• jackr@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Your proposal seems to be that we should replace the current hierarchical mode of resource ownership(capitalism) with another hierarchical mode of resource ownership(a state). This seems to not resolve the issue of hierarchies, only of the current hierarchy.

    • dogbert@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 hours ago

      If you have even a cursory understanding of socialism/communism you understand that the end goal is a stateless/classless society. Socialism is merely the process where the resources are stripped from the wealthy and redistributed.

      A hierarchy is immoral when it is triangular. That means the wealthy are a small few at the top, controlling the masses. When socialism creates a proletarian dictatorship, it flips the triangle upside down, where the masses are controlling the once powerful elites. I personally don’t have any moral objections to the masses having this power, but for those that do, they can rest assured that the end goal is for no hierarchy to exist in the end.

      The anarchist method is a fantasy because it relies on a magic wand being waived where suddenly we are stateless and classless. Socialism is a scientific process and it takes time.

      • jackr@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        right, this was obviously why the soviets had to be abolished, they consisted purely of the elites. It is also why Makhnovist Ukraine had to be destroyed, because of it’s bourgeois stateness, and why so many stateless societies came from the communist revolutions, as opposed to the anarchist ones like in Rojava, which all failed. Obviously.