Permanently Deleted

  • SankaraIsMyDaddy [they/them]
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 years ago

    large-scale

    Are you really surprised that anarchist communities tend to be smaller in scale? My understanding of anarchist values would lead me to assume a smaller scale, less centralized existence. I think many anarchists would consider these positives.

      • SankaraIsMyDaddy [they/them]
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        if communism was as successful as capitalism I’d have hoped to have seen communist projects on a scale to collectively rival capitalist projects in size

        The argument your making is no better than the one made by bourgeois capitalists to "disprove" communism.

        Just remember, we're fighting the same fight, and there's no reason existing communist countries and existing anarchist communities can't work together. Zapatistas seem to have figured out leftist unity.

                • Pezevenk [he/him]
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  “Well ackshcullly unions were and are the most successful revolutionary group in the history”

                  Unions aren't a group, or an organization, or a movement. However you can look at who is organizing unions etc, and the presence of anarchists in organized labour is pretty much 0 in most European countries, unlike communists.

              • Pezevenk [he/him]
                ·
                4 years ago

                The most successfull revolutionary group in the history of the imperial core was a maoist vanguard party , the black panthers.

                In the US, yeah, but generally many European countries had much more successful revolutionary groups than a relatively short lived movement with 8k members in a country of 300 million, and most of Europe is generally considered part of the imperial core.

            • Pezevenk [he/him]
              ·
              4 years ago

              I live in Europe the idea that any kind of marxist group is able to get enough power to establish a dictatorship of the proletariat is silly to me

              Where in Europe do you live? Because in most European countries in the 20th century it was marxist communists who had any kind of success at all ever, as opposed to anarchists, unless you take into account Catalonia which was before the war and had nothing to do with modern anarchy, in which case you'd also have to take into account all the partisans all over Europe, the communists in Spain, and the (failed) revolutions that happened.

          • SankaraIsMyDaddy [they/them]
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            I favour communism over capitalism for ideological not practical reasons, but I favour marxism over anarchism for practical reasons over the ideological.

            I think most anarchists favor anarchism over marxism for ideological reasons, so using practicality-based arguments might not appeal to most anarchists.

            These days though I just think a marxist approach is more realistic and less utopian

            I think there's room in the world for both, and perhaps each is more capable in certain places.

              • SankaraIsMyDaddy [they/them]
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 years ago

                Well, the way I see it is that the most effective method for achieving communism in China is marxism, and the most effective method for achieving communism in Chiapas is anarchism; both evidenced by the fact that their attempts to fight back against capitalism worked, and the rest of the world's attempts have failed. I think pretending there's gonna be one blueprint that's "the most effective" everywhere is naïve.