I’ve depicted you as the soyjak, while I am the chad. Checkmate, tankie.

with a little dash of 
Unlike what you like to believe, anarchists dunking on tankies is not a call for attention,anymore than it is when we dunk on libs
lol but you didnt dunk on anybody but yourselves and in true anarkiddy fashion you’re too self centered to even understand that
this is why china is building futuristic megacities and kropotkin hasnt been read by anybody who showers regularly in a century
And yet you choose not to live in a futuristic megacity. 🤔
…or i’m a working class person living in america who can’t afford to just move to china
anarchists trying to conceptualize not having a rich mom and dad to fund their existence challenge level: impossible
Curious that you need to afford to live in “socialism” , innit?
what’s curious to me is that you present yourself as some sort of leftist while not actually knowing anything about left wing political theory including anarchism which you claim to subscribe to lol. do you think you’re doing anarchism when you stay awake passed your bed time?
china doesn’t claim to be a socialist utopia, they’re a marxist government operating in a global capitalist economy trying to build toward socialism that’s catered specifically to the material conditions of china and the chinese people. the two cheap ass “gotchas” you tried to throw at me were just you getting yourself and showing everyone you don’t know shit about any of this. it’s weird to me you would make a site dedicated to something you know nothing about, cultivate an online personality around something you know nothing about etc. real fed behavior tbh
china doesn’t claim to be a socialist utopia, they’re a marxist government operating in a global capitalist economy trying to build toward socialism that’s catered specifically to the material conditions of china and the chinese people.
Minor correction, comrade, China is already socialist and believes it to be (for good reason, the large firms and key industries are publicly owned and the working classes run the state, though obviously not a utopia either). They are trying to develop said socialism to higher degrees, which requires 2 major factors:
-
Development of the productive forces
-
A downfall in western imperialism
They already have productive forces higher than the USSR ever had, now, but the second point is important and fundamentally tied to the first. China isn’t trying to go it alone, and has learned a lot from the struggles faced by the USSR. If China tried to jump to a soviet style economy quickly, then the interconnections they have with the global capitalist economy would be significantly hampered. That’s actually why in the new Five Year Plan, they are focusing on increasing domestic demand; this builds independence and self-reliance.
As the global south develops and the US Empire falls, China becomes much more free to aggressively re-socialize the private sector. In the meantime, they limit the private sector itself to the small and medium secondary industries, with few exceptions, ensuring that capitalists never get the upper hand on the economy.
What this creates is a tight balancing act that is decidedly different from how the soviets proceeded, but because of that difference we can both predict the continuation of socialization in China and the downfall of imperialism.
-
/disengage
@[email protected] is saying that moving is expensive, which is true. China is more affordable to live in than the US, but being able to move across the world, especially to a country with a language godlessworm likely doesn’t know, takes a large upfront investment of time and money. It’s not difficult to find examples of statesians moving to China and finding it much easier to make ends meet after doing so, but being able to move there in the first place is the problem.
Curious!
Man, this is just stupid, useless, terminally online infighting bullshit. I don’t wanna pick fights with anarchists.
As far as I’m concerned we’re comrades until every last landlord on Earth is doing a Mussolini cosplay. Then our children will execute us both for being libs, and I’ll die smiling when that happens.
You dont understand, my centralized power structure is based on giving. It could never be commandeered by power hungry psychopaths and used for their own gain like the rest of the power structures around the globe.
We don’t believe socialism to be pure of corruption, but that it’s both more resistant to it and more effective in general at meeting the needs of the people. The problem isn’t with power structures, but the mode of production and distribution, and the class character of the state. States run by the working classes as a consequence take better care of their people and those they rely on than capitalist ones do. Even the nordics, which are generally nice for their own population, rely on imperialism and foreign plunder to keep going, while socialist countries do not.
If you “don’t believe in power structures” you’re not even a fucking anarchist, you’re a child out here larping. Anarchism isn’t “the abolition of all power structures” it’s the abolition of unjust and arbitrary power structures. You literally cannot have a fucking functioning society without some form of hierarchy to it, there has to be some sort of decision making body whose decisions need some sort of enforcement structure. The whole fucking point to anarchism is ensuring that all is based on democratic participation and not “the bourgeoisie or nobility have all the power”
NATO “anarchists” out here acting like the Catalonian syndicalists just magically got shit done without having any officers elected to direct work
Chuki chuki pokopo
Kill your states
you’re not even saying anything tho. you understand that right? saying “kill your states” doesn’t do anything or mean anything. it doesn’t negate or even try to refute anything leeeroooy said lol.
