Government!

government!

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy
chomsky.info/unclesam01/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

... What is it good for?

how..
how would that even work? isn't that kind of contradictory?

Promoting conformism. Not much else.
\_(ツ)_/
If there is enough food to feed everyone, why are there people without food?
Communism and anarchism have always been the same thing, ever since it was conceived in Europe.

whatever is deemed necessary by those in power.

what?
they don't sound like the same thing, similar in some ways but not the same thing

If you don't know then why are you even complaining and/or talking about it?

Because time and energy are finite as well. You already acknowledged that at least apropos time.

It is contradictory, but there's some doctrinal arguments for it from Marx's writing. The general concept as I understand it is the position that the violent overthrow of government by proletariat (which is an inherently anarchic act) would be followed by a mutualist forming of communes. That has never and will never happen in all of human history, but that's the general idea.

If you want to look from the point of view of people known as communist thinkers:
Marx explicitly states that anarchism is the final goal of Marxism
If you want to look from the point of view of people known as anarchist thinkers:
Bakunin, Kropotkin, and all other early anarchist thinkers understood that capitalism and anarchism were mutually exclusive, and often worked with Marxists even while disagreeing with Marxism.
There are people without food because of capitalism. I was asking you to confirm this. Why else would people not have food that exists?
Only time is the genuinely scarce thing there. The sun puts out a lot of energy every day.

You're all useless idiots. None of you are willing to help change things. You all just complain.

Duh, Comunism is utopian. Socialism is the way (you deserve gulag).

yeah the likeliness of that happening at any time is a zero

i've not really read up on that stuff much and what i did was very minimal and was a long time ago in a classroom while on a computer

i'm in a position where all i can do is complain

Why didn't you mention this when I asked the initial question?

Overthrowing a state isn't inherently anarchist. A libertarian could do it too. Even a socialist or fascist could.
>forming of communes
You seem to be thinking of Marxism or something else. I agree that Marxism will never work, but fortunately Marxism and communism/anarchism are distinct entities.
Socialism would lack today's capitalism, but it would still have statism, and statism is shit.

Wrong. you choose to only complain. You haven't even tried, and you know it.

Right, energy is no good without the capacity to harness it though. You need solar panels, which require various materials to construct, require expertise to design, require time to assemble, etc.
>There are people without food because of capitalism
Wrong. More people are fed sufficiently today than at any previous time in history. The problem is objectively being solved. You just dislike the paste.

I don't think change needs to happen since the system works, my dude.

This argument is pretty boring honestly but I'm not doing anything important rn.

It trends towards anarchy in the general spectrum, however, and requires a brief loosening of state power in the interim (typically followed by a tightening).

I'm fascinated by what exactly your communism looks like if it's not doctrinal marxism and it's not statist.

...

>paste
pace* jesus christ

i'm okay with the form of government as it currently is

In that case, I stand corrected. If that is what you truly believe.

I mean it's an argument about communism as opposed to capitalism and capitalism is doing just fine so

Then why did you make the previous statement?

It's neat stuff. Marx was a perceptive guy, but he was also too naive. He thought a (socialist) state would willingly stop existing. States exist solely to continue existing, and will never do such a thing. In prefer these thinkers in this order: Kropotkin, Bakunin, Chomsky. Chomsky is American, by the way.
Any pace slower than "within my lifetime" is copping out. If you don't see something solved in your lifetime, you don't have proof it ever gets solved in the entire existence of the universe.
It's just communism. Regular communism known by so many people for well over a century.
It's ridiculous. When I say communism, most people from Europe, Asia, and South America immediately understand. People from North America often don't understand. I want to know where this cultural difference comes from.
>just fine
Why are your standards so low?

eh, when there's nothing better to do, why not?

because i complain about things that aren't the form of government

It's doing ok I think, could be better. Communism is doing worse. Neither is perfect. Both are tied down by corruption.

i personally don't find forms of government that neat, and i don't know or really care about any of those people

Poor MLK then, huh?

No, that explanation is decidedly insufficient. Communism in Europe, Asia, and South America was and is state enforced. You claim to be an anarcho communist. These things are not mutually compatible.

My standards are not low, I am merely not a utopian idiot.

Sure, it could be better. Nothing's perfect.

Please don't try to change the subject... It makes me believe you have no idea what you're talking about.

well to be honest i don't have any idea what i'm talking about with 90% of subjects that exist, with 10% being only a little idea of what i'm talking about

True. Everything is fallible because people are fallible as well. Doesn't mean we can't improve it. Not that you said we couldn't.

>doing worse
Communism doesn't exist today. It's not doing anything, because it doesn't exist. At best you could say socialism exists, but it really doesn't. A mixed-economy is inherently capitalist.
>Communism
>state enforced
Those are mutually exclusive though. And no one in those places thinks communism is statist. For example, as one person from the USSR told me:
"No one said the USSR was communist. No one thought the USSR was communist. Communism was the light at the end of this dark tunnel."

Then why are you forming opinions rather than asking questions?

well my opinion on the form of government i'm currently under is that i'm okay with it, am i not supposed to be okay with it?

Right, I'm just not motivated to be an agent of that improvement within the current system since I think in general terms we're doing well enough. If you care to smooth it out around the edges, one imagines you might go into politics.

I do have a vested interest in arresting the progress of people who want to obliterate the system I think is pretty good, though.

So everyone knew what communism was, but it never happened anywhere, and every government that claimed to be communist was lying - and when those systems fell, they all became capitalist or otherwise statist.

Sounds like the light at the end of the tunnel is didn't actually exist to begin with, huh

Communism and Socialism never truly existed. Those in power reaped the rewards. I was speaking of the ideal.

