Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

5

zod wrote

The government can be shrunken down to managable size. With anarchists in office that shrink military budgets it would be easier for us to control the state, not the other way around. It would take decades of campaigning and reform but I see it as feasible.

3

pstmod wrote

He's in the wrong sub lol. It happens. I'm sure someone there will talk him some sense.

Hes an ancap on the border on an-com which is closer to what we want then an-cap. An cap seems antithetical to me but maybe I misunderstand it, to me it just seems to be fringe libertarians who don't want to be called libertarians and doesn't seem to have much to do with anarchism and an-com because there's certain things involved like government and heirarchy albeit supposedly less then now.

If he just took the step of dissolving the government after to have society be formed around small non hierarchical egalitarian social groups then we would be getting somewhere at least but alas pure anarchic thought says that in such a situation the government would never give up power.

Now that I think about it, ancom is kind of like an oxymoron too in a similar way for a hardcore anarchist no? Isn't communism and anarchy endgame very similar? Its just a question of how to get there right? Thats the big difference between the two. Isn't the historic struggle between anarchists and communists based on the idea that anarchists believe the government would never give up power? In communism the state takes control, gets rid of the rich, distributes the wealth, gives workers the full rights to what they create in an egalitarian way and sets up the small nonheirarchal groups and then the government dissolves itself right? Anarchists say that would never work for many reasons, that we have to dissolve the government and the corporation and the rich all at the same time and the people have to organize themselves. So what happens when you combine the two? Okay im confusing myself at this point Ill stop.

3

dele_ted wrote

"Libertarian Socialist".

That word, Libertarian, has completely changed its meaning. I really despise it now, although it is a beautiful word that originally was pretty much synonymous with anarchism. It's turned into nothing more than a holier-than-thou way to say liberal.

4

selver wrote (edited )

Libertarian socialist is always code for anarchism minus all the cool shit. Nothing but Bookchin, Chomsky, and democracy usually.

2

zombie_berkman wrote (edited )

Lolwut alsoim gld that the us cake walked in Vietnam oh wait