Don't you know that any potential leader is probably just a grifter? If you want to build an effective leftist movement, you have to have no leaders whatsoever. Directionless resentment is surely the only way forward.

  • chapoid [none/use name]
    2·
    4 years ago

    Delegates from soviet councils had wide executive powers to obtain goods, services, and general labor. They weren’t just messengers.

    "In a system with temporary and instantly revocable delegates, workers decide on what their agenda is and what their needs are. They also mandate a temporary delegate to divulge and pursue them. The temporary delegates are elected among the workers themselves, can be instantly revoked if they betray their mandate, and are supposed to change frequently. The delegates act as messengers, carrying and interchanging the intention of the groups of workers."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_council

    hierarchies are needed. You can’t have people choosing a different person they want to try to engineer a bridge every other day, that is anarchy.

    holy fuck what a shit take. Hierarchy is not specialization. The engineers do not have rule over the steelworkers who weld the bridge. Anarchy is not doing whatever you want jesus fucking christ.

    • OhWell [he/him]
      1·
      4 years ago

      We don't even have a working class movement in the US but you're going to compare it to Soviet councils? LOL.

      Movements do need hierarchy and leaders and the left has none of that in the US. Compare it to the far right. They have a central figure they rally around (Trump), who do we have? No one. Maybe it was Sanders, but the left is so divided and infights over the most stupid petty bullshit, that he wasn't good enough before dropping out and shilling for Biden.

      And Occupy was a shitshow and I would know cause I was involved and following it from day 1. Occupy was proof that the bourgeoise are not intimidated or threatened by peaceful protests. It led to nothing and went out with a whimper.

      • chapoid [none/use name]
        1·
        4 years ago

        Movements do need hierarchy and leaders and the left has none of that in the US

        Because they're all dead or in jail you fucking genius

      • chapoid [none/use name]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Occupy was proof that the bourgeoise are not intimidated or threatened by peaceful protests. It led to nothing and went out with a whimper.

        Riiiiight, which is why they had a massive police presence from day one, were under constant harassment by cops, and went out with a violent raid nationally coordinated by the FBI. Fuck off.

        https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

    • anthropicprincipal [any]
      1·
      4 years ago

      That is why I said soviet. We are talking about two different things.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_(council)

      Engineers do have rule over who can work on a bridge. Name a bridge that was built without a foreman. I never said anarchy was doing whatever you want. Direct democracy can't apply everywhere and at all times. There have to be leaders.

      • Nagarjuna [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Name a bridge that was built without a foreman

        Most foremen are in a temporary position that's assigned by the union. Even under capitalism foreman is a temporary position of power with a very specific purview.

      • chapoid [none/use name]
        3·
        4 years ago

        I'm sorry you didnt say anarchy is doing whatever you want, you said anarchy is picking a new person to try to build a bridge every other day. Wow the anarchy understander has arrived my apologies.