...

man fuck this shit after work I'm gonna get chipotle it's gonna be fuegissimo and then I'm gonna dick around ALL THE DAMN DAY

No state claimed to be communist, though. Some states claimed to be working towards communism, though. Those are almost certainly the states you're thinking of.
>otherwise statist
They were already statist and sometimes already capitalist. State capitalism exists:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy
I'll not ever even claim the USSR was socialist. Mixed-economies are capitalist.
Communism exists, but the idea that Marxism can bring people there is faulty. The anarchocommunist idea of going straight to communism without socialism can work though. It either worked or got close to working in Catalonia.
Communism may have existed in Catalonia and Ukraine at certain periods of time.

If you don't know about 90% of what you're talking about, why are you forming an opinion? If you only know 10% of what you are forming your opinions off of it means your opinions are uninformed, which means they aren't credible to those who know more. They may not be many, but those are the people in charge.

I didn't say the capitalism wasn't statist, I was including it as an option. All I'm hearing from you, though, is that communism has literally never occurred, let alone been an improvement. I mean
>Communism may have existed in Catalonian and Ukraine at certain periods of time
Is about as convincing as saying "yeah dude I think I saw bigfoot"

....totally sucks you motherfucker... the goverment totally suuuuuuuuckkss

Alright that's fine.

it's not like anyone's going to care about my opinion anyways, and why would they be looking for a credible opinion from me of all people?

i said i don't know what i'm talking about with 90% of subjects that exist, 10% that do and i only know a bit about them, i know enough about the government i live under to be okay with the system it has in place compared to other styles of government

Okay, I can go into more details. During the Spanish civil war, Catalonia for a while was able to protect itself from both sides. During that time period, there was no money or barter (therefore no capitalism) and also no state. That's communism.
Some people debate whether it was truly unorganised enough to be called communism. There were several small organisations in existence due to the pressures of the war. If there was no war, perhaps they'd not exist.
Hemingway, Orwell, and many other authors visited it and wrote about their experiences. But then states from around the world, both to become axis and ally in WW2, sent their militaries in. This is because the biggest threat to a state is the threat of the good example: the example that people can be happy without a state.

I'm not so sure. Those in power usually abuse it. Ukraine is a former Soviet state where corruption ran rampant. It still may run rampant in both the Ukraine and Russia. Catalonia is Spain. Spain is well known for its poor use of money concerning the people and infrastructure.

...

I don't know that it fits your definition. Trade unions were operating as defacto overlords in revolutionary catalonia. It sounds like communism in the common understanding of it but certainly not anarchism despite the nominally anarchic traits of one party - the fact is that the general trend of humans to organize into hierarchy systems remains as inevitable as ever. It's by far the best example you have, though.

Also, nobody invaded Catalonia because they were communist. Catalonia got invaded because it's clay, and clay is valuable, and if your guns are bigger than the other guy's you take their clay. Come on now.

The argument was "why are you even voicing it if your opinion is uninformed and therefor doesn't matter."

Past tense. It may have existed decades ago.

because.

anyway I have to go figure out how computers work, later

later man

Hot.
I know that the trade union/parties are a significant detractor from anarchism/communism. That's why I said it may have existed, and if it didn't exist, that's as close as we've gotten to it in Europe. There are also examples of gift economies that existed in polynesian islands before European conquest. Those clearly didn't lack some hierarchies, though.
chomsky.info/unclesam01/

See you~

Absolutely nothing

When it comes to the Soviet union, aka Stalin, the KGB (which Putin had a hand in) was basically a death squad. They influenced Ukraine's government whether they want to admit it or not. I am not as informed on Catalonia, but people in power are usually inherently corrupt. Money is power for the most part, especially now.

goodnight

it's only 30 to noon, it's not night time

Yeah, the anarchism that may have existed in Ukraine was there before Stalin was a thing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory
If it existed

My bad. Poor choice of words. I was up all night.

...

So it was basically a military state?

...

...

No. It was a stateless area protected by a volunteer army. Definitely less of an example than the Catalonia example I explained here:

...

If the only reason why it existed is because it was protected by some sort of military, which failed, it means it was technically run by the military. (By the way, this conversation has been very fun. I've gotten to learn some things too!)

...

That's debatable. I definitely don't use the free territory as my main point.

While I don't feel sleepy, my body feels weak. I should go to bed sometime.

...

...

understandable. I mentioned that I'm not very informed on Catalonia previously. It's something I'll look into. I just find it hard to believe that any of those systems have ever existed in their pure forms.

>find it hard to believe
That's p understandable too. If you read my chomsky link in this thread, you'll find out why. A lot of propaganda is made specifically to deny that freedom can ever exist.

...

oyasumi
going to bed
It's nearly noon.

can you link me to it? I'm a bit lazy at the moment.

...

...

Who are you btw? Seeing as how we're the only ones left posting.

...

chomsky.info/unclesam01/

am zaryss
but i'm not really that important, i just kinda lurk or post and be depressed, i don't think many people are a fan

...

I'm the same, except nameless. Been lurking/ posting for a long time. Commenting when I'm extremely bored.

i see
i don't post unless there are other names in the thread most of the time, or when there's no thread and i make one

I made this one and I don't think it's going all that well. I post for the sake of posting I guess.

eh, just do you man. that's all i can really say about it

I always start my threads with an arctic fox so that might be some sort of recognition. I lurked up until two years ago and commented at random, but have been around for awhile. Never payed attention to the comments until I really started posting though.

yeah that's a way for people to recognize you, you could probably get away with having a name or trip

How is everyone today

nah, I'll be user until someone gives me a name. I don't feel like giving myself one.

as i said, just do you man.

bored... you are one of three people in the thread.

cool, you're chill

Gee bill

I'm sure it'll pick up again tonight

It always does, what's up?

i try to be most of the time

Just being lazy as usual, playing some video games