this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
676 points (99.9% liked)
196
16925 readers
2 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
heirarchy in any form
"he's not hurting the right people, " painted red
If you are not willing to oppress the capitalist class how will a revolution ever survive? How will you quash racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. without oppression? But then again you liberals only care about these people when it benefits them🤷♀️
Sometimes its about helping the right people. Sometimes that means taking direction, working together, and not simply following your own bloated ego.
Liberals seem to get that when they're vote canvassing, fund raising, and brigading on some social media jerk off sight.
But as soon as they see anyone to their left with any kind of organization or even a respect for their forebearers, a switch flips in their brains and all they see or hear is "tyranny".
I'm an anarchist, but nice try.
I believe the insinuation is that at the moment there is very little difference between your flavor of useful idiot "anarchism" and liberalism
Then every social structure is authoritarian.
Anarchists usually distinguish between just and unjust hierarchies, by the way, and svoid the word "authoritarian" when describing just ones. Anarchists still need to organize themselves to have leadership and delegation.
You should read about anarchy before you speak on it lol
There are all kinds of organizational styles that are non heirarchical.
Look into horizontal organization
Also look up the zapatistas, while they do not call themselves anarchist. They use a non heirarchical form of government.
well that's just childish isn't it
do you consider that a rebuttal?
yes because it's not anything intelligent enough to be thoughtfully argued against. a 7 year old could see the holes in such an idea
I oppose one more system of authority than you do, in the interest of ideological consistency, intellectual honesty.
are you taking the position of a literal child?
is revolution not putting the authority of the people over those in power, and bringing those people low? that's "hierarchy"
that depends if you draw distinction between the people and the state (which is merely an abstraction of capital)
state capitalism, as defined by lenin, is not a classless society, and is indefensible as a liberatory philosophy.
just as liberalism abolished the monarchy only to replace it with a dictatorship of private capital, authoritarian socialism replaced monarchy with a beaurocratic ruling class and unilateral control of the means of production.
the neck cares not the color of the boot
Thanks for posting this.
how is a small group of people commanding a big mass better?
at least over time there will always be power hungry asshole or just an idiot in position of power.
no power for no one is the only concept that can really work over time. but you need self-responsible and educated people for that
edit: and yeah, it is a utopian idea, but one I believe it is worth working for