Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Majrelende wrote (edited )

Primitive communism, class structure

I'm currently reading about something like that in Clastres's *Society Against the State--how "primitive" communist societies prevented class structures from forming by preventing accumulation of power.

In many such societies, the leaders (such as chiefs) cannot accumulate power, because the little power they are granted is on the grounds that they give what they have, when it is asked of them. Thus, accumulation of material wealth cannot be simultaneous with power, which is the origin of class; other people will not follow you unless you are poor.

This is like the supposed oppression of the bourgeoisie: it is a constant destroyer of class structure. If communism is happening, then the people have to "oppress" their leaders, whoever they are, lest even one is tempted to form a class structure.

The ruling class is not a set of people; it is rule, it is synonymous with the state. Whoever leads and oppresses, is said to rule; whoever rules, is the ruling class. Communists must do away with the ruling class; they thus must do away entirely with the concentration of power.

How, then, is communism not anarchism?

Preconditions for anarchy/communism

In the olden days of communism, there was long distance trade, but overall people existed in tightly knit bands or villages. When cities were formed, with kings and priests and so on, these village societies were disrupted and replaced with the city, the first form of mass society wherein you do not know the people around you personally. This trend has only continued through to the present day, as even friendships and family relationships are dissolving, or being commodified, or transferred to public or semi-public relationships through social media.

People despise those who control them. Every schoolchild gets a feeling of excitement when the teacher leaves the room: we are all born wanting not to be oppressed. However, in a mass society where people's lives are ultimately controlled by those they do not personally know, there can be no personal social consequences for being an asshole and accumulating power. And in addition, the powerful (currently, the capitalist class) are thus able to recruit cronies to manage and enforce their system on everyone else, and milk the working classes' labour in the process.

I think the last hope for communism is the gradual collapse of mass society through disasters and destruction of infrastructure caused by global warming, making friends, and taking control of our own lives in our own regions. We should utilize the weakening of the state in order to attack and create partially self-sufficient, free communist village societies. Aiming for anything larger is foolishness, and will lead not to communism but to an evolved form of capitalist tyranny.