we don’t have to be ruled by one global super power, you can have different centers of power but they’re all playing the same game. there is one world system of the dominant mode of production

well you can ofc, but then you’re just under a new distributional regime. part of the game is that you get to keep what they left to you prior, but it’s not as if you could get paid, not pay your taxes, and walk out without them caring

ah ok cool gotcha. sure, you’re granted the permission to use the money at your discretion, and at that point sure it’s fine to call it “your money”. but the point is that not much hinges on that -

you’re not giving the state “your money” when they take taxes. they, alongside the rest of the distributional apparatuses, are the ones granting you money. it happens to be “yours” is the short-term possessive sense in between institutions, but that’s basically normatively irrelevant

in short, you actually *can’t* choose to give your money to whomever if the government takes* it. and there’s no philosophical recourse to object to them taking* it in principle

boooo hisss snarls prances around u yearningly

that’s the part where i think geuss isn’t incredulous or skeptical enough about identity, and where i feel more affinity with stirner. i probably should have just led with stirner, but that’s kind of a whole thing and also fairly cringe on its face.

i won’t make the strong claim that no labels ever can be useful, but what i do claim is that they are dangerous

okay sorry i realize i kinda jumped in the deep end. that post is drawing together like 4 disparate things that are not making the same argument. the upshot of the post (besides just to meme) is that one shouldn’t feel any particular affinity towards “their” money (and shouldn’t

be bothered by the fact itself that the state is taking “their” money). each of the elements arrive at that conclusion in its own way. the graeber section is just about the historical story about money’s adoption and spread.

the real central thing there is bruenig’s article in the alt text. it’s an argument against “my money” style arguments and a way of reframing the discussion of taxes

yes!!

if dog over ip wasn’t nerfed by adhd she’d be foucault/butler’s strongest soldier

yea identity stuff is tricky bc it’s mostly just boring, and usually the more enlightening approach is to give an account of the roles it serves in folk’s lives and why they don’t need it. stirner is still goat (blumenfeld’s ‘all things are nothing to me’ is good companion too :>)

prolly ain’t worth reading tbh, more of a personal historical artifact than anything else

goeo when are you writing a genealogy of chemistry terms and their philosophical significance

stemlords in my replies smh, you should know better

might be a solution but it isn’t an answer :)

(also, it may not be a solution at all. i could simply say “that’s the wrong question, but i don’t have a right one for you”)

questions better left dissolved

i agree that they’re tepid and mundane conclusions, but the way people think about their identities are not tepid!

tbh i don’t have a great brief-article length piece that summarizes my views on the topic. tl;dr i don’t think the common notion of identity is defensible, there is no authentic self to unearth, and i have no interest in constructing one myself. the subject that is me is constituted by the

identities i do have, and it’s not as simple as naively “opting out”. resist as far as contextually practicable against something entirely contrary to my interests

oh yes i was actually just about to mention that i think this whole genre on anarchist library stuff is like extremely terribly written and fails to articulate anything convincing, and yet i think it meditates on a significant topic

idk how to describe it but in some contexts political philosophy that’s shitty poetry leaps over itself into accidentally becoming profound for me

i think it might be the kernel of utopianism i find compelling, and it falls into the same vices and virtues there as well. but yeah in terms of quality, this is literally just a few paragraphs of inside references to books the person has read lol

nuh uh i’m gonna go advise some of the worlds largest healthcare organizations instead ^_^

at one point refusal felt possible but no longer

and in case i didn’t cite geuss enough dreary.dev/pdfs/geuss/d...

it’s the in-between bit im annoyed by

ideally destruction

somehow i saw your pfp and thought it was david omfg

unfortunately yes

if you know a workaround lmk

me on not enough hours of sleep 🫠

minimum viable willow

ohhh i see gotcha

(sorry yea im pretty heavy in meme-mode) but you *do* have control? that’s interesting, how!

sounds like puppy needs to stage a revolutionary war :3c i’m glad i live in a country that values 🇺🇸FREEDOM🦅 and has a perfect track record on disenfranchisement

also erm,, taps the sign

well i would hope not! who’s a good puppy? :3

i need a name for to refer to you as a dog can get start working on a fursona

yes we love u bug

well there’s a few different ways to approach this but essentially authenticity is a technology of identity creation, usually predicated upon some notion of a ‘true self’, which i think is incredibly naive, conceited, lazy, flimsy, both historically and philosophically

recs include freud, nietzsche, adorno’s ’jargon of authenticity’ (for the specific existentialism takedown)

that ‘carefree wandering’ youtube guy has some more accessible vids on a different angle, while talking about profilicity thing, which is like fine enough too ig but kinda its own meaning

it’s been a while but iirc his stuff seemed almost in the vein of durkheim