this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2026
163 points (96.0% liked)
Memes
4812 readers
60 users here now
Good memes, bad memes, unite towards a united front.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
IDK how Western anarchists think anything will be built. Are people supposed to just spontaneously self-organize to build solarpunk high speed rail?
the person in the commune who likes to build high-speed rail will do it in exchange for produce from the person who likes gardening. I'm not joking.
Anarchists don't seem to put much thought into how their ideas will be translated into reality. The most complex organization they can envision is basically a street gang that paves roads instead of dealing drugs. As based as it sounds it's clearly inefficient yet anarchists seem more interested in vibes and less interested in results.
as long as no one is telling them what to do, that is the most morally important aspect i've come to find
This applies to just about any left wing organizing effort, at least in Eastern Europe.
All of them will have been doing some real praxis. Either it's theory, organizing protests, running food kitchens, other sort of mutual-aid etc.
Each of them wants to define what Marxism really is, assuming they even get that far to read marx and maybe whole 5 people here. Each year they throw more books at me and I have entertained them and respectably read their books.
Have they read my recommendations? No. They'd rather go debate with a liberal. Our governments have been stealing money from pension funds, medical funds, they've been stealing and plundering while we do nothing about it.
And I have never seen a leftist group here try to do anything to secure those funds instead. They deal with the consequences of consequences, but never take it a step further. Just like how they will blame USSR for collaborating with Nazi's but ignore the fact that Western allies pushed them into that position.
Thus I have come to my conclusion, after years of both practical experience (real world interactions) and theory, they have conditioned us into what's known and Splitting in psychology, we have Extremes, but we don't have that much Radicals.
The difference between a Radical and Extremist mindset is that they are both willing to make huge amounts of sacrifices, but one of them is grounded in reality while the other is metaphysical. A radical can shake hands with their enemy and then come out of there uncompromised. An extremist will kill all hostages to save a few.
Anarchists being the left version of libertarians is a hill I will die on.
They do love to call themselves left-libertarians.
Still the ideology of both those isn't much more complex than : "big gov bad, no rules no masters no toilet paper"
Libertarian literally was just the euphemism for anarchist when calling yourself the later could get you arrested.
It was intentionally reclaimed when it fell into obscurity by i want to say Rothbard I think who was angry liberal meant a social progressive and not what we now think a libertarian is.
I thought libertarianism originally was 1700s rich kids trying to find an ideological excuse to give their chamber maid syphilis.
That's being a Libertine
I stand corrected, though I do see some similarities.
Honestly, there was not much to coopt. Rightists just looked at the contradictions inherent in anarchism and deemed them awesome instead of a good reason to rethink this anarchism thingy.
Left-wing Libertarians/Libertarian Socialists are pretty much indistinguishable from Anarchists.
Anarkids: Let's dismantle the state and return to small localized productions instead of large industrialized labor.
Disabled people, the elderly, people who live in remote rural regions with insufficient arable land: 😕
And gifts!
Here have a free hip replacement!
I'm the commune orthopaedic surgeon this week. I make those decisions by community vote.
I'm not an anarchist, but a lot of people here are misrepresenting anarchism. Anarchists don't reject coordination or planning, only hierarchical state control. Large infrastructure would be built by federated councils, unions, and communes, with common plans and technical bodies coordinated by accountable, recallable delegates. Central coordination without a state hierarchy is entirely possible.
My disagreement with anarchism is different: I think only a state with a strong coercive apparatus can survive sustained imperial pressure and capitalist encirclement.
Its not a state, its a insert extremely convoluted term that does everything a state does
In fairness, a lot of socialist theory has a distinction between a "state" and a "government". The former is the repressive apparatus (police, army and ideological state aparatuses) and the latter consists of the civilian administration which deals with centralised organisation of labor/economy. This is why marx could describe a "stateless society" as developed-communism.
But in that case we again land on square one problem of pushing the communism button instantly.
Yeah. I'm an ML
Even the non-repressive function of states need hierarchies. All administration needs specialists, managers, organization.
Think of a hospital, or a large-scale engineering project. There is no conceivable way these could be run without hierarchies and centralized control.
Oh yeah the hierarchy stuff has always been out of control with anarchists. But anarchism itself is just stateless society. The rest, anarchists disagree on heavily.
And if inevitably the projects reach outside of the commune line into another commune line, how would the intercommunal council be called lol. At what point do you just have a state without calling it a state?