Convert me.
I got into anarchism because I wanted a critique of power structures that was more broad than something that only focused on work and government. Principles I learned from reading anarchist literature taught me to be suspect of all power structures, authorities and hierarchies, even those that may be beneficial like you might find in communism.
But with that said, left unity, etc. I'd still be proud to call you a comrade.
Anarchist ideas on the organization of society and power sturctures are valid, and would probably work if allowed to build themselves naturally. However, the problem comes in during implementation. Anarchism’s decentralized structure makes it ill-suited to defending itself against hostile state powers. The reality is that we will never be given the opportunity to build socialism without also having to defend it against organized, hostile foreign powers that seek to destroy it. This is the reason that anarchist socialist experiments on a nation-scale don’t last very long, and end up crumbling. There are other reasons, of course, but their capitalist encirclement makes it extremely difficult for them to survive without state power.
Marxism-Leninism understands that we’ll never be able to build socialism naturally without major disruption or intervention by foreign powers. The anarchist solution of “everybody will own guns and work together to fight off the invaders” falls apart quickly when faced with a highly organized capitalist army, and decentralization really doesn’t work in their favor (the famous military battle tactic of defeat in detail would be extremely effective against anarchist societies).
The truth is that as much as we don’t like the state, we need to use the state apparatus to oppress the bourgeoisie in order to achieve successful proletarian revolution. Once the bourgeoise is dissolved, there will no longer be a need for a state apparatus and it will begin to wither away. MLs don’t particularly like the state either, but it is a necessary evil until the powers that seek to harm the revolution no longer exist.
Lenin himself said “'While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State.”
A large amount of MLs were anarchists before their ideology evolved. Hell, I used to be an anarchist. Anarchist ideas are compelling, but they won’t be able to sustain a revolution into communism in the presence of existing capitalist powers.
Convert me. I got into anarchism because I wanted a critique of power structures that was more broad than something that only focused on work and government. Principles I learned from reading anarchist literature taught me to be suspect of all power structures, authorities and hierarchies, even those that may be beneficial like you might find in communism. But with that said, left unity, etc. I'd still be proud to call you a comrade.
Anarchist ideas on the organization of society and power sturctures are valid, and would probably work if allowed to build themselves naturally. However, the problem comes in during implementation. Anarchism’s decentralized structure makes it ill-suited to defending itself against hostile state powers. The reality is that we will never be given the opportunity to build socialism without also having to defend it against organized, hostile foreign powers that seek to destroy it. This is the reason that anarchist socialist experiments on a nation-scale don’t last very long, and end up crumbling. There are other reasons, of course, but their capitalist encirclement makes it extremely difficult for them to survive without state power.
Marxism-Leninism understands that we’ll never be able to build socialism naturally without major disruption or intervention by foreign powers. The anarchist solution of “everybody will own guns and work together to fight off the invaders” falls apart quickly when faced with a highly organized capitalist army, and decentralization really doesn’t work in their favor (the famous military battle tactic of defeat in detail would be extremely effective against anarchist societies).
The truth is that as much as we don’t like the state, we need to use the state apparatus to oppress the bourgeoisie in order to achieve successful proletarian revolution. Once the bourgeoise is dissolved, there will no longer be a need for a state apparatus and it will begin to wither away. MLs don’t particularly like the state either, but it is a necessary evil until the powers that seek to harm the revolution no longer exist.
Lenin himself said “'While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State.”
A large amount of MLs were anarchists before their ideology evolved. Hell, I used to be an anarchist. Anarchist ideas are compelling, but they won’t be able to sustain a revolution into communism in the presence of existing capitalist powers.