this post was submitted on 28 May 2026

146 points (99.3% liked)

Memes of Production

1,718 readers

2,695 active

259 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 9 months ago

moderators

Deceptichum@quokk.au

CobraCommander@quokk.au

manufacturing distraction (quokk.au)

submitted 4 months ago by Deceptichum@quokk.au [M] to c/mop@quokk.au

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

manufacturing distraction

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@anarchist.nexus 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (24 children)

vanguarding is required until we are all reenabled

I mean I'm autistic and I don't need nor want a vanguard. Hierarchical power structures like vanguards are especially dangerous for people like me, because they provide a positive feedback mechanism for people already at the top of the power dynamic. And it kinda doesn't sit right to me that my existence as an autistic person, my disability, is why we "need" a vanguard party. Maybe I'm missing something?

parent

hideshow 24 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 2 points 4 months ago* (23 children)

Disabilities≢disorders.
Explain to me how can I empower people with paraplegia, comatose, dys/agraphia, dys/apraxia, amputation, aphasia, dysarthria, agnosia, etc..

parent

hideshow 23 child comments

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@anarchist.nexus 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (22 children)

Disabilities≢disorders.

Autism is absolutely a disability by any reasonable definition of disability. (ASAN is autistic self-advocacy, i.e. these are autistic people speaking about our lived experience.)

Explain to me how can I empower people with paraplegia, comatose, dys/agraphia, dys/apraxia, amputation, aphasia, dysarthria, agnosia, etc.

We would have to ask them (or for the comatose person, whomever is responsible for their medical decisions) for what they need to be included in the community, and then act on it. In general, we can apply the same anarchist principles of freedom, horizontalness, non-domination, continuous consent, dignity, and inclusivity to our projects.

Like I'm not saying to never look out for anyone ever. Of course, we sometimes do need to stand up for people to defend them when they're down. I'm pushing back against vanguardism, the Leninist institutionalization of professional "revolution" that never seems to morph into communism as promised.

parent

hideshow 22 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 0 points 4 months ago* (21 children)

whomever is responsible for their medical decisions

that is a vanguard.

horizontalness, non-domination, continuous consent

Vanguardism.

Leninist institutionalization of professional “revolution” that never seems to morph into communism as promised

Nurses and doctors are institutionalized professionals vanguarding people to morph into better healthier versions of what you couldn't do alone.

If you have someone you can rely on, better yet, someone you use as support, you have a vanguard. Realizing how vanguarding is how we grow as mammals, is realizing some institutions are more corrupt than other hierarchical mammals.

I try to lean in empowerment and enabling you to do what you wish.
Not strip you off your desires, needs, and wishes.

parent

hideshow 21 child comments

[–] audrbox@beehaw.org 4 points 4 months ago (12 children)

The problem with vanguardism isn't that there are people who protect/stand up for others, it's that it inevitably institutionalizes those people into positions of power over those others. Nurses, caregivers, etc. aren't "supposed" to have power over their patients, but they very often do. Humans are already good at protecting and supporting each other--no need to risk creating a power differential by forming a designated vanguard to rigidify it.

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (11 children)

it inevitably institutionalizes those people into positions of power over those others.

Yep, are still trying find a solution for this quandary

Nurses, caregivers, etc. aren’t “supposed” to have power over their patients, but they very often do.

Welcome to the mammalia Class. As a minor, did you consent to your caregivers’ care methods? Were you allowed to adult? Get educated?

no need to risk creating a power differential by forming a designated vanguard to rigidify it.

I just see it as Mammals protecting the next generation to make better outcomes. But there has to be a point when we relent that power to the generation we raised, so they are empowered to the same to their children. When that is, neuroscience says 25-29 for female brain, 30-35 males.

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] audrbox@beehaw.org 2 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Yep, are still trying find a solution for this quandary

Ok but at that point, why still use "vanguard"? I'd understand wanting to reclaim it to mean something other than its historical meaning. But as it stands, when most people hear "vanguard", they understand it to mean Lenin/Stalin. And I think anyone building a revolution based on a "vanguard" broadly speaking would need to be super fucking careful to not fall into that trap themselves.

Welcome to the mammalia Class. As a minor, did you consent to your caregivers’ care methods? Were you allowed to adult? Get educated?

This is why child liberation theory is a thing. You're right that we give parents power over their children, and an anarchist analysis would say that's a bad thing.

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

an anarchist analysis would say that’s a bad thing.
child liberation theory is a thing

I need you to reflect, how, why, and when. MLs, esp. guardians know when those liberations can be applied. For when, why, and∗ how you exercise those liberations is how those children will praxis and react in the future. Until children can just be born with all the knowledge and practice to be independent, Vanguarding them is in our selection as a species.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] audrbox@beehaw.org 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

For when, why, ani how you exercise those liberations is how those children will praxis and react in the future.

