Comment on Funny, those guys don't usually agree on that much

• Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  They probably read 2 words that they don’t like.

  I like the idealism in communism and I have been thinking about how to implement communism without very authoritarian structures, and the anarchist way seems to be the only way, but I don’t see how it would be able to sustain our current lifestyle and amount of people. Exploitation of dependencies without authoritarian structures seems unavoidable to me and avoiding dependencies would probably require that people provide themselves with the resources ; which requires more labor and resources. As of right now, I don’t see a flawless system. (that includes capitalism)

  So personally I think, saying that the other people have a bad systemic insight in the context of any general ideology is ungranted.

  source

  • Cowbee@lemmy.ml ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    At what point does a structure become authoritarian? There are numerous Anarchist and Marxist propositions for how to structure a Socialist and eventually Communist, so if there’s a definitive cutoff point for you you can find something to research.

    What leftist theory have you read? Not as a “read more theory!” Snark, but more so I can give recs based on your answer to the authoritarian question posed in the last question.

    source

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Honestly I am not well-read on leftist theory as in formal education. I look into things that I have encountered and think for myself. I would appreciate new ideas and things to look into.

      I appreciate the call out on my vagueness in regards of authoritarian structures. Thanks for that.

      It isn’t as much a concrete point like “having a police”, but rather the human nature. I see a lot of protective behavior in people. The idea of communism is a sacrificing one in the sense that you give some of yours to get more for everyone. As a system will teach people within the system that the system is good. It is expected that people will be generally protective of the system. So sacrificing some freedoms for the protection of the system seems like a very normal evolution of those ideals. And you don’t need to worry as the system is good which is why you are protecting it. So over time, just like under any hierarchical system, the power will move towards the “core” of the system. Under capitalism the wealthy and under communism the state. Under communism, protecting the system will have a strong hand and will move the power to the “core”. The “core” is the state. the system and the state are extremely similar. So the state will behave as if an Attack on them is an Attack on the system. Justifying additional force and moving power into the core. Under somewhat authoritarian capitalism, we can observe that behavior quite clearly. But the state and the core isn’t as similar and an “attack” on the “core” isn’t an Attack on the state. Creating the shit that we can observe today under capitalism. Where the state are corrupted by the core while pretending to not be and fighting against the elements of the core that haven’t paid them. In communism, the power goes to the state and the state happily accepts it, turning it more and more authoritarian over time.

      So from my pov, authoritarian Systems are an issue but are also seemingly required to protect the system and it’s people. Capitalism sucks as it kinda assume hierarchy and “sneaks” exploitation in. But a authoritarian state acts a little bit as a counter force to the “core”. (While a full on authoritarian state will of course take control over the “core”) While any liberal state, enables the “core” to move more power to itself quicker. Communism is much better in regards of assuming hierarchy as it doesn’t. But an even slightly authoritarian state with communism places the “core” and the state together as a unite without a real counter force and will eventually be very authoritarian. An liberal communistic System would avoid hierarchy and by that protect itself from placing the “core” in the hands of the state, but it would live itself vulnerable by “small” actors trying to build an hierarchy as people generally like to do, and enables “small” local exploitation.

      I just don’t see a way for any of them to not fail. Currently I believe that the violence of the public is the only way to reset the failing systems. That violence is just usually a little late and not just, fair or merciful. Leading to a lot of unjust pain and suffering.

      I don’t see how to escape this shit.

      Please call me out on my shit take. Thanks.

      source

      • Cowbee@lemmy.ml ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I think you have done a lot of thinking, but haven’t really engaged much with Marxism or Anarchism with regards to philisophy.

        For Marxism, check out Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels.

        For Anarchism, The Conquest of Bread by Kropotkin is good.

        The “Human Nature” issue is one that every leftist movement has had to engage with and “solve.”

        source

        • -> View More Comments