What will happen to my pet tortoise in an anarchist society?
By - ItsOnlyJoey
I like turtles
Go for a swim and find a turtle, we're talking about tortoises
>Come, crown my brow with wreaths of myrtle!
>I know the tortoise is a turtle.
>Come, carve my name in stone immortal!
>I know the turtoise is a tortle.
>I know, to my profound despair:
>I bet on one to beat a hare.
>I also know I’m now a pauper
>Because of his tortly, turtly torpor.
– Ogden Nash
All tortoises are turtles, but not all turtles are tortoises.
i bet they like you too :)
Jonathan! Dressed up as a zombie!
He will get as many of the ugly vegetables from the local co-op as he wants.
You will be forced to dye their shell red and yellow comrade /j
the golden anarches
This thread...I’m lovin it
Paint it blue. Aim for the 1%.
I don't know, you're the one that cares of him, so it's up to you.
Good I didn’t know if I would have to give it away or something
Why would the absence of authority and hierarchy mean that you can't take care of a tortoise?
Maybe they boss their tortoise around and steal the tortoise's surplus labor.
If that is true then take the tortoise away
that is the wrong way, we have to teach it so it can liberate itself!
OP literally exploits his teenage mutant ninja tortoise and steals his surplus labour but go off I guess
vegan alert :P
Actually, the tortoise steals others' surplus labour by being given food it didn't work for. That bougie rat!
E: sorry, didn't see how old this post was.
Anarchism is when the state kills your pet turtle, obviously.
Several people expand that to nonhuman animals.
either way, inherently no one is going to *make* you do anything with your turtle in an anarchist society, regardless of their thoughts on you having it
I would definitely try to liberate someone's tortoise if I thought it was unjustly imprisoned
Caring for another person or animal isn't authority.
And, really, I don't know how you could extend it to that. Most animals do not obey commands for the sake of it. They generally need some kind of conditioning at most and, at worst, won't obey at all; their obedience is only temporary. You can't construct something like a state or capitalism around animals.
Pets and food are two very different things.
Tell that to PETA.
PETA is neither vegan nor anarchist, so I'm not sure how they're relevant here.
Are you one of those people who thinks PETA murders pets willy-nilly?
> Most animals do not obey commands for the sake of it. They generally need some kind of conditioning at most and, at worst, won't obey at all; their obedience is only temporary.
It's the same with people tbh
Not really. Humans actively reproduce states and hierarchies, they even get offended when someone suggests something else. Our conditioning goes much deeper.
Yeah, well, I can give commands all I want but most people really don't obey me. ;)
I think this conditioning is more visible in groups rather than individuals. Most people don't really want to be commanded by other individuals (so they don't obey me or you :( ) yet they're insistent that we need elected representatives or (at best) different forms of democratic institutions to give commands and enforce - they usually don't want to be commanded by people unless those people are of certain position as if this position was separate from an individual.
Most people can't even imagine non-totalitarian workplaces :|
Some would :3 ;)
> they even get offended when someone suggests something else
Why do you think that is?
I wish I knew exactly why, it would make talking about anarchism way easier. I think most are just conditioned to believe in authority because that's how the world works right now at home, at school, at work and almost everywhere else. For many lack of authority means chaos and weakness, rampaging murderers, no rights for minorities, blood feuds, war of all against all (fuck Hobbes) We also barely notice existing anarchies which are just as prevalent.
It's hard for me too so I don't blame others for having a hard time with this concept.
No, not at all. Humans will obey other humans, provided that they justify themselves accordingly, and they will do so for the sake of obedience rather than to get some treats or something.
As a poster below says, we actively create and reproduce hierarchies. This can explained, in some part, due to how social groups or systems with similar institutions, norms, or practices can reinforce each other in a number of ways but this further distinguishes us from animals who generally do not possess the same kind of institutional inertia that we are capable of.
Perhaps we should treat humans as humans and animals as animals. Of course, the line breaks down further. We can't treat cows as bats for instance. The point is that we shouldn't treat each other as exactly the same because we aren't but differences do not constitute hierarchy.
I have no idea what this has to do with primitivists. Primitivists are the last people to care about animals considering their preferred way of life demands animal consumption as a part of their greater romanticization of the past.
If anything, it has more to do with vegans or, at least, the lazy sort of vegans who want to tie everything they dislike under the veil of authority. I also don't know what this has to do with material conditions either.
The term "lifestylist" does remind me of Bookchin which is ironic because if anyone was into abstractions it was him.
