• 33550336@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    Well, it might be so. But I am just suspicious about tankies showing flaws of democracy since they use it to “show” the supposed supremacy of “communist”, authoritarian states as China.

      • 33550336@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You mean the idea of communism or actually existing “communist” countries, like China, USRR or North Korea?

          • 33550336@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Thank you for a quite objective response.

            I also see how a state which transforms into socialism or communism must be “authoritarian” in that it has to take away factories and land from those that keep it as capital, so that it can be shared.

            I think this will never work, or with a very small probability. Power simply corrupts and attracts a nasty kind of people. Personally, I believe that upwards, organic, evolutionary changes are more probable to bring us closer to the ideas of communism, as industrial evolution moved most of the world from feudalism into capitalism in a natural way.

              • 33550336@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I think that’s a fair take and perhaps indicates you’d lean anarchist-left.

                I perceive myself as a social democrat, maybe with elements of anarchism, such as decentralization and down-to-up elements of organization.

                I have mixed feelings myself, that kind of natural transformation won’t just be left alone to evolve, it’ll be actively resisted by powerful political and global forces, the United States and its allies would not allow it, for example.

                This problem is actually a hard one – otherwise no one wouldn’t need to argue about it, and there is no simple choice. If someone thinks that there is an obvious simple solution, then he/her may be just very ignorant. Maybe I will sound controversial here, but in contrast to Marxist-Leninist, I do not blame United States for damping revolution. Revolution will not come simply because we are not in 19th century capitalism anymore. Capitalists adapted, provided more humane conditions to workers to not be swept by workers’ revolution, and Antonio Gramsci saw it something like 100 years ago, but Marxist-Leninists still live in 19th century and do not see that low-income class would rather choose far-right options like Trump or AfD. The United States indeed massively interfered with damping of “socialists” republics in South America, but I think we do not need another “red” imperialism country like USSR or Russia’s vassal. Humanity needs real communism, not “red” authoritarianism.

                I think this pretty clearly demonstrated that the USSR wasn’t interested in anything but Empire.

                I think so, and with time this was becoming more and more obvious. Western leftists were surprisingly long (like 1956) under the charm of USSR, maybe with an exception of people like Emma Goldman.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Wait did you not know about the anarcho-communists doing labor camps?

            My point is that authoritarian is a useless word. Anarchists accuse left wingers of being authoritarian and then do the exact same thing with a different name. Just accept that some parts of revolution are gonna suck and gonna have excesses.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I don’t think you’re going to find it easy to convince a Marxist to become an Anarchist by linking Anarchist theory.

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    That is theory, what are you talking about?

                    Their point wasn’t that Anarchism necessitates forced labor, but that historically Anarcho-Communists have employed Labor Camps, such as in Revolutionary Catalonia.

                    Examples are mentioned in With the Peasants of Aragon.

                    They are making the point that Anarchists are more than willing to be authoritarian when it benefits them and is immediately practical, despite cloaking themselves in an “anti-authority” robe, historically.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Authoritarian is just a buzzword armchair generals throw around. All states rely on authority, including anarchist attempts like in Catalonia and Ukraine.