Hey no need to downvote, just trying to have a conversation, not a fight.

I’m telling you they don’t have the same stances: one is leftist, the other is far-right. One is anti-fascist, the other is willing to partner with neo-fascists so long as it benefits their self-interest (case in point, Jan 6 insurrection).

Anarchists, like communists, want society to evolve beyond statism because they both see the state as fatally flawed at best and an oppressor at worst. An anarchist is someone who doesn’t need a cop to make them do the right thing. It’s not so much that anarchism is for deregulation and weak government as it for a society where all power is with all the people. In practice, instead of relying hierarchies, such as government as we know it, anarchists use politics like consensus decision-making to form community agreements. Anarchism, in this way, is a development of direct democracy.

Perhaps your judgment against anarchism has to do with encounters with anarcho-egoism and anarcho-capitalism? These two ideologies are incompatible with classical anarchism, which is based on mutual aid. Or maybe you’ve encountered anarcho-primitivism, which I’d agree is perhaps as conservative as it gets lol.

In the interest of vulnerability, I mostly align with anarcho-syndicalism or anarcho-socialism with some hints of post-anarchism to form my theory and practice for how to develop a mutual society that doesn’t require the state.

Have a nice day!

Anarchists are not libertarians, at least not insofar as Americans understand libertarianism. The so-called Libertarian US party is right-libertarian. Anarchists are left-libertarian. Little-L libertarianism in this case refers to the opposite of authoritarianism.

But not all punks are anarchists anyway.

Neoliberalism however is an economic policy based on the renewal of classical liberalism and free market capitalism. It is a conservative ideology, shared by many Republicans and Democrats alike. Republicanism is based on classical liberalism.

Bespoke: You’ll become more Druid when you’re older.

This is how I understand what you’re saying: Over here we have the “musicians,” a title reserved for only those who play an instrument. On the other hand we have the “producers,” who make music on a computer, without an “instrument.”

But I say both make human music. And a computer can be an instrument. Drawing notes in MIDI is not much different than composing in Musescore. The producer is not unlike the classical composer, and I say both are musicians. And in a discussion on AI music vs. human music, why should we make a false dichotomy within human music anyway? “All models are wrong, but some are useful,” said George E. P. Box, statistician.

I think people have taken you as arguing in bad faith. I, and I assume many others, would agree with you that Suno AI is bad. I think AI is ethically uncouth. But your original comment seems to be making a false equivalency between AI music and sampling. I think I understand what you mean better, but I still disagree with your premise and think it’s a weak argument for fighting AI.

Dude, you’re the one drawing the lines at who gets to call themselves a musician and who is just a “different kind” of artist. As an “akshul” musician, by your definition, I think you’re mistaken and parroting some reactionary takes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKMDP-vDsTU

Boomer take. I’m a musician of two decades, got my degree in music. Sampling is as much an art and practice as playing a “traditional” instrument—I do both.

Are there lazy samplists? Sure, just as there are lazy guitarists. But watch this and tell me this isn’t musicianship. https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=sKMDP-vDsTU