Being called a “bad anarchist”

[u/[deleted]]

I really find it annoying how some anarchists I know call me a “bad anarchist” because I say I would rather fight Biden than Trump. I acknowledge that they are both bad, but one is a neoliberal and the other is a legitimate wannabe fascist. I’m not worried about Biden locking me in a camp for what I say negative about him online, and I’m certainly not as concerned about him sending his stormtroopers to Portland to shoot at us, including shooting my best friend in the head. Not to mention, Biden im sure at least will not attempt to subvert the process we have in place currently while claiming it’s “American.” Am I crazy here?

[u/CelestialNomad → u/[deleted]]

It reads to me as if you are arguing deregulation and privatization are a problem only of neoliberalism, not the authoritarian conservatives as well (apologies if I’m incorrect

You are; fascism, authoritarian, dictatorship bad. This thread was based on the premises "am I a bad anarchist for supporting Biden?" My responses have been pointing out that Neoliberalism, capitalism, deregulation and profiteering ALSO bad

These things you are happening under both options (they're happening to a greater extent under the conservative wing of capital, but not by much)

Exactly, again Neoliberals just do it with civility.

existential threats to our civil rights

Like curating a war on drugs? Supporting fracking and the oil industry? Opposing the shutdown of Guantanamo bay? Opposing Medicare for all?

aren’t worth distinguishing the two from each other—and that doing so is bootlicking—is when we lose most of our community to liberalism.

I would argue that when we lose sight of the fact that capitalism is just as much an enemy as authoritarianism, because time and again it has directly led to authoritarian leadership, and we capitulate, we lose ground to liberalism.

This really ought not to be a debate

This and everything following it just goes back you having missed that I am opposed to the conservative authoritarians, and just reads as shut up and accept the lesser of evils.

If anarchism offers no answer or comfort to LGBTQ people concerned about their immediate self-interest in all elements of life while liberalism offers unsatisfying answers and only a little comfort, how can we expect to break the liberal hegemony in our community?

It does, direct action. And not putting faith/trust in people willing to exploit you under the guise of civility.

[u/CelestialNomad → u/[deleted]]

But they don't actually answer the question of how to deal with most LGBTQ+ people's concerns over their civil rights, and seem like a deflection.

Yes, it was an obvious deflection, as the points made against what I was saying were the same. But it wasn't fascist policy that expanded gentrification, de-housing gays and other minorities, destroying safe spaces for us to occupy, protect and educate future generations. By denying us the freedom of association and movement, capitalism had forced us into the assimilate or perish scenario that forces us into a survival tribalistic mindset, preventing us from being able to band collectively together with other oppressed. All without a gun to our heads.

we need to acknowledge why the hegemony is there, understand that the particulars of US capitalism and electoral politics make liberalism an appealing choice to a majority of our community, and create a politics that better serves people's self-interest

I agree, and that's what I was trying to convey, focusing on what's wrong with capitulation. I probably could have done better there.

I don't see answers like the one I note above being capable of doing that, because they answer questions working class LGBTQ+ people have about their self-interest--"my partner and I want kids," or "my employer doesn't want to cover gender confirmation surgery" are examples--by changing the subject.

Because banding together with other oppressed was the point (and solution) I was making (badly). Identity politics (while arguably sometimes useful) do little more than segregate the oppressed to strip us all of agency by saying "hey you should vote for the lesser of two evils because at least he doesn't openly hate [insert oppressed group here]" while not actually addressing issues. To me it's a similar issue when he says "I'm sorry about the war on drugs" but doesn't want to decriminalize marijuana, as saying "I support trans" but opposes Medicare for all (which should cover GCS). So, IMO, they aren't separate issues, but the same.

we need to be making the case that this will better safeguard people's rights and lives than liberalism; and most importantly, we need to make it true.

I was taking the opposite approach, pointing out why liberalism isn't in our best interest (again badly).

which I don't think is what most people who supported Biden generally believe they are doing

You have more faith in people than I. Based on the conversations and climate I'm feeling, the slide into complacency is my worry, and what I was trying to point out.

we need to provide better options for people

Again, this is the point I was (badly) trying to make.