ziq

Reply to clowns by lastfutures

ziq wrote (edited )

it's like the whole fucking world is high on hierarchy and can't see how corroded their braincells have become

6

ziq OP wrote

you're forcing people into your capitalistic work-based industrial culture and pretending everyone lives like you live

Stalin did the same thing and deprived indigenous nomadic herders of their ancestral lands, declaring them all part of the working class, leading to millions of them starving to death

6

ziq wrote

What is FIRE?

Save up and bug out. Buy land and create a self sustaining homestead somewhere remote enough to not attract the state's attention. Learn everything you need to know to survive without police, supermarkets and pharmacies.

7

ziq OP wrote (edited )

When talking about indigenous cultures your European class system doesn't apply. It typically completely excludes indigenous people, especially hunter gatherers.

The only people who have abolished work are indigenous hunter gatherers who have no use for it and constantly have to reject it every generation as an endless stream of colonizers try to force it on them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadza_people

They escape the schools, factories and farms they're forced into and go back to the land. Workers have nowhere to escape because work and materialism is all they know.

Workers don't abolish work, they climb the work hierarchy and then exploit everyone below them.

Creating work doesn't abolish work.

Creating class doesn't abolish class.

Creating capitalism doesn't abolish capitalism.

Creating states doesn't abolish states.

Creating authority doesn't abolish authority.

7

ziq OP wrote

Only workers can abolish work

Why? Workers have never in history abolished work, rather once they've been assimilated into the system, they have a vested interest in proliferating the system and maintaining it at all costs, despite its global carnage. This is the same logic that gave us the "we need to create capitalism to achieve communism" scam.

3

ziq wrote

A democratic entity that decided to cast out the anarchists while they weren't even present at the meeting? That was a democratic action? Marxists really are walking doublespeak vectors.

Since Bakunin and co were forced out due to their opposition to the state, you have no leg to stand on when claiming Marx had a different ("neutral") definition of states than everyone else in the world. Using your obtuse doublespeak definition, self governing communes would 100% qualify as "neutral states that work for every class", so Marx obviously wanted nothing to do with "neutral states" and in fact fully supported the actual states that he cast the anarchists out for opposing. He opposed self government and supported state rule. That was the whole reason they were expelled. Not because he has a different definition of "state" than the anarchists - he knew exactly what the anarchists were against and what he supported.

8

ziq wrote

So when Marx expels people for supporting self-governing workplaces and communes instead of states, you support that, right? Is it "neutral" to throw a spiteful tantrum and exile people for supporting self government? Is self government somehow not "neutral" but states are? And if the state is so "neutral" why did Marx refuse to entertain the idea of self governing communes because he decided they conflicted with his "neutral" concept of states?

6

ziq wrote

if he really wanted to abolish the current state of things he probably shouldn't have argued so strongly to uphold states, even going as far as to expel the anarchists from the International (in Bakunin's absence - he wasn't even in the country at the time) for desiring federations of self-governing workplaces and communes instead of states. Someone who would be that hell-bent on preserving state has no business claiming to want to abolish the system.

6

ziq wrote

yeah but I'm moving away from the 'struggle' language since it implies a deliberate suffering and piousness and depriving of happiness until some far-off material accomplishment has been achieved. I say '"unending strive for autonomy and self-determination" now instead of struggle.

12