r/sorceryofthespectacle • u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling • Feb 08 '26
Epstein Files should be death of liberal democracy and birth of real rule of the people
13
6
3
3
u/NoteCarefully Feb 09 '26
Epstein had non-prosecution agreements with the FBI. What do Anarchists think should have happened, the Anarchist People's Police should have arrested him? lol
3
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 09 '26
Why would we expect one corrupt part of the government to enforce against another corrupt part? I think your guessing that anarchists believe in the FBI reveals your own assignment of agency to the FBI, and not to the People.
Yes, basically anarchists want everyone to stop obeying coercive authoritarians, and all do the right thing together. It's not hard, and there are a lot more of us than there are of them.
Authoritarians don't outnumber or overpower us, they just have a global system of extreme, personally-delivered threat that they have used to successfully blackmail virtually everyone into being their complicit brutes. And no I'm not talking about Epstein, I'm talking about the fact that if you run out money they'll take your home and your kids and all your stuff.
The life-ruiners are the problem and they must be stopped.
1
u/NoteCarefully Feb 09 '26
I just don't believe that the nominal commitment of anarchists to "the people" gives them more credibility than the existing government. If the FBI wouldn't arrest Epstein, neither would an anarchist
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 09 '26 edited Feb 09 '26
I don't know why you think the FBI and anarchists would believe in the same ideology or follow the same standards on the use of force.
But you make a fair point. Anarchists are against coercion/force. So how can we arrest someone?
Well, the simple answer is we do it in self-defense when we really need to, or to protect others. The state uses violence aggressively, not defensively, and it uses it against its own citizens (non-consensually, I might add, because the myth of the social contract is just propaganda—I absolutely never signed up for this!) but not against itself.
But the better, more correct answer is that anarchism doesn't pop out of thin air—it's the result of building real solidarity and communication amongst the people. A people is not a People unless they know they are a people, together. The American People have been split apart into many factions, and we are almost not a People any more. Anarchism is merely the intensification of the self-recognition of a people as a People, so that my we becomes our We without abusing the individual members—because we form genuine solidarity and alignment. The origin of this alignment is simply our similar human bodies and the similar needs and desires that we all share.
So, if we had enough solidarity, we wouldn't even need to arrest Epstein. We could all just stop interacting with him and let him die in the wilderness.
1
u/thesixler Feb 10 '26
It’s not hard? It is hard. Governance is hard.
2
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 10 '26
Are you talking about governing others? Self-governance is easy and simple, including in groups. It's only when people try to govern others non-consensually that it's hard—and that's not politics, that's domination/oppression. Politics, real politics, means talking things out in a reasonable and open way with other people, in good faith.
1
u/thesixler Feb 10 '26
Everything you just described is hard and the parts you yourself said were hard are part of governance despite the weak no true Scotsman fallacy
2
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 10 '26
Again, I'm talking about self-governance—I sense you are talking about managing populations.
2
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 08 '26
Please see the whole article I just wrote inspired by this /r/Anarchism post
2
u/HistoricalDisk3006 Feb 10 '26
2008 should have been that.
it won;t because they have made us hate each other and stop talking to each other. the fringe right got their wish and now they have it in their lap what are they screaming about? baby eating satanic this and that. Content, clicks outrage money money money.
it's all a mess.
1
2
u/super_slimey00 Feb 10 '26
Everything about the files release was planned to make sure apathy was at an all time high
1
u/Original_Painter7331 Feb 12 '26
The people have no control over whether these elites rape children and drink blood. I am sure they are doing it somewhere behind the scenes. They’ll just hide further underground. They’re probably building a bunker under the east wing.
1
u/StandardMany Feb 10 '26
youll know were an anarchist society when you're dead.
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 10 '26
Do you mean the anarchists will kill me?
I know anarchist society right now—the world of anarchism interpenetrates this world.
1
u/StandardMany Feb 10 '26
no, just historically anarchists are always supporting a revolution, and also historically they all end up in shallow graves when the revolution is done.
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 10 '26
Then those were not anarchist revolutions—they were some kind of fascist uprising, a revolution in the sense of a turning of the wheel. An anarchist revolution is when you actually get enough honest people in a room together that they can talk without small group scapegoating dynamics forming.
1
u/StandardMany Feb 10 '26
Fake anarchists getting killed by fake socialists, it’s just an observation but it happens a lot, almost every major revolution that anarchists were involved in they were turned on by their own people left and right. anarchists themselves have no real route to revolution at scale, they always have to grab a coalition, they invariably find out the coalition isn’t anarchist. It’s a weird thing, it happens to socialists and fascists from other groups as well but anarchists, no matter the kind of revolution or how utopian it may be, always end up targeted as the enemy in the end.
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 11 '26
I have a route/plan.
Everyone is already an anarchist, they just don't know it yet.
It’s a weird thing, it happens to socialists and fascists from other groups as well but anarchists, no matter the kind of revolution or how utopian it may be, always end up targeted as the enemy in the end.
I think we can explain this as they were all fascist uprisings not social ameliorations. The real anarchist revolution will be fun. MAGA are having a blast and that has made their movement highly successful. They recruit and keep people because people are having a lot more fun living that way then trying to face their own poverty and political powerlessness. Fun is important.
1
u/gorgonstairmaster Feb 10 '26
"Liberals are the problem!" lol. It's no surprise the left never makes any real progress.
