http://www.revleft.com/vb/deal-capitalists-after-t174068/index.html?t=174068
lolz...
question that I plan on asking them: If the marxists wish to eventually smash the state as most of us do, yet also want the economy to be centrally planned with "free" access to everything, who will centrally plan everything if not the state? Will everyone vote on where resources are allocated? If so, wouldn't that just basically be Anacho-capitalism.
Another question: How does a system move from state-socialism and into anarcho-communism? What is the supposed process for this?
And yet another question: it seems like they believe that once the state is no more, communism will flourish naturally. Ancaps believe that once the state is no more, capitalism will flourish naturally. It seems that, for the time being, our interests are the same - get rid of the state. Why not join forces and see who is right once the state is gone?
just food for thought.
"If men are not angels, then who shall run the state?"
slaughter and distribute to communist feral cats.
just food for cats
on another note, why does a communist website have a donate button, i thought communism was about abolishing currency?
THE STATE IS ABOLISHED.
WE WILL HANG THE CAPITALISTS FOR THEIR CRIMES.
Is the state really abolished?
“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence.""The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”
http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.org
I forget how to embed videos but this is a good theme song for this thread:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0ddOmzQlgY
One of the most hilarious threads I've recently read.
Experience has taught us what happens after a Socialist revolution: they get stuck forever in the "Proletarian dictatorship" phase. Cuba is still in that phase, 53 years later, and it seems the Castro brothers and their cronies are not exactly willing to help the final phase of Socialism come about. The Soviet Union was still a "Proletarian dictatorship" when it came apart like one of their cars.
The truth is that Marx made no provision about how the transition was to come about. In his works it appears he believed "Natural Communism" would just spontaneously pop up one day after either the Proletarian revolution or the inevitable collapse of the Capitalist system. Socialist and Communist writers and thinkers who followed him seemed to be just as clueless about this process: it was "just natural", hence it would come about one day. Not much difference from any religion promising Heaven on Earth in a distant future in short.
Under the influence of Lenin and Trotzky (sadly two of the most influential thinkers of the XX century), Socialist thought seemed to shift away from its roots and to focus on the "Proletarian Revolution" alone. After them you hear very little in mainstream Socialist thought about Anarco-Socialism (in fact Anarco-Socialists seem to have mostly split away from "mainstream" Socialism). Che Guevara's famous phrase "Revolution is not an apple that falls from the tree when it's ripe: you have to make it fall" was the final nail in the coffin of the old XIX century Socialism: the shift went from believing in an inevitable (and mostly peaceful) evolution of the human society into thinking only a violent revolution followed by a brutal dictatorship aimed at eliminating the "indesiderable" elements of society could bring about Socialism.
They don't call the XX century "the century of the bloody-minded professors" for nothing...
capitalists will be hit in the head with the iron fist, it if does not kill them, it could leave them brain damaged, then they would fit right in with the communists.
One thing I've realized from studying Marxism is that its semantics tend to be quite different from ours. For example, Marxism defines "the state" as something like "the coercive apparatus used by one class to dominate the other(s)". By that definition, a classless society is necessarily a stateless society. That doesn't mean, however, that there won't be an administrative apparatus for managing the entire society.
As I see it (and I'm not endorsing this, by the way), the best chance for a classless society to arise would be if the proletariat seized the means of production from the capitalists en masse. In so doing, the proletariat would abolish itself and the capitalists as classes, thus ushering in the classless society. Then presumably the society would organize the means of production at higher levels, etc.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Autolykos-
Isnt an administrative apparatus, a social class in and of itself?
Not necessarily. The libertarian socialist idea of an administrative apparatus is one that consists of delegates that are democratically elected and (importantly) subject to recall at any time.
our current government is democraticly elected and subject to recall at any time. unless you mean each government worker, that's a lot of people to vote on if people have to vote on millions of people.
I would say so.
The communist abolition of the State amounts to renaming it. Likewise, they abolish slavery by calling it freedom. Quite a feat!
That whole site is incredibly creepy >_> It's like reading the communist Screwtape Letters or something.