Well, since I'm an anarcho-communist: It is a communist (as in: a classless, moneyless society based on the principle: to each according to their needs, from each according to their ability) model of how the world would work.

That's not how Lenin did things, though. Lenin actively took power away from the sovjets and centralized decision making so that the bolsheviks made decisions top-down, not bottom up. Before the bolsheviks sabotaged it, Ukraine actually was organized in a very anarchist manner after the 1918 revolution.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I understand the party wanted to defend itself from foreign interference, something Ukraine was not able to do despite uniting with other eastern-european nations for defense. I see this as the main reason why we need socialist states before organizing the conditions for communism to happen.

How would you see such a large scale defense playing out in an anarchist society? I ask this with political interference, soft power and propaganda also in mind.

Would the USSR have survived for as long as it did if didnt have Ukraine as a "buffer zone" and a more centralized, hierarchical military? Are there anarchist answers to this?

[–] Prunebutt@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry, didn't study that stuff. I only have a birds-eye view of that era. I do know the anarchist critique of Lenin, though.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you elaborate on that critique?

[–] Prunebutt@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Sorry, I'm afraid I personally can't. But I know an essay that can.