to act alone. It's folly to presume I'll be left alone just because I'm caring for myself. Furthermore, it's better if we work together, those who share values in our value-based communities. But we apparently, obviously, need to be bigger than The Branch Davidians and smaller than the USA or even a whole state (a lot smaller, maybe) to build these value based communities.
One of the things I heard another commentator say was how much he loved changing his mind and how liberating it was. It's so true. If a person has never changed their mind or even just fine-tuned their thinking, then they are in a trap and there is no growth happening.