I don't know what this means. Someone not knowing how to liberate themselves and learning it from someone who does is not a state of them being under the power of the teacher. Teaching does not inherently entail restriction in autonomy and is only an assertion of power to the extent that we allow it to be.

Also, children's liberation is absolutely a thing and you can/should read about it.

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

Educating the next generation on how they too have to liberate their own children is crucial vanguardism. This includes teaching children how to dearrest, defend, liberate, organizeds, intersect, aid, etc.. MLs are highly aware when, if ever, they’ll be able to do so for their comrades, and future comrades.

The theory of conceptualizing consequences and reflecting is a cognitive skill not many realize. Being ablemto formulate actions and review results is what allows us to progress.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] audrbox@beehaw.org 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

None of this relates to my point though. Everything you mention here is possible (and as an anarchist, necessary) to carry out while treating the children as equals and not infringing on their autonomy.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago*

Children are equals when they can treat each other autonomous. This requires empathy, and mutual intersecting practice. Getting there is why as a species we vanguard.

parent

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

neuroscience says 25-29 for female brain, 30-35 males.

Science, even neuroscience, never says anything, it suggests things based on evidence but saying implies something is proven. However, that isn't the point or within the ability of science.

Welcome to the mammalia Class. As a minor, did you consent to your caregivers’ care methods? Were you allowed to adult? Get educated?

Right which is exactly why things like Youth Liberation are so important. There needs to be more freedom and rights for those (fairly or unfairly) labelled youth. They need to have more autonomy over their bodies and other rights in the world.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

Right which is exactly why things like Youth Liberation are so important. There needs to be more freedom and rights for those (fairly or unfairly) labelled youth. They need to have more autonomy over their bodies and other rights in the world.

🤝 glad we agree that children need to be empowered gradually until they are able to defend and free themselves off arrests. You also teach’em wilderness thriving training too, right?

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

glad we agree that children need to be empowered gradually until they are able to defend and free themselves off arrests

We're not sure that's what we said or agreed exactly.

You also teach’em wilderness thriving training too, right?

No, we have no ability to do that.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

we have no ability to do that.

🫂. I know at the least mines will know how to fish, lay traps, hunt, and gather.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago

We're vegan, so it's unlikely we would teach others to fish or hunt. But gathering we could do.

The problem isn't we don't know how, the problem is we do not have long with the young people, we are trying to teach them emotions, consent, and how to fight back against oppression etc.

parent

[–] Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

I feel like there's a disagreement on the definition of vanguardism. I didn't know it exactly, so i looked it up on Wikipedia and AnarWiki, and i get from those that a key element of the "strict" (leninist) definition is that it applies to a whole society rather than individual cases, and that it requires a minority of educated people to guide a mass of uneducated people, implying that the uneducated masses can take no part in it.

What you describe as one on one relations would seem to fall more under general "solidarity" than vanguardism to my eyes.

Also, vanguardism is by this definition not horizontal, neither consensual.

Feel free to correct my uneducated ass, but with the knowledge i have, it seems that you are using a much wider definition of vanguardism than the original one.

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

requires a minority of educated people to guide a mass of uneducated people, implying that the uneducated masses can take no part in it.

What∗ are minors?

vanguardism is by this definition not horizontal, neither consensual.

How do you intersect the unable to empower themselves? Like minors?

wider definition of vanguardism than the original one.

I am taking indeed a holistic approach to our species vanguarding the next generation of us.
Do you think there are more older educated people than the non-educated?

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

Oh, my bad if it felt like the case, but i'm not saying vanguardism is not a good/necessary strategy.

I'm saying that it cannot be horizontal/consensual, but maybe things have to be not horizontal/consensual, i'm not sure about that.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

Just like we allow adolescents responsibilities and self-development, we strive to horizontalize and consentual relieve off duties. Like advocacy if you want, but it fits squarely in Vanguardism.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 1 point 4 months ago

Well, that may be what vanguardism strives for or aims at, but not what it is neither how it works. Like socialism isnt communism but may be one way towards it.

parent

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 4 months ago* (2 children)

How do you intersect the unable to empower themselves? Like minors?

They are partially only unable because others treat them so. We have interacted with many many young people and we find them very capable when given the chance to be so.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] alapakala@quokk.au 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

we find them very capable when given the chance to be so.

We do too, when we have seen they are responsible and accountable for their actions. There are still many people who never grow the necessary means to independize themselves, including the disabled. Vanguarding until they can do so is ML in a nutshell

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 4 months ago

We're anarchists, so how we treat youth is as equals for the most part. Unless they are doing something that would cause serious harm to themselves or others and then we would intervene.

We're not really MLs, but that's interesting to know.

parent