Yeah it wasn’t supposed to be a serious response. Thats why the Hatsune Miku lyrics are there.
the idealism of a literal child but ok
banned for being objectively correct, lol
isn’t that an abuse of your power structures, mods?!

yeah that’s you talking about the state having an aneurysm when anybody asks “ok so how do you organize literally anything you fucking moron”
Oh calm down. You guys talk down to anarchists all day and I ignore it because ya’ll are funny. I make one joke and your stick is in a knot over it.
They’re right to do so, you are inferior
So either anarchism has no power structures, thus implicitly admitting that it is fundamentally incapable of bringing about the political change that it advocates for, or it has a power structure and thus it is liable to be commandeered by power hungry psychopaths and used for their own gain like the rest of the power structures around the globe.
Which way, western anarchist?
Anarchism is a network of smaller structures. Yes, a psychopath would be able to a tribe into a cult. However, the rest of the network would work a check on that psychopath’s power. Better that than a psychopath turning a nation into a cult.
So we’re talking about the platonic ideal of anarchism and not the examples of anarchism in the real world then?
yeah thats not what marxists believe. you’re the one making bogus uneducated claims rofl
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
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.
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
Anarchist cells operating simulteanously can accomplish the same thing without relying on a single point of failure or granting a figurehead to attack.
Can it? When in history has that ever actually worked?
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)
It worked in Revolutionary Catalonia for one.
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”.
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.
They lasted less than a year before they were destroyed by nationalist forces.
What is continuous revolution?

spoiler
there’s no Mao-think emoji?!
Marx stared at the turntable in wide-eyed amazement.
“Seventy-two revolutions per minute!?”
One of the tent-poles of Marxism is the idea that actions are driven by material conditions. It seems so obvious to me that the material conditions of a self-appointed vanguard class (regardless of their original intentions) will lead them to be tyrants. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” as they say.
Vanguards are not “self-appointed,” they are chosen and backed by the broader working class, which is how they have any powwr in the first place. Secondly, the idea that “absolute power corrupts absolutely” is closer to idealism than materialism.
By a wopping 23.27% after which they decided to just take power anyways.
The constituent assembly, the bourgeois institution the workers had already abandoned in favor of the soviet government? Why would anyone hold legitimacy to that? The workers rallied around the bolsheviks, and the SRs backed the overthrow of the state and following the soviets anyways. The bolsheviks had their power from mass support, and because the other groups rallied around them, rather than the SRs, whites, etc.
Right, that is what Lenin said afterwards to justify this blatant power grab by force. You are really funny 🤡
No? It was the truth. The majority of the faction vote supported overthrowing the constituent assembly and only recognizing the soviet government, which was by that time the government recognized by the working classes. That means that the total of the SRs, Mensheviks, and Bolsheviks voted in outweighed the votes the Right SRs and other factions, and thus support for overthrowing the constituent assembly in favor of the soviets was popular.
Shortly after, the Left SRs and Bolsheviks formed a coalition, and won against the Right SRs among the peasantry, effectively a vote to support the soviet government. After the overthrow of the Tsar, the workers threw the broad majority of their support behind the bolsheviks, with most Left SRs and Mensheviks joining the bolsheviks and the rights split between the whites and the bolsheviks.
I really don’t know what you’re trying to get at, here, do you think the Kerensky government was popular?
Yes, the “truth” as written by Soviet historians afterwards 🙄
The Bolshevik were deeply unpopular and could not claim at all to represent the working class. They only got into power through political maneuvering and outright violence. Maybe at the time they were seen as the lesser evil, but that sure turned out to be a big miscalculation after Lenin started to purge his former political allies.
🤡 🐝
Care to share any examples of this happening?
source: I made it the fuck up
Lol, Marxists have been doing this shite since goddamn Engels, who even wrote the most iconically bad example of this meme.
Source: lol I made it the fuck up
Lol I guess one really can lead a horse to water…
Sorry but I can’t sit there spoonfeeding you
Bruh the trough is bone dry. You can lead a horse to water but just saying “there’s water in the trough” doesn’t mean that you’ve actually managed to led a horse to water.
How many layers of idealism are you on?
(Also this is the first time we have had an exchange between you and I in well over 5 years. How time flies! I’m glad to see that you have managed to get away from that shithole they call Reddit.
Oh by the way, I’ve been meaning to ask and I’ve never known for certain - ATPL/FEE were the accounts of Sean Kealiher, right?
