160
Solarpunk (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/memes@lemmygrad.ml
70 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I'm not an anarchist, but a lot of people here are misrepresenting anarchism. Anarchists don't reject coordination or planning, only hierarchical state control. Large infrastructure would be built by federated councils, unions, and communes, with common plans and technical bodies coordinated by accountable, recallable delegates. Central coordination without a state hierarchy is entirely possible.

My disagreement with anarchism is different: I think only a state with a strong coercive apparatus can survive sustained imperial pressure and capitalist encirclement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 47 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Central coordination without a state hierarchy is entirely possible.

    Its not a state, its a insert extremely convoluted term that does everything a state does

    These gentlemen think when they have changed the names of things, they have changed the things themselves. That is how these profound thinkers mock the whole world.

    • Engels
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    In fairness, a lot of socialist theory has a distinction between a "state" and a "government". The former is the repressive apparatus (police, army and ideological state aparatuses) and the latter consists of the civilian administration which deals with centralised organisation of labor/economy. This is why marx could describe a "stateless society" as developed-communism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Even the non-repressive function of states need hierarchies. All administration needs specialists, managers, organization.

    Think of a hospital, or a large-scale engineering project. There is no conceivable way these could be run without hierarchies and centralized control.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    And if inevitably the projects reach outside of the commune line into another commune line, how would the intercommunal council be called lol. At what point do you just have a state without calling it a state?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 7 months ago* (2 children)

    You can call a federation of communes a "state" if you want. Anarchists are not against this kind of "state". As long as power flows bottom-up by delegation and recall.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Sounds a lot like democratic centralism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    The "delegation and recall" part of it? Totally! The "vanguard party" and "DotP" parts? Not so much.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    A Vanguard Party is just the most dedicated and ideologically advanced people working together. It doesn't have to call itself a party at all.

    DotP is the state machine being in the hands of the proletarian class. If one accepts the concept of classes, that should be a nonissue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Lol then I'll ask the age old question of how do you expect to protect your revolution with no vanguard or DoTP? How do you stop the systemic issue of racism without an actual system to suppress it? That was the chief reason as to why I thought anarchism was silly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    how do you expect to protect your revolution with no vanguard or DoTP?

    This is literally what I wrote in my first comment:

    My disagreement with anarchism is different: I think only a state with a strong coercive apparatus can survive sustained imperial pressure and capitalist encirclement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Why not just be an ML at that point, you're already like 75% there lmao

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

    I am an ML.

    I never said I'm an anarchist I'm just explaining what anarchism is and it's not what a lot of people here think it is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    sorry i'm not good at telling tone and maybe i'm just not smart and not proficient at theory but is this not like the soviet system

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Early Soviets maybe, before war communism, for like less than a year... There was a reason anarchists tried to assassinate Lenin as a counterrevolutionary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •