Anarcho-communism is the obvious solution. Prove me wrong

Anarcho-communism is the obvious solution. Prove me wrong.

Other urls found in this thread:

dictionary.com/browse/communism
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

...

you realize communism is the full authoritarian control of both the economy and social aspects of its citizens. there is no "anarcho" possible about it.

?
if it's so obvious, why can't anyone define it?

Totalitarian communism, yes

>conflating totalitarianism with communism

My poor sweet burger friend

In an anarchist society the people themselves would control the means of production

hue hue hue

dictionary.com/browse/communism
" a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party."

Political science 101 lol.

not enough sniffles.

>dictionary.com
got a live one here, lads!

Yes but this can't work unless you remove factors like religious fundamentalism

All anarchists are retarded, but anarcho-communists are the worse. "The good of the community" is not enough to stop violence because people are selfish. At least with anarcho-capitalism fighting is deterred by the need for peace to create profit.

>defining intricate political ideologies with a website used by middle schooled to cheat on their vocab quizzes

Wew

Former Communist here. Read Kapital, the whole 9.
I was a communist until I learned about groups and Group Dynamics. Some people are simply worth more and better than others, and thatis due to attributes that fall outside the realm of the economy

*schoolers

ask any political scientist professor and this is the answer you will get. "anarcho-communism" is an oxymoron and logically incoherent.

...

>unironic communist

got a retard here, lads!

How does it feel having never produced a single successful communist state? please, try and come up with an even slightly coherent excuse I am curious how you practice such fervent denial.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism

>Anarcho-communism stressesegalitarianism, the abolition ofsocial hierarchy, and class distinctions arising from unequal wealth distribution, as well as the abolition ofmoneyandprivate property(while retaining respect forpersonal property). Replacing these approaches would be collective production and distribution of goods by means of voluntary association. In anarchist communism, the state andprivate propertywould no longer exist. Each individual and group would be free to contribute to production and to satisfy their needs based on their own choice. Systems of production and distribution would be managed by their participants.

Believing there's a difference in practice

You sad unemployable twat

>controlled almost half the world for a century
>brought Russia from a backwards, illiterate peasant nation to a world superpower
>Bunkers. No equal
not successful?

kek

So OP...who decides the way in which way the society will go? How do you remedy those vying for the power to control? Also how do you get everyone to comply? If any one of these breaks down it becomes totalitarian.

Also, this wasn't even full out communism, just a step along the path towards it.

Post yfw the struggle of Wikileaks directly goes against the struggle against antisemitism because the more people that know about zionist third party actions in the West the more people rally against them.

Dropped.

Are you retarded or just pretending?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

I wager you're under 18.

While it is true they killed many people, what said is still true.

>backwards, illiterate peasant nation
wrong for 1916
right for 1926
guess why

Tolkien is overrated

Literally what

...

Oh, you sure got me.

Why would libertarians care if the government spies on and doesn't allow firearms in the white house?

Muh freedoms

Communism/Socialism and any other variation of Marxism requires a totalitarian state to enforce other wise sane people will flee in droves or question and challenge the people enforcing it. All forms of Marxism have to become totalitarian in order to preserve itself.

Why?

...

>implying it has been tried

"Hey factory worker, how would you like to have real ownership in your place of business, with a democratized workplace with no bosses?"

>NOOOOO!!! GOMMUNISM!!!

Communism cannot exist in a stateless society because nobody wants it aside from a handful of liberal-arts majors and single moms.

Think of it this way: the only Communist societies that have ever existed were totalitarian, even though Marx himself said that anarchy is the ideal scenario. Do you genuinely believe that his followers, the ones that risked their lives leading Communist revolutions in the 20th century, would not have implemented the system to its fullest extent if it were possible?

>this deluded
Do you know who works in factories communigger? Have you ever worked with anyone else in your life? People (especially the minorities you love so much) are dicks who will leave all the work to the poor bastard who does his job. Then that poor bastard gets tired of working for the rest so you either have nothing or violently coerce him into working for you. Which is why you hate capitalism

>the only communist societies that ever existed were totalitarian

Dude, educate yourself before you start spewing shit about things you know nothing about. There have been multiple anarchist communist states, including Catalonia during the Spanish civil war, the Ukrainian "Free territory", and currently the area of Syria known as rojava

>Steps to Anarcho-Communism
>1. Set up a state
>2. Don't call it a state
>3. ????
>4. Massive Starvation and deterioration of living conditions

But hey there's no more inequality except for those that run the state.