RIP big dog. You would have hated seeing the way the world has turned out.)idealism so pure the layers are compacted into a shell of vibes and contrarianism
What the hell are you talking about, Jesse? /disengage
That’s not how the disengage rule functions
what bogus uneducated claims are MLs making about anarchists? most of us began our political journey as anarchists. i myself am only an ideological marxist. idealistically im an anarchist and marxism leninism is a viable path to get there.
if we want our freedom as working class people we need to build authority and exert it over the bourgeoisie.
Lenin was the worst thing that ever happened to Marxism as a philosophy.

How? He analyzed imperialism, and further developed organizational theory into a working model that established socialism successfully for billions of workers and peasants.
Telling on yourself loudly
Being mad about tankies online is praxis

Anarchists smell. I refuse to elaborate
Can confirm
Anarchists smell nice
Congrats on the engagement
If those .ml users could read, they’d be really mad
are you rly gonna pretend mls read less than anarchists
The OP in these comments saying that didn’t even know that communism is by definition stateless and yet Cowbee is in here writing full-blown essays on the different understandings of the definition of communism per ideological position, including slippery ones that require a lot of reading such as communization theory, and you’ve got me making references to primary sources on Nestor Makhno’s record and the governmental structure of the Generalitat of Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War (albeit oblique references.)
But sure, it’s those darn MLs are the ones who can’t read.
Edit:
Oh god, they just said that my ~500 word comment is me writing “a book”. Please, that’s 2 minutes of reading at an average reading speed. Don’t say these sorts of things to me - it’s just baiting me into insulting you if you do 😭😭 ∞ 🏳️⚧️Edie [it/its, she/her, fae/faer, love/loves, ze/hir, des/pair, none/use name, undecided]@hexbear.netEnglish
10·23 hours agoOh god, they just said that my ~500 word comment is me writing “a book”. Please, that’s 2 minutes of reading at an average reading speed. Don’t say these sorts of things to me - it’s just baiting me into insulting you if you do 😭😭
When you’re used to comments that are just a few lines, your multi-paragraph comment is like a book.
ⓘ This user is suspected of being a cat. Please report any suspicious behavior.
I’m trying so hard to remain a polite and respectful guest here and this reply is bringing the absolute worst out in me lmao
If they were an actual lib I wouldn’t be trying to hold it in right now.
Nevertheless, your comments here are fantastic, as always, especially your points on the semi-state nature of the tactics practically employed by the Spanish anarchists.
Honesty, I’m standing on the shoulders of giants in this.

That excerpt doesn’t capture the half of it imo. For example, there were attempts to nationalize the telecommunications industry in Barcelona. The Generalitat conducted a census of the industry and, although the results were incomplete, there were hundreds of companies operating. Just in Barcelona. (I can’t remember if it was over 300 or over 500, but the details don’t really matter.)
Obviously, especially in war time (and a civil war to boot), such critical infrastructure needs to be secured. This is straight up non-negotiable imo (putting aside the matter of the May Days for brevity here). I might be more sympathetic to other anarchist arguments but in these matters, you simply must seize and nationalize infrastructure and to do that you need a state, there’s just no other way around it.
Also this quote doesn’t even address the issues of military discipline, which was atrocious amongst the Republic forces although Jorjor Well, of all people (lol), happens to discuss this.
There were major issues in the Spanish Republic and I’m loath to pin its failure on one single matter however Catalonia and the surrounding regions that were held by the republic were the most economically productive in Spain, although critically they were almost always characterized by smallhold factories and production by small companies (think petit-bourgeois cobblers or tailors or very small factories that produced things like candles rather than big industrial factories like existed in Britain.) This made it virtually impossible to manage the economy and production well, especially for a revolutionary government, and it was well suited to sabotage and reactionaries doing what they do.
Due to the political ideology of the CNT/FAI they didn’t go nearly as hard on liquidating these smallhold companies and organizing a necessarily ruthless program of nationalization, much to the detriment of the war effort. On top of that you had classic trade union consciousness rearing its ugly head, given the nature of economic organization there, and so you have things like an hours-long debate in the government because the glassworkers’ union was demanding that recycling efforts were ceased so that artificial demand could be induced to keep glassworkers employed.
The government was jammed up for hours because glassworkers wanted to smash bottles and jars to create more work for themselves while the fascist forces were nipping at their heels the whole time. I’m still astounded by this, honestly, and we all know the consequences that poor organizing had on Spain and more broadly for Europe (not to mention WWII and, of course, Morocco.)
If you get me talking about this long enough I end up getting legitimately angry for how this incredibly rare opportunity got pissed up the wall.
