Ok, so I’m gonna get some downvotes from this, but I think of the Anarchists as allies, not as enemies. The longer Marxists and Anarchists bicker about which type of socialism is best, the stronger the bourgeoisie gets. If we want to overthrow the bourgeoisie, Marxists and Anarchists need to band together, not bicker. The true enemy is not the Anarchist. The true enemy is the capitalist.

  • @kimjong_ill
    7•3 years ago

    it is clear you need to read Anarchism or Socialism?. here’s a preview (i bolded some as a direct response):

    Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends.

    This is a great mistake.

    We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the “doctrine” of the Anarchists from beginning to end and weigh it up thoroughly from all aspects.

    We shall try to prove that, as advocates of small community socialism, the Anarchists are not genuine Socialists.

    We shall also try to prove that, in so far as they repudiate the dictatorship of the proletariat, the Anarchists are also not genuine revolutionaries.

    • The Free PenguinOP
      0•3 years ago

      Erhem. What do you call decentralist socialism then, huh?

      • The Free PenguinOP
        1•3 years ago

        This is supposed to be a rebuttal against “Anarchism and Socialism”

        • What Anarchism means (from a former anarchist’s point of view) No leader, everybody votes, not just representatives.
        • @kimjong_ill
          5•3 years ago

          please read the text i linked before you try to counter it

          • The Free PenguinOP
            1•3 years ago

            Okay, also, why do you consider having the economy planned on a commune level to be inherently “a fantasy”

            • @kimjong_ill
              4•3 years ago

              marxism involves a scientific view of history. historically, it doesn’t work. there have been zero successful anarchist projects.

              state & rev will explain why a state is needed. i didn’t link it to be flippant. i linked it because it has answers to your questions.

              • The Free PenguinOP
                1•3 years ago

                If you read Part 1, you will see that there still is a state. The GPC/GCoL/GLP’s job is to make laws for the whole SWR. However, the economy planning is on a commune level, rather than a global level. The global government might make laws like “All farming co-ops need to be given at least X amount of money”, but in the end it comes down to the commune.

                • @kimjong_ill
                  4•3 years ago

                  i didn’t realize you were referring to planning. planning must be centralized in order to work. basically all parts need to be communicating instead of operating individually. and planning does not involve simply allocating funds.

                  co-ops

                  commune

                  your use of these terms suggests you are still thinking about this from an anarchist’s perspective. take your time reading the works that have been suggested and if you have questions afterwards don’t be afraid to ask

                  • The Free PenguinOP
                    1•3 years ago

                    And what would you call 3rd-level administrative divisions?