• btbt [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The excuses some of y’all come up with for not doing anything never cease to amaze me, do you really think you can bring about revolutionary political change by just asking nicely? If actual anarchists were like you the ideology of anarchism would rightfully be taken about as seriously as Posadism

    • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      You dont even know what I do locally and now we’re all making uneducated guesses cause I wanted to make a joke about centralized power structures. Chill.

      • btbt [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Local work is good and commendable, but wider societal change requires centralized leadership and the use of force to counter the violence which the capitalist class will engage in to protect its existence both during and after any revolution

        • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Anarchist cells operating simulteanously can accomplish the same thing without relying on a single point of failure or granting a figurehead to attack.

            • MLRL_Commie [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              26
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Well, to be fair, Islamic resistance groups (not ideologically communist but progressive) have recently developed cells and flexible leadership methods which are sustainable and relatively successful. This is not what anarchist are usually referring to, though, because that still works strictly in a heirarchical structure and wields state power (good)

              • BanMeFromPosting [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                23 hours ago

                It didn’t, considering how revolutionary Catalonia did not survive the war.

                This is peak western leftism. Only supporting failed movements because they are able to remain “pure”.

              • ReadFanon [any, any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                24
                ·
                2 days ago

                Revolutionary Catalonia was not in any way a collection of independent anarchist cells. If you actually read the work of historians on Catalonia you’d realize that they had basically everything in terms of state apparatuses that someone like you would be ideologically opposed to, if you were consistent in your politics.

                Workers couldn’t even leave their villages without the permission of the village council in Revolutionary Catalonia my guy. I don’t know how to tell you this but that sounds awfully like a repressive state doing what a repressive state does, even if it flies a black (and red) flag.

                • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  They were still sustainable. The same thing is going to happen to any startup anarchist collective as nations and corporations hold an ungodly amount of power and material wealth. It was destroyed because it was actually working but couldn’t defend itself completely from a nation. That is a flaw but its one any up and coming revolution starts with.

                  • BeanisBrain [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    17
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    but couldn’t defend itself completely from a nation. That is a flaw but its one any up and coming revolution starts with.

                    The Bolsheviks defended themselves completely from 15.

                  • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    11
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    Sustainable except in regard to actually existing lol, being unable to defend yourself is kind of a big deal

                  • btbt [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    27
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    It was destroyed because it was actually working but couldn’t defend itself completely from a nation

                    Damn, I wonder if there’s anything they could have done to address this problem thonk

                  • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    25
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    The same thing is going to happen to any startup anarchist collective as nations and corporations hold an ungodly amount of power and material wealth

                    And therein lies the problem. I’m not questioning that it was sustainable, but without centralized leadership and the use of force to protect itself, any anarchist cell is going to lose to the much more organized and better equipped capitalist forces aiming to disrupt and overturn them. Anarchist projects cannot be successful while capitalists continue to wield power.