Primitivists also want to eat berries and shit I think
A lot of tortoises are poached, it's a bit of a problem. Looking after a pet is fine, the question is one of aquisition.
And I think there is a discussion to be had about claiming dominion over animals in an anarchist society.
Obviously giving away pets is not necessary, but new pets (or farmed animals of any sort, I guess) is something we could talk about.
I am strongly for pet ownership, but holy shit, breeding, WOAH. There's a world of problems there. Humanity breeds things that are born dying just because it is amusing.
Yep. So how do we square anarchies with regulating puppy breeders?
One thing that immediately comes into focus is the need for transparency in such systems, for example do we want to check how our bread is made?
My suggestion would be an eternal tour in every working property, but that's just me I suspect.
No I was thinking of something in a similar vain. I think that it should pretty much be an open facility. Come visit the critters! The work should be volunteer! Animal care should be a more open thing. The degree of specialization and closed doors allows so much of the abuse.
Makes sense, I've been saying this about healthcare in general for years- I didn't make the leap!
We need to open up sectors for volunteer work, and redefine on-the-job training (and redefine job titles) so that nurses can become
Are you being serious
Obviously we will let them animal decide if the animal wants to stay it can if not then it can leave
I would also argue you have a right to decide if you want to leave with it and you both can be on the open road together in a form of symbiosis
(Holy shit this is a great cartoon waiting to happen
Have you tried educations your tortoise on anarchist theory? Helping them understand anarchism would allow them to choose what they want to do in an anarchist society, and they might have some worthy contributions of their own! /j
Tortoises are notoriously right wing libertarians so don’t bother. They’re mostly harmless but annoying
That's a terrible generalisation, I've met several tortoise who were ardent Ancoms.
those were turtles
The turtle bias is strong in this sub :o
Actually the only turtles I've met were Maoists.
We will ride the tortoises into battle.
error 403 forbidden
given what you're responding to, i am very curious what image you were trying to share.
In an anarchist society we wouldn't continue ti exploit our non-human comrades, so no.
Edit: lol speciesists keep downvoting this comment, great job
It's just a joke.
Tortoises are too slow for combat anyways. We'll have chariots pulled by rabbits.
Everyone knows tortoises are for carrying the continent of North America. Reject USA and Canada. Embrace Turtle Island. Unless that turtle isn't a tortoise... In which case I imagine they are just pets!
tortoises aren't good for riding into battle, it's just a joke
he will be loved and appreciated
Is your tortoise a capitalist? Cuz that could be problem.
He lets me rub his head no matter how much lettuce I give him so I don’t think so
Good fellow. He can stay.
He shell be free to set up a tortoise commune with his fellow comrades of course!^(/s)
Well, I expect my cats will be the same as always: the kind of lazy moochers that the right fears. I'm sure your tortoise will be fine.
All cats are individualist anarchists in the vein of Stirner.
I will pet him on the forehead & feed him some lettuce
Humans had companion animals long before the state and Capitalism, I don't see why that would change under anarchism. In fact, some of the closest societies to anarchist ideals, egalitarian 'hunter-gatherer' societies often have many 'pets'.
Absolutely nothing. Releasing any house pet, even an "outside cat" in the wild is very dangerous and they would probably die. Some become invasive species though (so then native animals die). Best is to keep your pets, since you're literally the best person to take care of their needs.
I'll add that this also applies to farm animals and cattle, as they were bred for exploitation and cannot survive on their own. Plus, any ruminant is source of tremendous horsepower and digesting ability that can help with reforestation. They can also be used to restore permafrost, for example Sergueï Zimov using various sorts of large winter resistant mammals in his scientific research station/park.
Your turtle will have to fend for himself
I will ask to see him
Prob be elected to the head council on account of being the least likely to perpetuate social hierarchies.
I'd vote for him
If your turtle is sick, you would be able to easily access an animal healthcare center in order to deal with it. If we are talking about an ancom society, and perhaps some other forms of anarchism, this would be free of cost.
I can't think of much else. I do think that an anarchist society would conceptualize the relationships between humans and nonhuman animals differently. I think the concept of "pets" and animal ownership would be faced out and replaced with some sort of "animal companion" concept. Sort of like a more radical version of Aang's animal guide being Appa (from Avatar: The Last Airbender).
The best answer in my opinion.
Just getting rid of all pets like some people are suggesting is not a solution as many types of animals are domesticated to the point where they could not live by themselves anyone.
Instead we should put more focus on our relationship with animals, try to find a way to live together in a way that works for all of us.
