Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ziq wrote

I actually think that the concept can be radically interpreted in the favor of Anarchist praxis.

A "temporary' state..?

How should communities decide upon matters in the absence of democracy?

w/democracy

2

A_Lane OP wrote

I have not argued in favor of a transitional program if that's what you're suggesting.

1

A_Lane OP wrote (edited )

Rather than answer my question, you could always just call me a "tankie" and then send me a link to your wall of text which still does not address it. While this does include a critique of direct democracy, it does not offer an alternative. What do you mean by "self determination"?

1

ziq wrote (edited )

It does address it or I wouldn't have linked you to it. Now you're just asking me to repeat myself. Here:

"Instead of a large group laboring to make democracy work so they can agree on a course of action, it would be far more productive for smaller groups made up of people with shared interests to splinter off and co-operate to follow their own plans that require no compromise because their interests are already aligned."

I don't know how to make my perspective clearer than that.

you could always just call me a "tankie"

When did I call you a tankie? I just pointed out your argument was no different than the 'withering away of the state' promise.

2

A_Lane OP wrote

How are the smaller groups to come to decisions other than through participatory democracy? I wasn't necessarily arguing for what could be considered to be Platformism, I guess. I think that there ought to be a loosely affiliated set of freely associated societies that decide upon matters through participatory democracy. Like I said, I haven't quite parcelled this all out yet.

1

ziq wrote

How are the smaller groups to come to decisions

By talking to each other.

2

A_Lane OP wrote

That effectively seems to be exactly what I mean by participatory democracy, though.

1