I still need to provide binaries for Windows, so build and compile for multiple operating systems.

I love Linux. Deploying software to customer sites was historically challenging on Linux due to system dependencies. Containers alleviate most of those problems.

As a wage laborer, I trade time for a fixed amount of money to be deposited to my bank account.

As an employer, I agree to pay employees a wage based on some existing contract.

As a wage laborer, I can work harder to sell more product making more profits for the company.

As an employer, a productive wage laborer increases my profits since ((gross profit) - (fixed labor cost)) = (net profit).

The kicker is the productive wage laborer could keep the net profits, or split them with other workers, if not for the employer. The employer has trapped land, capital (building, tools, ect) and a favorable agreement with labor in the form of wages to fix costs. The employer then lives off the work of others.

Employers are parasites. The struggle between wage laborers and employers is a class struggle. Class solidarity is an acknowledgement of the parasitic relationship. Class solidarity, friend!

My guess from the question an expectation of some formal group. Such groups exist. Better yet is prefiguration.

Build community in your neighborhood by getting to know your neighbors and contributing your skills to meet common goals. People, being social animals, work together to meet their needs. That is resistance.

Look out for your neighborhoods safety. Some ideas for doing that include: securing a water source, learning to raise food, learning basic repair of equipment, working on cardio, learning grappling/striking or joining a gun club. Be a neighbor with skills.

Lastly, never trust an organization with a heirarchy of leaders. Said leaders will eventually need to lynched. Joining the Marxist-Leninist book club is about as productive as Bible study.

I’m reminded of The Preacher and the Slave by Joe Hill. The pie in the sky is a lie. Everyone needs to eat. Religion does not feed people.

I see feminism as a component of minimizing heirarchy and moving toward anarchy.

Instead of the liberal conception of rights, I would use equality of individual liberty and social solidarity regardless of gender or sex. Definitionally, I claim gender as performative and sex as related to procreative genitals. Maybe it’s all just worbs, that is, political words without meaning.

Those in favor of heirarchy use “equality of outcome” as a bludgeon. Humans do not need “equality of outcome”. We need autonomy to make choices about our lives. We need societies that take care of each other. Heirarchies such as patriarchy prevent making choices and taking care of each other.

As a bonus rant, the rube statement, “What is a woman?”, can be answered with, “Who is pink for?”. The provocateur wants to conflate gender and sex, but is too embarassed to come out and discuss genitals. A logical follow-up for the embarassed trap-setter could be, “Which genitals taste the best?”. The point being don’t entertain traps with anything but hostility.

I know posting is masturbatory, since I often fail to read replies. I’m sure your reply will be great and I will probably fail to read it. I’m still working on social solidarity.

A fair point.

Anarchism is the ideology. Anarchy is the implentation. Anarchism can cause less confusion in people conditioned to think anarchy is a society without law or order.

Good catch.

The justice system is working as intended. Working people are disenfranchised. The powerless create myths when the system can’t be criticized. We are all dumb, but power belongs to the owning class.

The dichotomy of anarchy and voting is confusing. Anarchy in context probably means lawlessness. Defining anarchy as lawlessness ignores anarchy as a political philosophy.

Roads, schools, hospitals and fire departments do not require bosses. Anarchy keeps infrastructure without bosses.

Voting puts bosses in place to make decisions. Anarchy prefers consensus building between effected parties.

People deserve to make more decisions in how their lives are run. A lack of respect for laws passed by our bosses is fitting.

Voting for bosses that make laws to chain people who can run their own school or hospital is unnecesary. Vote because it is the extent of power afforded to us now. Concurrently build better systems and power structures like anarchy.

The ideas that domination is the goal are correct. The domination goes beyond social issues. Owing someone rent puts them in a position to dominate me. Saying the rent is the people’s rent doesn’t rationalize the domination.