Libs thinking we’re on their side, until the point we reject electoralism and US imperialist propaganda. Then label as as “tankies”.
Campists thinking we’re on their side until the point we reject “AES” and “left unity”. Then label as a “liberals”.
Anarchists are clearly the rare species of “liberal tankie” 😆
I took college courses on comparative politics. It wasn’t until I read The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin that I really understood what anarchy and communism are. I really love that book. It does a great job of portraying that world from both a biased, personal lens and then again from outsiders perspectives.
That being said - until we have a planet dedicated to it, I believe any attempt at anarchy will just get overrun by coordinated assholes with guns (read: states).
Finding a way to defend yourself without reinventing the machinery of the state is certainly one of the larger practical problems facing anarchism.
Anarchists can defend themselves just fine. We just need to learn not to trust MLs and libs to do it with as they’ll backstab anarchists at the first opportunity they have to grab power. This sort of rhetoric is like claiming that democracy is a failed concept in the middle ages, because democracies “can’t defend themselves from monarchies” or some shit.
What are you talking about? The only currently extant anarchish communities are in places where states are weak. Anarchists in places with highly centralised states tend to get attacked by everyone, and that’s a serious problem you can’t just vibes away.
Wars, even ones you win, are a tremendous drain. States tend to suck at fighting non states, but that doesn’t mean it’s conducive to human flourishing for the non state people. States are also moronically optimistic about their ability to “productively” war.
This isn’t some fringe concern. There’s any number of proposals you can read on anarchists library about how to deal with this.
It has nothing to do with being failed. If you wanted to start a democratic collective in manorialist times then yes, figuring out how not to get invaded was very important.
You’re not saying anything new, anarchism can’t happen in times where the system is strong. It can happen when the system is in crisis if we set the relevant groundwork. And when it does, we can defend ourselves from the likewise weakened states.
I didn’t think I was saying anything new, just that it’s a practical problem that needs solving.
Its 5 pm i just woke up and im too tired to argue this shit again. You’re wrong. There are books about why you’re wrong and you’re wrong in most ways from the atomic level up to planetary scale shit. Every part of these ideas is wrong in a frustrating stubborn common way.
Honestly it makes me understand why tankies exist. I don’t agree with them, but I get it. Just like I get capitalism. They both suck but they’re both right for different reasons.
Lemmy has just ruined the word tankie but if you are referring to the more militant/dogmatic MLs then I would agree that I think a search for “realistic” solutions drives some of the more concerning/ardent believers.
Even with our own planet, I fear someone would chuck an asteroid our way, à la “it’s free real estate!” once the dust settles…
deleted by creator
Most anarchists agree that there is need for some kind of transitional society. Just not what tankies call “socialism”.
deleted by creator
What do you mean exactly? Socialism or the transitional society?
For MLs, socialism is when the dictatorship of the proletariat is established and the state is run by “the proletariat” in order to lead to communism. Anarchists (ever since Bakunin) would point out that this would make them stop being the proletariat, but rather a class of bureaucrats. Also, means ends unity would dictate that this will not lead to a stateless society.
For me, “socialism” means worker control of the means of production.
The anarchist transitionary period is way harder to describe, since
- There are too many anarchist flavors for a consistent “prediction” or what have you
- The anarchist approach is generally less theleological. Therefore, they “predict” less and think that the people in the transitional period need to find out the rules of said society when they get the most feedback for it, i.e. when it’s happening.
- I haven’t put too much thought into how this would go about, to be honest.
However, the most important part is IMHO that the revolutionary cells working for communism are structured with horizontal hierarchies.
The dispossessed had the same affect on me as well, though i only recently read it, about a year ago.
never heard of that book, I’ll add it to my reading list;
++ recommend. Dont expect that there isnt criticism of the anarchist state
anarchist state? how can a state be anarchist?
Read the book…
I will.
You act like coercion is inherently a better mechanism of coordination. As if suffering is strength. This is my least favorite fallacy.
It really should be addressed: why are states assumed to be better at violence? The trend in doctrine over the past century, and among elite pro murderers, has always been to devolve authority, put decision making closer to the decision, create more autonomy. This is anarchism’s entire shit, i think similarly ewuipped, similarly trained forces, a state has the disadvantage.
And indeed when you see liberatory forces going up against oppressors, usually fascists (or something like them; daesh comes to mind) they tend to function better than a traditional assessmejt might assume. Not always enough for the odds they face, but beyter than you’d expect.
What theyve got is already being established, and being able to reach deep into our lives to fuck us from thr start. Its all the labor and loot they’ve stolen and hoarded, which would at least equalize over time. It sounds like the problem in conflict here is just the usual problems of revolution-any revolution, with any politics.
And literally every ideology has won at least one of those.
It boils down to cooperation vs coordination.
A cooperative force has fewer week points. A single point of failure would be unlikely to cause the rest of the cooperatives to quit. Contrast that to a coordinated war machine where a coup d’etat could quite literally cause them to lay down arms.
Cooperatives by their nature are volunteers whereas state solders are frequently conscripted or coerced in other ways.
A state has hierarchical structures which allows a few leaders near the top to organize a large portion of the state’s workforce and economy into a war machine. We have seen examples of that many times through history. Have we seen a counter example of an anarchist cooperative building a war machine to protect itself? Bonus: Has that ever happened without then turning into a state because of the systems it built took on a life of their own birthing regime soaked in the blood of its own? I digress.
conscripted or otherwise coerced
In a defensive war the attacker does that.
war machine
Kind of. Ukraine. They didnt lose because red vs black, they kind of lost because look-at-a-fucking-map, and did win against the white army. Remember what happened when republican armies (even napolean’s republican-built one) started going up against monarchist armies?
