Why would OP be banned for that? That’s what Marx literally stated. Marxists and Anarchists have different views on what the state is though, and thus both how to get rid of it and the final structure, so trying to claim Marx was using the Anarchist definition of the state to try to take the stance that Marx was an advocate for decentralized cooperatives and communes as a solution is wrong, if that was your implication.
Marxists see the state as an implementation of class oppression, Anarchists see it as a tool of hierarchy. As a consequence, Marxists see Communism as a fully publicly owned and planned, democratic government, while Anarchists want decentralized networks of Communes. For Marxists, the Anarchist solution retains class distinctions as each commune only has internal ownership and thus class is retained, while for Anarchists the Marxist solution retains the state as it retains hierarchy.
This struggle over analysis drives the major distinctions between each major school of Leftist thought. That doesn’t mean we do not share a common anti-capitalist and anti-Imperialist struggle, but it does mean the strategies and ends are different. If it was simply a question of strategy and timeline specifically, there would not be as much friction outside of explicitly non-sectarian spaces.
Lemmy.ml is run by MLs for the most part, so even if this isn’t an explicitly Communist instance there is Communist sympathy. The user you are replying to takes issue with that.
Nonsense, I’m a communist. I love it when people want to create a society where the workers own the means of production. I think you’ve made a false equivalence to reach that conclusion about me.
I’m using Communist to refer to what most people understand as Communist. I’m sure you have your own opinions on what that constitutes and how, but they are definitely not the standard or traditional readings of Marxist Communism.
Yeah, those are the two things you made a false equivalence between. Communism and Marxist Communism. If you think Marxism is the only kind of communism, you won’t be able to acknowledge anarcho-communists. That’s probably why a lot of people say you don’t respect anarchists.
I don’t assume Anarcho-Communism isn’t a form of Communism, but I do find it more intuitive to say Communism for Marxism, and Anarchism for Anarchism, as that’s what occupies most people’s minds. I do respect Anarchists, actually, I don’t know what you mean by saying a “lot of people say I don’t respect Anarchists.”
Well you said I had an issue with communism. Knowing I’m an anarchist, that’s very misleading. Your intuitive language is causing you to disrespect anarcho-communism, you should change it.
I feel that this is just being disingenuous, but I’ll keep your suggestion in mind. You appear to have issues with Marxism, then, or at least the Marxist conception of Communism, and that’s why you made your original comment, or appears to be why.
Further still, I don’t know what you mean by saying a “lot of people say I don’t respect Anarchists.” Mind elaborating?
Yes, I know communism is stateless. You shouldn’t be so willing to think other people don’t know what they’re talking about. You should be more charitable.
Their belief is that Marxists are hypocritical for wanting public ownership of property and believing a government necessary for that, as they are of the belief that government and the state are the same for Marx, and rather than the “Administration of Things” that Engels speaks of, there would be a structure closer to Anarchism.
I’m not really saying much of anything beyond that you have a bone to pick with the mods, and that is the clearest explanation for why you made your original comment. I’m not trying to reduce you to anything, just draw on a similar situation from a few weeks ago.
I don’t care that you have only a flimsy grasp of Marxism at best, or are a bad faith troll, we get those all the time. You’re not even fun just repetitive and boring. I would ban you just for being a smug little shit.
It is, pretty much every communist including ML’s here fully accept and support the notion that communism at the end is going to be stateless, as the state itself would become unnecessary. The differences come from the means which this end would be achieved.
I do feel that that wording can cause confusion. Marxists and Anarchists have a different view of what the state even is to begin with, and thus very different end goals. Marxists see the state as an implementation of class oppression, Anarchists see it as a tool of hierarchy.
As a consequence, Marxists see Communism as a fully publicly owned and planned, democratic government, while Anarchists want decentralized networks of Communes. For Marxists, the Anarchist solution retains class distinctions as each commune only has internal ownership and thus class is retained, while for Anarchists the Marxist solution retains the state as it retains hierarchy.
This struggle over analysis drives the major distinctions between each major school of Leftist thought. That doesn’t mean we do not share a common anti-capitalist and anti-Imperialist struggle, but it does mean the strategies and ends are different. If it was simply a question of strategy and timeline specifically, there would not be as much friction outside of explicitly non-sectarian spaces.
The end? No, no, no. The point where the state is abolished is the beginning. We don’t pack up and go home after we abolish the state. We live in the world we created. Everything before the state is abolished is preamble.
Yes, that’s implicit - you build something in order to use/live in it. The end I was talking about was referring to the end of the gradual transformation from capitalism to communism, it’s not an instant process.
OP is gonna get banned by the admins for implying communism is stateless
Why would OP be banned for that? That’s what Marx literally stated. Marxists and Anarchists have different views on what the state is though, and thus both how to get rid of it and the final structure, so trying to claim Marx was using the Anarchist definition of the state to try to take the stance that Marx was an advocate for decentralized cooperatives and communes as a solution is wrong, if that was your implication.
