Personally I will jump on any revolutionary or even just leftist organization if it has a chance of bringing change
Honestly same, I don’t like the hardcore commies too much but if they’re getting shit done then I’ll join the bandwagon. Still better than libs.
Im an Anarchist but ill happily work with the hardcore commies, the MLs, hell I would even work alongside demsocs if they had a real chance of getting stuff done.
We’re stronger together, comrades 💪
Preach.
“nomadic war machine” goes hard
Indeed
I feel like all of them are completely right and also have blindingly massive holes in them because that is how all systems seem to be but also I would be down to have any of them in power over the commically evil and corrupt billionaires we have in power now
I am still trying to figure out what label fits me because on some point I do completely agree with the ml’s but also on others I fully agree with anarchists and on other ones I can see the merits of both but haven’t done enough research or seen enough places using those systems to form a solid opinion on what meets the needs of people better
I think the simplest way to look at is this.
Do you think a top-down (ml) or bottom-up (anarchist) approach is best for people?
In theory the end results should look similar, a world without borders, governments, or hierarchy. The difference lies in how to get there, do you need to force people at gunpoint to upend their lives and travel across the country to work in your mandated state job or do you think small communities can build up their own locally adaptive systems to supersede the need for a state. Either one will require a bloody revolution before the capitalists give up their power mind you.
How is Marxism Leninism “top-down”? And anarchism is not “bottom-up” either. It’s idk, “side to side”. There is no “up” in anarchism.
Because ML relies on a vanguard party and a centralised leadership.
You’re right side to side is a better analogy, but bottom-up is generally how grass roots movements are described so I found it the better layman term.
That’s a misconception on what a vanguard party is. But in truth it’s a misconception some (usually young and misinformed) MLs also make.
A “vanguard party” is a post hoc definition. You can’t have a “vanguard party” in the now. The “vanguard party” is just the group of people ahead ideologically during a revolution, and who guide and lead the people. And it’s only something you can actually say after the revolution is over, when the dust settled.
No group should self define as a vanguard, or should even try to be one. That makes very little sense.
When the revolution happens, some people and some groups will naturally emerge as leaders (as in leading the way, not sowing orders). And it won’t be the people who called themselves “the vanguard” even before a revolution even started.
You can see that in history, no revolutionary group in any successful revolution called themselves the vanguard party. Specially not during the revolution. Not the Chinese Communists, not the Bolsheviks, not the Cuban revolutionaries, not Ho Chi Minh etc etc.
That’s what the original definition of what a vanguard party was. A post hoc descriptor of the “most advanced” group in a revolution, given after the revolution is over.
Also, never heard any communist or ML say or think that “centralized leadership” was a requirement for anything. You’re probably be mixing up “democratic centralism” with centralized leadership.
And democratic centralism is just how all organizations work really. If there’s a discussion, that is followed by a vote, and a decision is made, all organization members should abide by the decision. Regardless if they voted for or against it. That’s just the basics on how an organization can even be, well, organized.
I don’t particularly see how top down would work because as you said the capitalist class aren’t going to replace themselves so without a push from the bottom there will be no change and if you try and go bottom first it will be stifled and crushed out by the people currently in power unless it is a coordinated action from a large percentage of the lower class to no longer recognize their authority and just do it.
I don’t believe that people should be forced at gunpoint into jobs they don’t want but I could see non monitary benefits being used to incentivize workers move to places that need them at the very least until we have a stable system if not longer than that
As far as immediately going stateless I could see that being done in a sense but it would require those communities build up a force large enough to defend themselves from the state and unless the communities come up with a way to link together for mutual aid and become a union that is for all intents and purposes a state that can act together as one I feel it would be near impossible to best a pre existing state especially one with a massive military force already.
Not sure If that made sense but the way you explained the difference did help as I rambled my way through
and if you try and go bottom first it will be stifled and crushed out by the people currently in power unless it is a coordinated action from a large percentage of the lower class to no longer recognize their authority and just do it.
That’s how we transitioned out of monarchism and into republicanism as the dominant form of government. It didn’t happen overnight. It didn’t even happen in a decade. It happened over centuries of slowly building up local power in a decentralized method, starting from one locale that decided to ignore the established processes to distribute resources under their immediate control as they saw fit that was then copied or adapted elsewhere, until each independent locality could begin to coordinate to overthrow the central authority of the king instead of just simply subvert it.
So long as they kept the king and his men pacified, they never bothered to look at what was happening underneath the hood until it was too late. The same principles apply today and in anarchist philosophy we call this building dual power and preconfiguration.
I will join a workers council as soon as i can fucking FIND ONE but when I do I’m going to stay enrolled in the party as well.
Also do a nomadic war machine!
Por que no los tres?
Fine but I’m not finding a place for your council to meet; that way lies madness.