You've reminded me of the way my Grandfather spoke of the animals nearby, as his friends. He was on first name basis with both the rabbits and the coyotes. I want a world where everyone can be like that. Yip yip to your world friend, yip yip.
This is the best and most wholesome questionI have ever seen here. OP’s responses are S-Tier
To ensure the survival of our endeavor, we ask that your tortoise serve a brief tenure as a mobile artillery platform for the revolution. Then he can chill and grow moss on his back or whatever tortoises like to do.
You will have to set him free so that he can find his brothers and learn karate in the sewers.
It'll be safe for him to go outside
Realistically. It would stay in your house being happy, maybe having better food and making everyone happy too
It's really up to you. Some people say we shouldn't have pets. Others say that pets are a natural relationship that benefits both parties. So really, of you feel that they're better off with you then it's up to you what to do with them
Nothing at all
What about my birds 🤔 They're already free to fly away, but they never do 🙃
Train them to lead a tortoise rebellion /j
This is the best question asked on this sub in a while, for real.
Anarchist chickens turn into anarchist coyote poop. Some people are ridiculous around here.
Whoa whoa whoa, are you implying that some people around here haven't thought through the implications of their goals?
Next you'll say that pets are better off as slaves!
> Whoa whoa whoa, are you implying that some people around here haven't thought through the implications of their goals?
When someone's version of "anarchism" is basically just "fuck you, dad, you're not the boss of me!" with a few Proudhon quotes slapped on top to make it feel grown-up, I guess my expectations are too high?
25 years ago, they were the people at RATM who thought the machine was their mom.
That doesn't have to be incorrect, it may be the rule in families with conservative parents. When kids get kicked out for being "disobedient" (i.e. queers, non-Christians, even vegans) the mom is not some passive furniture in the discussion.
Yeah, except 25 years ago they didn't exist.
Should we *have* the conversation about animals in an anarchist society?
Are you saying RATM didn't exist 25 years ago? Or are you meaning something else?
I mean, I can share my point of view, if you'd like. It's not a vegan one though.
I choose to believe they mean the people posting all this identity-politics-hiding-under-anarchism stuff didn't exist 25 years ago.
I really hope.
"Identidy politics hiding under Anarchism"?
Yes, like the "I'm only interested in anarchy because I'm currently marginalized but anarchy means I wouldn't be marginalized so that's cool, but I don't know anything about it beyond that it's just convenient for this other thing that I actually *am* interested in" kind.
I fully invite those people. Telling a person who hates oppression they aren't allowed in because they haven't read enough books is silly.
Some of the comments are eggcellent.
he will be rename 'torstoy'
One school of thought, primarily associated with anti-civ and vegan anarchists, called anti-domestication would seek to end the process by which you your tortoise (the ideology that allows us to treat other living (and even non living for some people such as myself) as property or as lesser.) Animal liberation groups often try and achieve this by freeing animals which have been imprisoned or by attempting to stop humans from harming or imprisoning animals.
I don’t think my tortoise really minds being in my house, all he does is sleep under the couch and come outside to munch on some lettuce
What kind of turtle is it?
I think it obvious that one would be skeptical of the imprisoner speaking on behalf of the imprisoned.
I give him time outside every day
Human prisoners are also sometimes let out to "rec yards"
I don’t think human prisoners get free head rubs
My tortoise loves his head rubs
You can consider activities head pats in that scenario where sports crafts and television would be the substitute for pats
At what point does having the authority to force everyone to free their pets itself constitute a hierarchy?
Or the authority to resist hierarchies?
At what point does having the authority to force everyone to give up their land constitute a hierarchy?
do you mean private property?
I'm unsure what you mean by this.
If you don’t know the difference between domesticated species and their wilder cousins, then you shouldn’t be having this argument.
I say this as a vegan, who mostly subscribes to this line of thinking.
Aren't we imprisoning children by that logic?
So children would be free to choose where they live and could be raised by a whole commune, instead of just two people, if they choose? Interesting. Really makes you think about how much your parents make you distrust other people as a child.
I would not put it this way, since I am opposed to this idea of communes, and replacing the nuclear family with the communal family (among other things). But I believe in complete autonomy for children. I believe all distinctions between children and adults, which is used as justification for their subjugation should be dismantled. This would include "child" choosing where and with whom they live (if anywhere or with anyone so including with no one).
> I believe in complete autonomy for children. I believe **all distinctions between children and adults**, which is used as justification for their subjugation **should be dismantled**.
You sound an *awful* lot like a *certain type* of libertarian...
