Skip Navigation
244 comments

  • Nah anarchists and non-ml communists get along great because we want the same thing.

    • Ignoring that there are many instances of MLs and anarchists getting along great, Marxists in general (including MLs, which are the most numerous among Marxists) are aligned with anarchists against capitalism and fascism, but have entirely different analysis on what to do about them. Anarchism is primarily about communalization of production and distribution, while Marxism is primarily about collectivization of production and distribution.

      When I say “communalization,” I mean anarchists propose horizontalist, decentralized cells, similar to early humanity’s cooperative production but with more interconnection and modern tech. When I say collectivization, I mean the unification of all of humanity into one system, where production and distribution is planned collectively to satisfy the needs of everyone as best as possible.

      For anarchists, collectivized society still seems to retain the state, as some anarchists conflate administration with the state as it represents a hierarchy. For Marxists, this focus on communalism creates inter-cell class distinctions, as each cell only truly owns their own means of production, giving rise to class distinctions and thus states in the future.

      For Marxists, socialism must have a state, a state can only wither with respect to how far along it has come in collectivizing production and therefore eliminating class. All states are authoritarian, but we cannot get rid of the state without erasing the foundations of the state: class society, and to do so we must collectivize production and distribution globally. Socialist states, where the working class wields its authority against capitalists and fascists, are the means by which this collectivization can actually happen, and are fully in-line with Marx’s beliefs. Communism as a stateless, classless, moneyless society is only possible post-socialism.

      Abolishing the state overnight would not create the kind of society Marxists advocate for advancing towards, and if anything, would result in the resumption of competition and the resurgance of capitalism if Marx and Engels predictions are correct.

      None of this was specific to Marxism-Leninism, but Marxism in general.

      • Here's another analysis for you: Anarchism is about creating social structures and improve the lives of those in these structures. There is no end goal or concrete structure to these structures. They change and adapt as the people within them change, leave or enter.

        Anarchy is not about resources or class or opposing archists. But about creating spaces and communities in which people can safely exist as themselves. About creating social structures that are based on mutual aid and human connection instead of ability or need. Anarchy isn't about making a single system that everyone follows. It's about creating many overlapping systems doing many overlapping things. Different cells are not some distinct group of people with their own flags and names where you need to apply to join. It's just a name for a group of people that have something in common. The same person will belong to different cells as every cell represents some part of society. They cannot form states because a state needs to have polity and anarchists should reject polity wherever possible.

        But that's just how I see it. other anarchists will disagree and that is the most anarchist thing ever.

      • And yet in every instance of AEML, the state never withers it only abuses its authority over the people.

        Give me voluntary collaboration over top-down dictation any day. At the end of the day, we need a non-hierarchical stateless society that works for mutual aid, and you cannot get there with the statism trap.

      • the unification of all of humanity into one system

        This seems so arbitrary. Why is there a line that perfectly encircles every single human, and no other organism? There is nothing we all share, that is not also shared by other creatures. And yet, there is essentially nothing of meaning that we do all share. This group seems either too large or too small. I think you only come to such a Goldilocks conclusion when you start there and work backwards.

      • For Marxists, this focus on communalism creates inter-cell class distinctions, as each cell only truly owns their own means of production, giving rise to class distinctions and thus states in the future.

        But,

        internationalist.

    • yep, this is just the standard “hey leftists! fight each other now! don’t have the revolution until after you fight each other as much as possible!”

    • Not really... no

  • I still hold out hope that the Anarchists will stop falling for it, and unite for freedom over economics.

    Instead of uniting with the Tankies, unite with the AnCaps.

    "But they're not real Anarchists."

    And the Tankies and Totalitarians calling themselves Communists are?

244 comments