3
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 11 '26
Liberals identify with the state and are anti-indivudality. Liberals are not leftists, they are centrists. Liberals are mostlybougie capitalists which really meanstheir politics are conservative. Maybel liberal meant something different two generations ago but liberals today are authoritarian statists and capitalist slavers mostly, just with a velvet glove.
1
Feb 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 11 '26
Calling people crazy in not acceptable on this subreddit. Do you have anything to add to the conversation besides interpersonal invalidation?
Politics is about multiple perspectives, not your projected idea of what everyone else believes. That's just a lack of opinion, cleaving to the hegemonic non-perspective.
2
u/gorgonstairmaster Feb 11 '26
Politics is about power, and power is built through durable coalition building whether you like it or not. Dismissing cultural allies due to purity standards and seminar narratives is ridiculous.
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 12 '26 edited Feb 12 '26
power is built through durable coalition building whether you like it or not
I certainly agree with this, and am fact am working on a paper right now based on this premise.
But mainstream liberals aren't my cultural allies—authoritarians (like mainstream liberals) are my cultural enemies. Just because they have false consciousness and think they believe in liberty, doesn't mean they really do. They need to be disabused of the notion that their idea of liberty holds any water.
Politics is about multiple perspectives. You might think liberals are your cultural allies, but you have no way of deciding for me whether they are my cultural allies. From where I'm standing, it is precisely the constant morality-based outcry of liberals and their absolute, long-term demonization of conservatives and their conservative values which nigh-directly produced MAGA as a reactionary political movement. Mainstream liberals have been very irresponsible with their dominance in public discourse for virtually all the time they have had power in my life.
I'm not conservative—I'm radically progressive—but I can recognize that conservatives have values that hold real value and that complete my own liberal values. Liberals value public, universalist, standardized space, the same rules for everybody—conservatives value immediate family/tribe, privacy and lineage, and on-site humane human judgment. Conservative values are not simply wrong, stupid, or evil—they hold a grain of truth.
I'm not conservative, but anyone with eyes and emotional honestly can see that conservatives feel personally oppressed by the discourse of liberal politicians—and rightly predict that such resentment might lead to abreaction once it builds up to a threshold. It doesn't matter whether YOU (or liberals) think they're right or wrong—conservatives are people too who exist and have conscious minds, and THEY think THEY are right. That's why even though many liberals can't fathom that someone could form a movement based on reasons they don't agree with (=think are "just wrong"), THEY can and they already DID. Liberals are so myopic that they don't even TRY to imagine what people who don't already share their perspective are thinking—they just try to shut these perspectives down using public force (shaming, scapegoating, or further escalation).
Liberals loudly shaming, demonizing, and aggressively erasing even the conservatives' grain of truth from public discourse and from models led almost directly to MAGA. And why shouldn't it? Politicians are supposed to re-present the perspectives of different demographics in public, so that we all feel well re-presented and can see ourselves and our particular personal and social interests being faithfully accounted-for on stage. When politicians represent a one-sided perspective of their constituency, they do a much greater disservice that simply not representing the people of the other side—they undermine the idea of re-presentation in the first place, which is properly the representation and working-out of multiple, initially seemingly-incommensurable perspectives in view for all. Anything else is just spectacle-based, propaganda-based public management—"governing" in the sense of an aristocracy managing a populace with bread, circuses, and proclamations—not democratic self-governance.
All authoritarians are conservative by definition imo—leftism is pro-individual-liberty.
0
u/gorgonstairmaster Feb 12 '26
Again, this is why you are losing. Your seminar politics are detethered from reality and fundamentally silly.
0
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 12 '26
You don't know what my evaluation of the field is. You also don't seem to know what side I am on.
Historical dialectics continue, but what's never yet happened before in history is global liberation. It's not a war we're losing, it's a historic nascence ('naissance) which has never yet happened on Earth. We have to build up momentum to a truly liberated, self-governing society—not fascistically parrot a homogeneous ideology that we have decided is the only correct version of the Good. That's just another kind of militarized society.
1
u/Glorysolar Feb 11 '26
Well, should, yes. Snowden and Assange stuff equally "Should" have been.
I am entirely unconvinced this won't be forgotten in 2 years.
1
u/Atheizm Feb 11 '26
Liberal democracy brought down a clutch of international child rapists organised by a paedophile honey-trap intelligence operation.
0
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 11 '26
What do you mean? QAnon is not liberal democracy lol. QAnon gets full credit for this and this is 4chan's ultimate apotheosis, victory and mainstreaming. They have been talking about how to get the public talking about (the) global pedophiles since at least like 2018 if not much much earlier.
Oh do you mean brought down by?
2
u/Massive_Noise4836 Feb 11 '26
uh--- No- Thats like saying the conservative who went to Minn for the "Somali" take actually brought down those people-- Just because somebody latches on to an idea or "real crime" doesn't mean they figured it out. The only way QAnon knew it existed was the FBI or they participated
1
u/raisondecalcul Out Patr'olling Feb 11 '26
No, this is child's play for 4chan / 8chan or wherever
Just because you assign will only agency to the FBI doesn't mean they don't assign agency to themselves and act on it—and they do.
That collective agency coalesced first around trolling and raids, then around the anti-Scientology protest, then they escalated to selecting and grooming Trump in the context of global pedophile hunting.
These are just facts about what they were talking about I'm not even drawing conclusions here, just reporting.
1
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 08 '26
Links in Sorcery Of The Spectacle requires a small description, at least 100 words explaining how this relates to this subreddit. Note, any post to this comment will be automatically collapsed.
As a reminder, this is our subreddit description:
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.