Absolutely, 100%. I’m of the side that believes that practice informed them the necessity of discipline and organization, which is why the level of organization they did develop was a product of sheer practicality. Had they continued to develop and learn, it likely would have looked similar to the soviet system, but sheer unseriousness held them back.
What is that an excerpt from? It looks interesting!
∞ 🏳️⚧️Edie [it/its, she/her, fae/faer, love/loves, ze/hir, des/pair, none/use name, undecided]@hexbear.netEnglish
7·21 hours agoText of image, highlighted parts have been bolded.
Some of the lessons, which the CNT leadership had drawn from the experience of the year and a half following the spontaneous seizure by the workers and peasants of a large part of the economy of Republican Spain, are clear. It concluded obviously that some kind of general direction and planning were needed in the CNT economy. They concluded that some facility under CNT control was needed to provide for the financial needs of the several thousand collectives. It had come to feel that within the collectives, as well as among them, there was need for instruments to enforce labor discipline. There was need, they concluded, to standardize the social security aspects of the system of collectives, in so far as possible without the interference of the state.
Missing from the resolutions of the economic plenum were some of the traditional beliefs of the Spanish anarchists. Gone was the insistence on the complete autonomy of every unit of the libertarian economy. Gone was the trust in spontaneous solidarity, both among the workers within each collective and among all of the collectives, as being sufficient to assure the smooth functioning of the system as a whole.
The decisions of the economic plenum, had the Civil War been won and the anarchists been in a position to carry out the decisions of January 1938, would almost certainly have resulted in a degree of bureaucracy in the anarchist economy which they had always abhorred, and before the War had always tried to avoid in practice within the CNT and its affiliated organizations. One can only speculate on whether such modifications in anarchist doctrine were the inevitable result of trying to run a large part of a more or less modern economy or were the consequence of a group of people for the first time in their lives having considerable power, liking it, and seeking to expand it.
ⓘ This user is suspected of being a cat. Please report any suspicious behavior.
I never see communists actually achieve statelesness.
I will start my own “communism”, with blackjack, and hookers!
This is the hallmark of the chronically online western dilettante “anarchist” mentality.
You cannot achieve statelessness in a material sense if the world is an assortment of states. What do you imagine happening? A country like the USSR just declares statelessness, dissolves the government, and no longer administers its territory while at every border is a state run by capitalists who would immediately annex territory?
That’s no way to run a socialist revolution.
Even by your own definition of a state, the actually existing examples of anarchism in history met that definition - Revolutionary Catalonia literally had customs houses and strictly controlled their borders, the Makhnovshchina administered and defended its territory while imposing the will of the government over that territorial claim. (I’m not going to discuss AANES since they aren’t even socialist by their very constitution and I’m not gonna entertain idealist Orientalist nonsense by discussing it and as for MAREZ they openly reject the label of anarchism so out of respect for them I’m not going to lump them into the anarchist category but, if someone were to, they would still meet that definition.)
That leaves Freetown Christiania which enforces a drug policy over its borders (enough said) and KPAM, and we both know that you haven’t done anywhere near enough reading to even start to discuss that example.
So why is it that the anarchists who have attempted socialist revolutions recognize the necessity of state apparatuses and territorial borders (i.e. the existence of the state) and yet you do not? What do the anarchists who have actually put the hard work in to advance their political project understand about the material conditions of reality that you do not?
I am a dialectal materialist. My position is that you cannot just dissolve a state by pressing the button labeled “statelessness” and that it’s not possible to achieve a full moneyless, classless, stateless society until the contradictions that give rise to these phenomena have been resolved; capitalism didn’t displace feudalism until the contradictions of feudalism were surpassed by centuries of development of the material conditions (and feudalism itself only ended in 2008 btw) so obviously it’s naive to argue from a position that countries that only existed for lean than a century and achieved socialism (or at least made major strides in achieving socialism) while being beset at all sides by war, subversion, and gray zone warfare at the hands of reactionaries should be able to just press the communism button immediately. But if that really is the position you’re going to be arguing from then perhaps you should be asking yourself why actually existing anarchist projects never achieved socialism, let alone anarcho-communism and the statelessness that is implied therein.
I can tell you two things about this though:
-
Following this thread until you reach the conclusion will be where you discover that you are no longer an anarchist, as long as you step out of the axioms and into matters of history.
-
You and I both believe in the idea of the withering away of the state already, although I doubt you would admit that openly and it’s likely that you haven’t even admitted it to yourself yet; the only difference between you and I on this matter is that we disagree on the timeframe that this takes place within.
I can go beat for beat on this but trust me when I say that you’re talking to a person who was a committed anarchist likely longer than you’ve been an adult for and we’re gonna do the “guac is extra” routine if it gets that far in the discussion.
