you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 8 hours ago* (4 children)

I mean this is sort of backdooring itself into the trove of arguments and theory around why a communist revolution has to be an international liberation movement, and why you need a revolutionary vanguard cause you can't hope to achieve communism while capitalist imperialism is still around.

Which is precisely why the question of socialism/communism or Anarchism and how to achieve it goes beyond just seizing control of the state or reorganizing production and the relationship with the state within national borders. It's also became heavily about surviving and overcoming an international system of capitalist power that has both the material incentive and institutional capacity to prevent those alternatives from succeeding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    Except even the world revolution can't solve the issue of degradation into a plain-old authoritarianism. Speaking in analogies, both communism and anarchism, as geopolitical regimes, create a power vacuum. A sterile room, ridden of all the bacteria, but neither of them has an answer on how to keep the room sterile after without having to overthrow yet another government.

    [...] It's also became heavily about surviving and overcoming an international system of capitalist power [...]

    As i said in my initial comment, both ideologies can work on smaller (than a geopolitical one) scales. Anarchism is already basically intrinsic to any friend/family group in some capacity. Help efforts, no matter whether they were started by ideological anarchists, exist, and nobody bats an eye about that. That's just not what i'm discussing here. I'm discussing the realism of a communist and/or anarchist state.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

    "anarchist state" is a self contradiction

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 child)

    Depends on the definition given. I'm not devolving into arguing about linguistics. If you didn't understand what i was trying to say, then feel free to ask and I'll clarify. If you did understand and are just being pedantic, while switching the topic of conversation, then it's just rude.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago

    Most anarchist movements agree on the statelessness of anarchist society. If you're discussing "anarchist state", you might have to lower your expectations of people taking you seriously. If you have not expressed your argument clearly enough, I look forward to clarification and correction of your precious comment.

  • source
  • parent