The analogy to a messy room fails. I recommend you read this (and the rest of the archive, it’s great stuff):

https://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001.html

Of note is “The Earth is not a closed system”

Realizing that the root cause is just because you want it to be true is fine, commendable even. Just don’t try to justify it post hoc with sciency-sounding arguments.

I disagree with everything you’ve said, but upvoted because you answered the question.

You appear to be using the term “capitalism” in a confusing way. From etymonline:

The meaning “political/economic system which encourages capitalists” is recorded from 1872 and originally was used disparagingly by socialists.

Words can change meaning and all that, but when people complain about capitalism, they don’t mean what you’re talking about. You seem to mean something like “well-regulated free market”, and other people mean “broken, exploitative system that worships greed”

Genuine question, what happens in an anarchist utopia when your neighbors decide that they like your land? If you fight back en masse, doesn’t that involve creating a military with a hierarchy that’s ripe for seizing power? How can you maintain the social organization for building fighter jets or aircraft carriers or spycraft without those being taken over and used against the people? If you just don’t, what happens when your neighbors are a global superpower that has all that?

It seems even more impractical and idealistic than Communism, which at least has an answer to that.

There’s no assumption. They literally listed two purity tests that they themselves use, directly after saying that they never see anyone use purity tests

I quoted an entire sentence exactly. They didn’t say “I like pancakes”, they said “You can’t compromise with waffle-eaters”

You cannot compromise with a bigot

To reiterate the comment you’re responding to, you’re reducing a complex world to a binary choice. Everyone that has ever existed is bigoted to some degree, therefore no compromise is possible ever?

Yeah, the comment above is kind of a hilarious example of cognitive dissonance. “I’ve never seen purity tests, other than these tests for ensuring purity”. Blanket statements like that are rarely used in good faith.

Why is AGP transphobic? Seems like at best it’s still unsettled science. From the link:

The concept that androphilia in trans women is related to homosexuality in cisgender men has been tested by MRI studies. Cantor interprets these studies as supporting Blanchard’s transsexualism typology.

There’s a loud minority of anti-AI people. Most people don’t reflexively hate it, though.

Good point. Neither prong of the dichotomy bothers me because I think AI is neat and copyright laws are dumb and so reject it entirely. It does create an uncomfortable tension if you dislike AI and like copyright though.

100%, I’m hoping that AI will result in capitalism eating itself up entirely

AI art isn’t theft, so the rest of your question falls apart.

In regards to sharing art, it’s trying to fight technological progress and it’s bound to lose. Copyright is dead and that’s a good thing. We shouldn’t simp for legal systems pushed by and that benefit large corporations over creators.