Скачать или смотреть BLVCKHELICOPTERS | What Kind of Anarchist Are You

From the upcoming Dispatches From North America EP
Official site: https://blvckhelicopters.com
Find Me: https://linktr.ee/blvckhelicopters

Anarchism begins and ends with its definition.
No rulers.
Total autonomy over oneself.

That definition is enough.

Anything that requires obedience contradicts it.
Anything that centralizes authority contradicts it.
Anything that asks for freedom later contradicts it now.

Anarchism is not a tradition to inherit.
Not a movement to defend.
Not an identity to preserve.

It is a living philosophy.
And when it is treated as doctrine instead of definition,
it becomes hollow,
and it collapses under its own contradictions.

Early anarchists were not wrong in intent.
They were early.

They underestimated how power behaves once it is seized.
They trusted that shared enemies meant shared goals.
They believed authority could be temporary.

It never was.

Alliances with communists and other statists were framed as necessities.
They ended the same way every time.

Betrayal was not an accident.
It was the predictable outcome.

Any system built on hierarchy and enforcement
is hostile to autonomy by design,
no matter the rhetoric,
no matter the slogans.

Repeating those compromises does not honor history.
It repeats its failures.

Rights are meaningless without the ability to choose.
To refuse.
To exit.
To take responsibility for consequences.

A right that requires permission is not a right.
It is a condition.

Autonomy does not promise comfort.
It does not promise safety.
It does not promise equality.

It promises agency.

Any framework that values outcomes over choice
undermines freedom itself.

Government calls itself protection.
In practice, it is substitution.

It replaces personal responsibility
with centralized control.
It replaces accountability
with compliance.

Authority does not remove risk.
It relocates decisions away from individuals.

Many people do not seek rulers because they love power.
They seek relief.

Relief from choosing.
Relief from self-defense.
Relief from responsibility.

That trade erodes agency
and creates dependence
on systems that cannot exist without domination.

Technology is not the enemy.

It is terrain.

Tools can expand autonomy
or they can be used to dominate.

Refusing to engage does not prevent abuse.
It guarantees control remains institutional.

The question is not whether technology exists.
The question is who controls it,
and toward what ends.

Autonomy requires engagement.
Not withdrawal.

This position does not require purity.
It does not require unity.
It does not require faith in human goodness.

It assumes humans are flawed
and designs accordingly.

Autonomy cannot be delegated.
It cannot be outsourced.
It cannot be enforced for someone else.

It must be exercised.
Directly.
Individually.
Continuously.

There is only one measure.

Whether individuals retain real control over their lives.

The ability to choose.
To refuse.
To defend themselves.
To live with the consequences of those choices.

That is freedom.

Any system that diminishes this capacity
is incompatible with anarchism,
no matter how it justifies itself.