I mean, giving adults authority over children is more often the aiding hand for people who want to sexually violate children. Teaching children that they have rights regardless of what the person who birthed them or takes care of them says and that they don't have to submit to something an adult says just because they're older sounds pretty in line with the anti hierarchy tenant of anarchism to me.
Alice in Monsterland is a text that covers this sort of thinking. Detailing how institutional power leads to children being abused as opposed to individuals "desire".
You might want to pay closer attention to what that specific person is actually saying, at the very least.
What *you* are saying is **not** "[remove] all distinctions between children and adults".
I did read what they said. I guess I just gave more emphasis to their qualifier for which distinctions that want to dismantle. That being those "which [are] used as justification for [children's] subjugation". I just took care to expand on what I believe is meant by that instead of assuming mal intent.
Read their other responses, in which they equate Queer people with paedophilia.
You are being overly generous.
Yes while I am anti-identity I would say i am just as "supportive" of pedophiles as I am other paraphiliacs such as queer people. A good text on this coming from the anarchist milue is Anarchy A journal of desire armed: issue 19 on child sexuality which depves into the topic, its relation to anarchism, places it historically, relates it to pycho analysis, relates it to queer struggle, a d gives examples of it in both personal terms and more systemic ones.
You are fucking scum.
Why is this?
Being queer isn't a paraphilia.
It used to be, as this ajoda issue points out there was a lot of overlap in both communities before queer people were able to assimilate more and not be designated as paraphiliacs.
"It used to" Ok, and?
In practice, this basically means no adults are responsible for where children are or who they are with. I know you can figure out the problems with that.
I guess my phrasing could be changed to just a group of people instead of saying commune. Anyway, thanks for the clarification.
Edit: I read some other replies, oof. The idea of giving children more autonomy is still interesting, though. But only as long as it prevents abuse and not incite it.
Wildlife trade is commodification and pillaging https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/lo4ql8/wildlife_trade_drives_declines_of_over_60_in/
And they use "I'm a breeder" to *launder* the animals.
HE WILL BE LOVED BY ALL
Here’s a picture of him
*N O M*
WE SHALL MAKE HIM/HER KING…..and since your turtle cannot communicate with humans, it will be the perfect leader
He won’t even be awake for most of the time
He only wakes up to go eat
That’s what makes him the perfect king, he will leave all of us alone
Except for when he wakes up, then we all have to feed him
Totally worth it for that cute little critter
Yeah that definitely changes things.
think of the groundhog in spring but, like, as a negotiating position
It will just be a turtle. What kinda question is this?
I'll give him some treats and he can hang out with us
At this point your turtle has most likely learned to rely on you for food and socialization and couldn't have a good life on its own, so it's probably most ethical for you to keep the turtle.
he would be ok i think
He'll get to fight in the pits
you'll have more free time to spend with your little shell buddy, and he'll be able to have all the ugly vegetables he could ever desire!
he will break the chains of your unjust hierarchy and he shall be free
You will be his pet from then on
You’ll get free food for the tortoise
he will be hailed as a god
This is one of the best threads ever. Ima save it and hope that i will never lose it :)
No more tortoise, buddy
You'd be able to keep it.
Gotta be a troll
Definitely, but it's a good one and I'm here for it.
I mean to me it's definitely got to be a Republican asking questions that are just completely irrelevant. I see a lot of posts on here that immediately make me think that
I more get the sense that it's someone well versed in leftist thought, here to point out how ridiculous some of the questions on this sub have gotten, and how totally-off-the-rails anarchist spaces have gotten since all the wokescolds got bored harping at each other for not being "good allies" and decided anarchy was the way to make everyone be like them instead.
And I realize this makes me look like I'm also the OP but I'm not. I'm just in the same place but not as clever about it.
I haven't been on this subreddit for very long but I can definitely see that.
Have you considered being happy?
That’s good to hear
Animals as a possession 🤮
That is true. I don't think that it's necessarily inhumane for humans to take care of animals, as long as they're not being abused.
You could just say "in your care" or "in your responsibility" if that's what you mean, I think it would be more accurate
Animals aren't property, and especially animals that haven't been domesticated and bred to live around humans should be left alone. No aquariums and no "exotic" pets. Domesticated animals are a different question but tortoises aren't domesticated.
Have you considered being normal
Since no property is allowed you’ll have to share the tortoise with everyone whenever they want to have it for a while
Stop trolling m8.
what the fuck is going on in here on this day
This is a lovely question. I want to meet your pet tortoise.
You mean OUR tortoise?
Just here to say that my friend kept their tortoise in a tiny tank and never played with them. I think this tortoise would rebel against the owner-pet hierarchy.