Would be better to plan this a little farther out but I am already on a permanent boycott so I support this obviously.

So you want him to become more tolerant, is that your goal?

I don’t think it’s always necessary or even helpful to sever relationships solely because someone has toxic political beliefs.

I would think more in terms of what problems do you see with this relationship and what actions, if any could potentially solve these problems? What are you trying to achieve by ending this relationship?

This is literally the core idea of the green new deal which is somehow now a conservative boogie man.

I would bet only ‘globally’ before betting on ‘only the Americas’

What do you mean by this? Why would the US be more likely to be hegemonic over the entire world than just the Americas? Their heavy-handed political interventions in Latin America are well-known.

Russia has no hope of anything at this point except vassalage to the PRC. China is exactly what I’m worried about, though.

Just because everyone overestimated Putin’s military at the beginning of the war doesn’t mean they’re not a serious power. While they may not be quite on the level of the US or the CPC, they’re still the 5th largest in the world and I think despite the war casualties, their military production and organization are stronger than they were before. Their abilities in information warfare and nuclear arsenal also made them punch above their weight. I think they will remain a global power barring some kind of major political or economic collapse, and in a post US world might be more likely to come into conflict with the CPC.

Maybe not globally but in the Americas maybe yes?

Of course, global geopolitics means there won’t be a total power vacuum. China & Russia waiting in the wings to tip things in their favor. Maybe Europe and India too if they can get their act together.

It holds slightly more ground but it’s still hateful propaganda.

The existence of conscientious objectors alone renders its logic invalid. And there are many other issues as well.

Court packing was never a viable suggestion.

I’m guessing they’re just not aware of construction impacts on trees. It’s not something most people think about.

No, it’s real. For some Nazis the Jews are the ultimate enemy and they have cynically attempted to graft themselves to the Palestinian liberation movement as a recruitment tool. They obviously don’t give a shit about Palestinians but if they can weaponize Israeli war crimes to foster anti-semitism they can recruit more people into their movement.

It’s similar to how some far-right extremists participated in the George Floyd protests—both because they’re anti-cop and they wanted to start a race war.

Yeah I immediately realized after posting this that I had even seen this video before. But it was lost deep in the memory banks.

I had no idea doge was connected to HSR though. How do Nazis always end up ruining wholesome internet art?

Wait doge came from Homestar? How did I not know this?

So you were a right-wing accelerationist anarchist all along?! I knew it!

In all seriousness I am still a little unclear on what exactly a mutualist is.

You could also describe it as monarchist I suppose, though as I mentioned that doesn’t quite fit the more racialized elements of the film. But fascism is a much more popular ideology today, and as you mention the overlap between the two is substantial.

I am talking about the original. I haven’t seen the remake.

Goose-stepping is not only associated with the Nazis and fascism is a broader movement beyond just them—it’s also highly associated with the USSR, which would have been a recent memory for writers of the time. But I’m talking about the deeper ideas of the film, not just the imagery. The idea of rule by birthright, that there is a class of people meant to sit at the top of society, and that allowing subjugated people to run rampant will cause ruin are all ideas strongly connected to fascism. The hyenas are also coded as “ghetto” or low class with their accents. You could also use a different word if you prefer, since many of these themes predate fascism, but it’s an idea that most people here understand.

I don’t personally think the writers were intentionally aiming to support fascism but rather that they unintentionally included fascist themes and ideas from other similar stories in our society. Many of these ideas have deep roots that tie back to authoritarian elements of society under feudalism or church authority, and they can be found in many of the fairy tales and other stories Disney drew inspiration from.

I’m not sure I agree but this is a well-argued and reasonable position.

I am not saying we should vilify people for being imperfect but I do think it’s important to recognize and speak about the harms that they did. Too often we slip into white-washing our history which can be very dangerous. I know you aren’t doing that but I see it so commonly that it has trained me to push back when I see anything even a little similar.

Yeah that’s all fair, although I will note that Aristotle was not writing in English, so the implication that this is the same word seems a little questionable.

Sometimes I wish that there was a different and better word to describe the movement, but that’s the one early theorists chose. I think their ideas remain foundational to the movement, and the linguistic connection remains important. Feminism sometimes suffers from a similar if less severe version of this issue.

There is libertarian socialism which is not exactly the same but could be used instead. But it’s a mouthful and those words have their own baggage, some of which has already come up in this thread.

Ultimately, the point of words is to communicate clearly and be understood by as many people as possible. There might be other solutions or ways to communicate but with all this in mind I still feel the best solution is asking people to use the word only for the movement and not these other ideas. But I’m happy to hear if anyone has an alternative.

I think the implication was that without the top predators controlling the hyena population, the ecosystem was out of balance. This is sort of a real ecological phenomenon called meso-predator release, and explains why predation on some herbivores actually declined when wolves were brought back to the western US, though it does not necessarily cause all the plants to die as depicted in the film—the harms are more complicated and nuanced.

However, I do want to say that the implications of this movie that the relationships between species are comparable to those between people is very incorrect and harmful. In fact if you ever rewatch this movie as an adult, some of the embedded ideology is very disturbing. Some authors have argued that the movie implicitly supports fascism, which I am forced to agree with.

Doing this minimizes the violence and oppression that “moderates” in the US government have caused. If and when we defeat the rise of fascism I don’t want people to think that everything is fine when we go back to “normal”. The US government was a problem long before Trump came on the scene, even if he is making things worse.

I knew what you meant but as an anarchist I have to object because you are contributing to this widespread misunderstanding of our movement and what we’re actually advocating for. The Trump administration is a perfect example of the abuses that the state empowers, so I think it’s a crucial time for people to learn about alternatives. This is difficult if people think anarchist just means some violent anti-government mass-shooter type. It is a specific, historical political tradition with lots of deep, insightful thinkers and practical solutions to a wide variety of today’s problems.