I think the misunderstanding comes from what the word means. Some people use it to designate the rule of someone else, as in the examples you mentioned. I personally advocate for autonomy (decentralized power) which also fits under that umbrella.

So yes, context matters. But consent matters even more so. I never consented to live under the rule of the French Empire and every day of my life i suffer due to that. The same is true with many people. In the name of what would you refuse us the right to build our own autonomous commune as is illegal by French law?

[+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] southerntofu@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Reasoning with those in power does not work: those from the ZAD who tried to negotiate with the State ended up betraying/destroying the ZAD (it's now all legalized and mostly populated by hipsters and bourgeois). Going all guerilla warfare on your government is a valid strategy, but arguably modern empires have become too resilient for that to work. Mounting a legal political party for your cause seems useless: even a formally-elected government like in Catalonia will get repressed by the State for trying to separate.

Yeah there's a lot we can do and i guess both of us are involved in various projects AFK, but still when you boil it down to personal/communal consent, Nation States are always the enemy of the people.