Private property is a must.

Land and raw materials are iffy though.

...

>implying a group cannot manage itself without an authority figure
>implying I love minorities
>implying

Now you are inevitably going to say "if they were so great, why don't they exist anymore"

Catalonia was conquered by Hitler-backed Franco, and the free territory was conquered by the Bolsheviks

>mfw I write a hypothesis that says you can throw a ball in the air and have it not fall back down
>my followers throw balls in the air
>they fall back down
>instead of recognizing my hypothesis as incorrect they deludedly parrot the idea promoted by power-junkies that it wasn't fairly tested and that they should keep doing it
>instead of a stupid ball theory it's an economic system that's now responsible for the deaths of one hundred million people

...

>bitches about dictionary.com
>links to wikipedia
Embarrassing.

The solution to what, nigga?

>still believes the old "Wikipedia is always wrong cuz anyone can edit it"

>implying a group cannot manage itself without an authority figure
This is what I am implying yes. If they could they would by now. But they dont.

Clearly the US. Canada would be so easy to annex. They'd most likely surrender before the invasion even began.

you fucking faggot retard cuck

...because they are prevented from doing so by their authority figures...

...

>implying
No they arent. If they were capable of doing their shit on their authority figures wouldnt have to do anything. You have to be underage
>inb4 muh strawman

This is like saying "slaves wouldn't be able to survive in their own, that's why they are forced to work for their master"

>democracy in the workplace
What exactly prevents manual labor workers (who are not hired based on intelligence) from voting every company into debt thanks to their economic illiteracy?

My boss (the owner of the M.O.P) doesn't do much, how about yours?

Saying >inb4 muh strawman< doesn't exempt you from the fact that you just used a strawman

I wouldn't say capitalists are selected based on intelligence, either

>debt
>company
>economy
Nigga what

Okay, so you refuted your own bullshit post. There's no magic wizard that would stop the annexation and dissolution of an anarchic-communist state today.

Also, what makes you think either of those short-lives states would have lasted beyond the normal phase of socialism "working"? Venezuela sustained itself under socialism for 20 years, that doesn't change the fact that it's retarded policies eventually crashed the economy and led to the now observable mass starvation and murder.

Didn't Catalonia in Spain have an anarchist era during the civil war?

How did that work?

Jesus, dude. Look up the term "strawmanning" and call it a day. Your posts have been nothing but unsubstantiated nonsense and refutations of points that were never made.

I never said it was a strong military system that could resist any invading force. Both of those examples had no chance of surviving annexation because they were heavily outnumbered.

No u

You're free to start a business anytime you like. There's also no law preventing you from running it under a democratic system. Notice how none of those exist.

>anarchist
>state
I know it's hard to think outside of ideology, but have at least a little imagination

>violent coercion is the same as being fired
O I am laffin
Yes she does. She doesnt do a very good job since she bails out a lazy nigger all the time but she does work considerably.
Its obvious he's either had magically perfect workplaces or hasnt experienced a workplace

>what is The Green Bay Packers
>what is Alaskan Oil

Anarchists are full of shit. We all wish there was no government and we could just be free to do whatever but there are bad people that would never allow you to do that. Anarchism is unattainable.

>SHE
cased close

Even if you start your own business, you are still under the rule of the capitalist state

Not an argument.

Corporations regularly take out loans or sell their stock to pay for shit. Not sure if joking or just retarded.

First scenario.
>Country invades.
>Since you are a bunch of farmers constantly infighting you lose.
Second scenario.
>Gun factory owner realizes he could easily take over the country so he does just that.
Third scenario.
>Since greed and ambition are part of human nature several factions form and fight for total control until one wins and sets up a dictatorship.

...

...

Communism as Marx firs described it was anarcho-communisim
He suggested that the state would only be temporary.

What does this even mean? Businesses should be run democratically with every worker having equal stake? That's a horrible idea that would never work.

>>what is The Green Bay Packers
A football team that generates revenue from playing football well, a quality independent from its ownership.
>what is Alaskan Oil
Oil companies generate a ton of profit on principle because of how rare oil is. It's not like the management is responsible for the company's founder striking oil by coincidence. It would be extremely difficult to bankrupt an oil company.

Green Bay Packers? Ha! I live in Green Bay and am a shareholder. I 'own' a piece of the Packers, but you must be fucking retarded to believe that I actually get any say in anything they do.

and so on and so on