Marxists see the state as an implementation of class oppression, Anarchists see it as a tool of hierarchy. As a consequence, Marxists see Communism as a fully publicly owned and planned, democratic government, while Anarchists want decentralized networks of Communes. For Marxists, the Anarchist solution retains class distinctions as each commune only has internal ownership and thus class is retained, while for Anarchists the Marxist solution retains the state as it retains hierarchy.
This struggle over analysis drives the major distinctions between each major school of Leftist thought. That doesn’t mean we do not share a common anti-capitalist and anti-Imperialist struggle, but it does mean the strategies and ends are different. If it was simply a question of strategy and timeline specifically, there would not be as much friction outside of explicitly non-sectarian spaces.
deleted by creator
Lemmy.ml is run by MLs for the most part, so even if this isn’t an explicitly Communist instance there is Communist sympathy. The user you are replying to takes issue with that.
Ahh good ol cowbee :) i gotta recall my calm… leavin the rest to you mate
🫡
Nonsense, I’m a communist. I love it when people want to create a society where the workers own the means of production. I think you’ve made a false equivalence to reach that conclusion about me.
Did you switch from anarchism to communism in the last month? https://reddthat.com/post/36317630
No, I’ve been an anarcho-communist for years.
I’m using Communist to refer to what most people understand as Communist. I’m sure you have your own opinions on what that constitutes and how, but they are definitely not the standard or traditional readings of Marxist Communism.
Yeah, those are the two things you made a false equivalence between. Communism and Marxist Communism. If you think Marxism is the only kind of communism, you won’t be able to acknowledge anarcho-communists. That’s probably why a lot of people say you don’t respect anarchists.
I don’t assume Anarcho-Communism isn’t a form of Communism, but I do find it more intuitive to say Communism for Marxism, and Anarchism for Anarchism, as that’s what occupies most people’s minds. I do respect Anarchists, actually, I don’t know what you mean by saying a “lot of people say I don’t respect Anarchists.”
Well you said I had an issue with communism. Knowing I’m an anarchist, that’s very misleading. Your intuitive language is causing you to disrespect anarcho-communism, you should change it.
I feel that this is just being disingenuous, but I’ll keep your suggestion in mind. You appear to have issues with Marxism, then, or at least the Marxist conception of Communism, and that’s why you made your original comment, or appears to be why.
Further still, I don’t know what you mean by saying a “lot of people say I don’t respect Anarchists.” Mind elaborating?
You know Marx said this right? Like that’s the end goal.
Yes, I know communism is stateless. You shouldn’t be so willing to think other people don’t know what they’re talking about. You should be more charitable.
So why would they get banned? I don’t understand
They are a troll, likely again trying to get banned and make a post about Lemmy.ml moderator “hypocricy.”
Their belief is that Marxists are hypocritical for wanting public ownership of property and believing a government necessary for that, as they are of the belief that government and the state are the same for Marx, and rather than the “Administration of Things” that Engels speaks of, there would be a structure closer to Anarchism.
I’m aware they’re at least somewhat disingenuous. I’m trying to get them to spell out their beliefs and assumptions despite that.
Gotcha, keep it up, comrade 🫡
So you’re saying if the admins ban me, they’d be giving me exactly what I want, and therefore they shouldn’t?
I’m okay with you believing that. Even if you are choosing to reduce my entire personality to one event, weeks ago, which I’d mostly forgotten.
I’m not really saying much of anything beyond that you have a bone to pick with the mods, and that is the clearest explanation for why you made your original comment. I’m not trying to reduce you to anything, just draw on a similar situation from a few weeks ago.
The mods have never treated me unfairly, I have no problem with them.
I don’t care that you have only a flimsy grasp of Marxism at best, or are a bad faith troll, we get those all the time. You’re not even fun just repetitive and boring. I would ban you just for being a smug little shit.
Mods or admins, doesn’t make too much of a difference, your issue I presume is with the people running Lemmy.ml.
It is, pretty much every communist including ML’s here fully accept and support the notion that communism at the end is going to be stateless, as the state itself would become unnecessary. The differences come from the means which this end would be achieved.
I do feel that that wording can cause confusion. Marxists and Anarchists have a different view of what the state even is to begin with, and thus very different end goals. Marxists see the state as an implementation of class oppression, Anarchists see it as a tool of hierarchy.
As a consequence, Marxists see Communism as a fully publicly owned and planned, democratic government, while Anarchists want decentralized networks of Communes. For Marxists, the Anarchist solution retains class distinctions as each commune only has internal ownership and thus class is retained, while for Anarchists the Marxist solution retains the state as it retains hierarchy.
This struggle over analysis drives the major distinctions between each major school of Leftist thought. That doesn’t mean we do not share a common anti-capitalist and anti-Imperialist struggle, but it does mean the strategies and ends are different. If it was simply a question of strategy and timeline specifically, there would not be as much friction outside of explicitly non-sectarian spaces.
The end? No, no, no. The point where the state is abolished is the beginning. We don’t pack up and go home after we abolish the state. We live in the world we created. Everything before the state is abolished is preamble.
Yes, that’s implicit - you build something in order to use/live in it. The end I was talking about was referring to the end of the gradual transformation from capitalism to communism, it’s not an instant process.