you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Something to keep in mind is that anarchism and marxism-leninism are fundamentally in opposition. I love my anarchist comrades and I am very open to finding solutions that do not involve bloodshed (obviously) but one of us seeks to wield the state and the other seeks to destroy it. Anarchism is a threat to the proletarian state and has proven itself to be so in the past.

I do honestly think though, as Amerikkka and the Western powers generally are likely going to be the last to overthrough their capitalists, it is very possible that peaceful solutions to this contradiction will be clearer.

I've always thought an autonomous anarchist territory within the geographic region of a socialist state would be cool

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 days ago*

    They do not have to be in direct opposition, as long as anarchist comrades recognize that the bourgeois state is a fundementally larger impediment to the disintegration of the state than the proletariatian state.

    The issue fundementally arises from the fact that, much like most Western communist parties were built with only active academic and activist communist strains that opposed AES at the forefront, so too have the majority of Western anarchist groups been grown with a larger opposition to AES than the actual bourgeois state they existed in, because all strands of Western leftism is infected with either settler-colonial ideology or psy-ops bullshit.

    We are, imo, just now starting to really come around, where real international communist and anarchist ideologies are coming to the forefront of the left in the West (albeit extremely slowly), due to the lack of resources being pushed explicitly into the left (or more likely because they are trying to get us to commit treason colluding with a foreign government, typical psy-op shit, but it's just a gut feeling).

    We have yet to even know if the black and red in the West have any real reason to oppose each other. It may be the case that the western state can only be smashed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 3 days ago* (1 child)

    one of us seeks to wield the state and the other seeks to destroy it.

    All communists seek to destroy the state. In ML terms the part where you're talking about "wielding the state" is called socialism and it is only a stepping stone to the actual goal (communism) that is identical to the goal of anarchists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 3 days ago*

    Yeah for sure, it's just that the socialist period tends to cause trouble between us. I'd really rather find some way to peacefully avoid that trouble which would be amiable to all of us. I think to leave that contradiction unrecognized is dangerous.

    Political organs that involve both anarchist and communists are necessary for handling this contradiction. To be clear

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago*

    finding solutions that do not involve bloodshed (obviously)

    Like for real. Other than the involvement in USA color revolutions what have any of us actually done. Now we are talking about bloodshed. Hey you don't gotta like everybody but.... something must be done and the culture needs to shift and it needs to stick. A lot of people are over socialized. Even in their little groups were they bicker and fuck each other. Too much government. Too much drama. I like the government that fucks off. We got ass loads of government these daze. It is a matter of ratios and proportions. You gotta smash the state to build a better foundation. My delusions of grandeur got me good.

    I've always thought an autonomous anarchist territory within the geographic region of a socialist state would be cool

    You can go there and gamble hahaha.... within reason of cource

  • source
  • parent