“Well ACKSHUALLY the party that literally passed these key pieces of progressive legislation deserve 0% of the credit! In fact liberals are worse than the conservatives, who we will never even bother to criticize! The libs are our true enemy!”

The one example you found came over a decade ago from a retriever mix in a household where a different unspecified dog later attacked another child. So on one side you have a single tenuous example from over ten years ago in a huge red flag environment, and on the other you have multiple pit bull fatalities this month.

lol, lmao even

Edit: it’s also worth noting that your cited example involved an infant child, who are the most vulnerable humans by far and could be at threat by basically any living entity. Whereas every pit bull example I listed above, again just from this month, involved fully grown adults.

It literally doesn’t, please cite a single golden retriever kills baby article

The top level comment made a claim that Gen X is de facto the best. I just pointed out an observable fact that suggests otherwise. And then apparently my comment that Gen X is perhaps not actually better than every other generation then triggered you so hard that you had to comment calling it “bitching and whining because everything isn’t about [my unknown generation]”. Lol.

You mean the statistically most pro-Trump generation, more so than even boomers?

Lol the original point in the top level comment, which I was agreeing with, was that this idealized version of anarchism requires everyone to be on the same page, and then you go off on a weird tangent about how true believers don’t want money to be happy? That just proves the original point. Maybe you and your friends don’t care about money, but the vast majority of the world does, and that’s not changing anytime soon. Which explains exactly why anarchism is not a viable government form in the modern world - most people don’t share your ethics, which are required for that government form to function.

Spanish anarchists lost the war because they were disorganized and vulnerable to external pressure (competing political parties like the Communists at the time) which was half my original point.

Zapatistas exist in the single poorest state in Mexico, which is not exactly a ringing endorsement of the “ideal government form” as many here apparently believe.

Regardless of semantics, it would “work” if it’s what 100% of the population supported and worked towards. Obviously that’s not the case in reality, but the same applies to anarchism. Anarchism (edit: and fascism, just to be clear) are uniquely vulnerable to bad actors when the reality sets in that not everyone is going to be well intentioned.

Also from a geo-political perspective, anarchism would be exceptionally easy for neighbors with bad intentions (think Russia) to take advantage of.

Every time I see someone advocating for anarchy on Lemmy (which is a lot), it comes down to “well if everyone works together in harmony and also there are no neighboring states with imperialist intentions, then everything will be great!”. If everyone was perfectly altruistic then literally any government form would work - capitalism, communism, even fascism.