I posted that one comment from another thread on lemmygrad on the reddit thread, an analysis of why China is socialist. I'll put it in the comments.
I posted that one comment from another thread on lemmygrad on the reddit thread, an analysis of why China is socialist. I'll put it in the comments.
The way I interpret it (without much thought to be fair, I've got more important things to spend my time on than reddit anarkiddies), is that the long process of the state withering away proposed by Marx means a whole lot of time spent on the transitional yet still in part "stated classed moneyed" society. This is unacceptable to an anarchist, who just wants us to press the end-game communism button and be done with it.
Of course they haven't developed their analytical skills whatsoever, so they can't see that both situations have a classless moneyless society being built out of a moneyed hierarchical society, where only one actually has a path to success. The other has a path to, well, I'm not even sure where anarchism leads.
IE, "if you want to build a castle out of legos, you have to skip the building part. Just go straight to the castle (instructions unclear)"
The trot version of this: "your castle is doomed to fail unless europe builds one first."
"Buh b but all the redfash authoritankietarian states have been around for decades and haven't withered away yet. That means they were never meant to wither away and that the marxists just want to be the new ruling class!"
-- an anarchist, probably