I feel like people just give authoritarianism a ton of points that… I dont get where they’re getting them?
allows a few leaders near the top to organize
How near the top? Lets say youre fighting america right now, lets say you’re in that position, trying to use that power. The nature of your power dwtermines so much of whqt you can and cannot do. In fact they’re trying to do exactly what youve said and have been failing for months. You could give whatever orders you like, of course, but what actually gets done and what damages your authority or gets you fired in the attempt is a serious stumbling block-a king does not have freedom, only power, and that binds him.
Like, you’re believing all the hype here.
The main advantage they have is that there’s lots of people who buy their shit and lots of shit they’ve stolen. It’s that they’re established. Break that and i genuinely dont think they have much on more liberated forms of society. I think the rest is various degrees of bullshit.
I mean its pugjesus man, no one that dedicated to criticizing leftists isn’t a cryptofash
He punches left, then wonders why leftists don’t like him.
Impossible, his other favorite things are the Roman Empire (specifically not the Republic) and the universe of 40k!
As we all know, normal liberals like Rome and Warhammer, and not fascists on Twitter.
Tbf there’s plenty of lefties that love both Roman history and 40k.
They just don’t also spend the rest of their time attacking left.
Fair, it’s just very odd that he hates socialists more than fascists, and posts about Rome and space Rome.
Oh so you can’t hate socialists more than fascists and still be a good person? What about winston churchill and ronald reagan, huh?
Also they tend to include the republic at-least-equally.
Yeah but sometimes they… Okay it’s still punching left but at totally imaginary people so its different i think.
Filtering Pugjesus’ posts was the greatest boost to my lemmy experience.
And any complaining about evil ml
Lol filtering ml was the biggest boost for me
Oh you already had .world blocked?
this whole thing has been salami tactics, but applied to instances.
like they just make up shit, but as long as it’s about ‘tankies’ it just goes around getting repeated unverified. they then expand the definition of ‘tankie’ as they see fit.
So what you’re saying is, first they came for the “authoritarian” communists.
Speaking of: you seldom come across the original version these days. “Communist” is almost always replaced with “socialist,” because fuck tankies.
deleted by creator
Old mate puggy is like the embodiment of the ?mark fischer? quote “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism”.
Then again, apparently I’m a tankie and racist who’s going to move to the usa to inform on people with the wrong paperwork according to one user here.
Omg can you inform on me when you get here?
Dude is a joker at best. Not worth taking seriously.
But what libs don’t realize is that they’re just western tankies. Same ideology, different empires.
It’s the other way around. Tankjesus has to be taken seriously as a fascist saboteur, instead of a jokester.
Let me know first hand when he liberated 🇺🇲. He seems to be enjoying deathcamps too much.
Wasn’t this under the post about someone denying Uyghur genocide?
“Denying” is a strong hyperbole to “overblowning.” Pugjesus is literally tankiejacketing instance administrators in an attempt to coagulate enforcement with his fash dynamics.
Instead of collaborating means of liberation, he’s not ending American DeathCamps in his own yard. Something about an a log stuck on your eye and all that.
@rockerface@lemmy.cafe downvote me all you like. Pugjesus is comfortable sending Palestine genocide protestors to deathcamps, and he’s doing shit about it.
Talk about denying Gaza genocide. Fucking ameko.
What are you on about? I have not downvoted your comment. You’re not making the best defense of your point by making stuff up.
The current Palestine Genocide, Pugjesus praxis, or the downvoter 🧵?
The downvoter part, specifically
Then I apologize if it wasn’t you. I just have little patience for Americans sitting all day on a screen while their neighbors get abducted for simply saying “Maybe we should end genocide.”
deleted by creator
Good job taking a screenshot of my downvote from another comment
We all make mistakes sometimes. Apologies.
Understandable, apology accepted
anarchists being called tankies made me shit my pants laughing
deleted by creator
Clueless right wingers.
There is no such thing as left unity.
orgs with differing views work together all the time including many flavours of unions, religious organizations, and lefty organizations. Just because people can’t agree on a particular theoretical point online doesn’t mean they don’t unite around causes irl.
Looking at the current political climate with a unified right and a disorganized left I’d have to disagree.
Liberals (for a certain value of the left) have shown that when they say “left unity” they mean “do what we say or else” for two hundred years and we’re not going to forget about it now that they’re reaping the consequences of their actions.
So my trans and deported friends are collateral damage in this lesson we’re being taught?
The Ukrainians and Palestinians too?
deleted by creator
There is no such thing as left unity.
Liberals aren’t leftists, and you know that. Just keep repeating your thought terminating cliche though. Clearly it works since you haven’t absorbed this info.
Get a gun and join a liberal militia or stop whining. You’re a majority group, right? Defend your democracy.
Oh, wait, those don’t exist.
Wonder why.
Yeah liberal militias and progressive politicians.
There’d be more of both if liberal politicians didn’t attack them on sight.
I mean they don’t have the scale of the fascist right but most orgs work together with orgs with differing viewpoints irl.
Sure there is - hating the Trots!
I think everyone of any political stripe can agree that diarrhea sucks.
Except libertarians they probably like that shit.
If the government took an official anti-diarrhea stance, libertarians would be shitting into each others’ mouths by the end of the week…
Diarrhea is a beautiful opportunity to sell wellness supplements
For a certain value of wellness
It really fucks up my mind trying to say who’s the worst anarchist between the ones defending america’s propaganda and the ones defending china’s genocide. And it’s not like they’re really that much disagreeing, it’s just relatively minor differences in their analysis, they all could probably agree that China is genociding Uyghurs and that Western right wings are amplifying it.
Solidarity.
Removed by mod
Yeah this is not the space for you to go on a platform. Check the sidebar
OK. I see it now.