Man wrote a book for me, so I’m actually going to stop and read it, then edit this comment later (=
Oh yea, my idea is that people will fight for their own self-interest, obviously. So if I design an uh…“living package” that is minimally expensive, and makes you not-dependent on outside factors for your basic survival, encourage trade between communities, an ethical system that means those who seek to exploit or subvert this new movement, get shunned (as all have to agree to a set of ethical terms, and they will see how those working against this system will go against their own self-interest).
I have a lot of kinks to work out there, in free time. I need to buy and test a “living kit”, and stick to it. This needs to be a start to something bigger. As for how I plan to deal with violent outside interference, a good part of the plan is that I would be sapping those outside, malevolent forces of their power, by denying them subjects. The movement would basically by leaderless, and based on economics by the time it takes off, and trying to regulate it, would draw aggro, and drain support away from The Powers That Be.
To make things even more interesting, these communities would be able to operate independently by design, so violence against them would be quite hard (good luck cutting supply lines, electricity, destroying food). If I have plans other than hoping people organize to defend themselves, I am sure as fuck not revealing them.
I’m not baiting you into fedposting and I reject it entirely but it is possible to make references to historical examples or to talk in hypotheticals without signing your name to it, for example, after mentioning what you have then following up by saying “I’ve heard that the Venezuelan Colectivos are armed and trained to act as a community self-defense force so it will be interesting to see how effective they are and what can be learned from their model of community self-defense” - you aren’t saying “we should do this” or “I’m forming this myself where I live” but the allusion is enough to gesture at an example without getting yourself dragged before a court, that is assuming you even want to discuss something like this publicly online in at all. It’s easy enough to read between the lines but also you have boatloads of plausible deniability if you ever had to account for posting a comment like that. OpSec is always priority.
I get what you’re saying about draining away the power from capitalisms and/or statism but my question is - what has happened to every utopian commune to ever exist? Either they pose a threat and they get taken down (and it’s not like any commune could resist against the forces of a power like the US military) or they peter out.
In my opinion what you’ve described is a way of building the new world within the shell of the old, except with extra steps. This is going to come off as uncharitable but this is the exact trajectory that Revolutionary Catalonia took in terms of defending the revolution - they started largely with very classic anarchist-ish policy (including economic policy) and over time the issues with public safety, a mafia-like org holding too much power as a sort of shadow state, labor discipline and economic productivity, attempts to organize production and logistics etc. all led them to start reinventing the Bolshevik wheel. In a smaller, shorter way (that has much less in terms of documentation) this is also the trajectory that the Makhnovshchina took as well.
Interesting. Sigh tons to crunch over when I have actual time
-
You’ve also never seen a world without the United States, whomst spends 60% of the world’s military budget and has financed 100000000 coups
Until all capitalists are destroyed and every single human endeavor on Earth is being democratically directed by the working class, a state will have to exist to wage class war
I feel Engels with his text “On Authority” is the OG of this kind of activity. Here is a text that goes into more detail
May I interest you in a meme?
Subscribe
Well, if they were persecuted by this giant surveillance and oppression apparatus, they must’ve been bourgeoisie.
Nothing makes me more skeptical of anarchism than being told I’d have to rely on my local community.
Sounds like you need to work on improving your local community.
Where I am in Melbourne, we’re a large and diverse group of people, there are constant events and community acitivities, a large co-op garden is just down the hill from me, at the park nearby there’s frequently food trucks helping the poor/homeless.
It’s not perfect, but give me more of that over Albanese and his genocidal enabling, Trump buddy-ness any day. I’d rather see my taxes/work go towards building this up than subsiding a mining company.
Mmm maybe i should work on it, perhaps through a hierarchical structure that works to organise people, bring out their best and simplify interactions with other communities?
Or instead of trying to have someone be above the others and dictate to them, you could just work together with them for the betterment of your community 🤷
And would elevating the most capable in the community help with that?
No.
Empowering everyone to work together would help with that.
Giving everyone a voice and a chance to meet and talk together to work out the how they would like a better community to look would help with that.
Ordering people around will only give you exactly what you already have as I assume you live in a LGA, with a hierarchical structure already, no?
The whole point is that truth=group acceptance.
I swear to fuck nothing has set back Marxism as much as the ussr
The USSR clearly must have been an CIA insider job /s
Western “leftists” were responsible for the USSR
/s
German imperial intelligence, but yes
Nah, just a KGB inside job.
In this thread, a whole bunch of liberal cucks.

























