deadacc

4y

to be very direct about it this path is the logical formulation of the experience of a century and a half of socialist experiments. it's often repeated but not without reason: if there were any radically successful "anarchist" projects, we would be able to point to such an obvious success and model our efforts behind it.

I am actually extremely supportive of viable alternative paths to socialism. I am not supportive of this false dichotomy between "anarchist" paths and "ML" paths. the two paths walk the same course and tbh i only find very minor, nitpicky ideological differences in what needs to be done following both paths. The reason we follow this trail, is because we can look down the path and see the tangible material benefits it provides. There are definite critiques of past movements and formulations of ML synthesis that I hold as any serious non-ideologue should, and these are expansions of thought within the framework of the hard, hard earned successes of past revolutionaries, who held the same exact values as you and me.

If you see failures in past movements, you can use that insight to implement a better approach to the current material conditions to help produce a socialist movement that improves upon the design. ideologically opposing "ML"ism because you ideologically agree with "anarchism" is completely detrimental to everybody and undermines everything you could possibly stand for as a socialist.

All I can offer to you, as you can't read the well-formulated and heavily-scrutinized works of revolutionaries more successful and well-read than either of us, is to try to overcome what comes across as chauvinistic othering of ML projects in order to assume an ideologically superior position, and instead embrace the failures of past socialist projects and choose to use the diversity in your thought to support and improve upon the work of those who came before you.

Nort

4y

I also subscribe to the idea of Libertarian Socialist not anarchist

deadacc

4y

whats the distinction in your eyes

Nort

4y

I also subscribe to the idea of Libertarian Socialist not anarchist

Nort

4y

I think making the argument that the lack of successful anarchist projects means it can’t work, is a little fallacious. You speak of benefits but all these ML experiments & success stories I think should be credited to the idea of State-Capitalism. I’m not seeing the socialism. If we want to improve upon past ML projects, why aren’t we advocating for workers to have direct ownership over the means of production? What are we hoping to improve upon?

deadacc

4y

there are many forms of more collective ownership in socialist countries. many countries such as vietnam having implemented land reform and a guaranteed amount of land per citizen for personal cultivation and worker communes in many socialist countries. even china, while facing certain consequences of "state capitalism" in the highly-developed special zones, has a lot of communal work and distribution in the rural areas.

and to your last point we are hoping to improve upon the rate and ratio of "direct" worker ownership of the means of production. collective direct ownership of the means of production is a fine intangible line that ultimately means little when "hierarchy" is also a necessary intangible concept to effectively steward the means of production. at what point does an organization of people keeping each other in check become "governance" and a "state".

in these countries, this is simply the level of direct ownership that they have agreed to implement collectively. ~90% of Chinese citizens support their government and believe it is moving in the correct direction.

Nort

4y

How do you imagine the state would dissolve under your system? If we’re relying on the state to distribute land and resources, what happens after? I haven’t heard the arguments for how we get to socialism past this phase. I don’t understand why a hierarchy is necessary to “effectively” steward the means of production either. I figured that’s what socialism is all about, after all.

also, I don’t think data like that is super credible or relevant. I hate to use this example but it’s the only one I could think of — Hitler had high approval ratings.

Cudderwalks

4y

You guys are really debating with a guy who named himself after a serial killer who murdered and raped 48 women.

Womanpuncher69

4y

On Contradictions might be my favourite piece of theory

Cudderwalks

4y

Combat Liberalism another great piece by Mao

krishna bound

4y

new NK opposition strategy: "yeah can you just uh idk show off your breasts or something"

ARCADE GOON

4y

Her plastic face looks hideous here

krishna bound

4y

her plastic surgery is beyond insane. whole south korean plastic surgery industry is demonic

Fargo

4y

@ARCADE_GOON i apologize for going off on that Turk in the other thread he pissed me off