Democratic Confederalism seems incredibly rad

Democratic Confederalism seems incredibly rad.

Does it have any base of support outside of Syrian Kurdistan? I don't know of any democratic confederalist groups besides the YPG and PKK

Go move there and impregnate a kurdish qt like all of the other anarchists that got tired of throwing bricks

Yes, there is a democratic confederalist movement in South Eastern Turkey in the Kurdish populated areas, albeit to a lesser degree. It has been repressed by Turkey pretty harshly though.

damn… is Kurdistan now full of half-Spanish and half-American kids?

No, they're busy fighting a war and do not allow people to come over in search of intimacy and whatnot

Every anarchist that stopped being a LARPer and went over there is probably just dead

according to ppg the ypg don't fuck

celibacy is enforced

This be true

Yeah no. You can't go back in time. You can see the tendency to centralize issues in almost every country in the world these days, as technology and communication progresses, Democratic Confederalism looks like it's stalling he progress of humanity. I'm all for representing regions instead of nation states but anarchist models of communalism must face the reality of post-liberal technocracy that we have to overtake with a vanguard, and not destroy.

It sure works for a bunch of US-backed sandniggers and their petty ethnic regional struggle but is useless and reactionary on a bigger scale.

Damn, cancel my tickets

and they said robots couldn't lead the revolution

If you wanted to fuck Kurdish girls you would have to wait for the war/your service to be over and find some. If you're European on the way home you could try to impress Kurd refugee girls by saying some shit in Kurdish and be like "hey you know I fought in Kurdistan".

Communalism > DemConFed tbh

I'm amused how Holla Forums falls for the kurdish qt meme.

You realize those girls are for the propaganda photos and are not actually fighting, right? The girls that actually do fight might look more like Brienne of Tarth

It's both very regressive

what do? I smoke *ahem* american spirits: periques

YPJ absolutely do fight and regularly get killed just like their male counterparts my man

I'd fuck Brienne of Tarth

I'm pretty sure you can have both.

nice nice

Back to reddit


Reading comprehension my dude


There's the Institute of Social Ecology that bookchin co-founded. The German Greens at their inception had a very similar program to bookchin's libertarian municipalism but gave it up to become a shitty socdem party.

At the beginning of the 19th century maybe
I didn't. Centralization has nothing to do with nation states per se. Something like Democratic Confederalism will regress towards a level even behind nation states
Being put into practice it will do so.

Capitalism was never an inevitability, progressing humans forward. Capitalism is and was a cancer that grew in the decaying social order of the time and has proceeded to grow and destroy since then.
Nation-States are the medium in which this centralization is taking place. You can't say the current centralization is a progressive thing without acknowledging the medium it's taking place in, and to acknowledge this is to acknowledge that nation-states are also progressive.
You call DemCon and Communalism "regressive" but fail to elaborate on what you mean by this, the mechanisms in place that lead to this regression, and how the current social order is somehow more "progressive".

Fucking step it up man

oh damn, the YPG is volcel?

Isn't the latter the continuation or concretization of the former? Bookchin wrote about confederalism and democratic confederations being the large units of libertarian municipalities, making up the libertarian socialist society of his.

Inter-communal administration is an unnecessary burden for central commodity allocation and maintaing infrastructure in a world where communication and administration exceeds geographical dimensions through digital networks. Decentralized planning has shown to be abhorrent in terms of its practicality in early Maoist China already and will, when put into practice on a supra-regional scale, the natural antagonist of the center.

Regions and communes should be integrated through either direct representation, or, when you ask leftcoms, through a bottom-up council structure into a centralized allocation structure. Post-Modern dynamics automatically crave for culmination into a central hub, Communalism or Democratic Confederalism would reset that process but can't change it. Even if you get through with a council of communes, rationalization would ultimately overthrow the very definition of Communalism. It's unnecessary and stems from a time where communication and administration was 2-dimensional by describing hierarchy in horizontal and vertical terms, to which Bookchin subscribed to.

It's regressive because it will eventually be a centrifugal, subversive threat to the vanguard of Marxism-Leninism.

I never said that. But I rather seize what we instead instead of hurling everybody back into the pre-industrial age…

that's the patrician option comrades

I don't see why I wouldn't support them since we can't be picky but I don't see their ideology as anything substantial and it is honestly more of a modus operandi of organisation rather than a progressive force.

Plus the fact that they are US-funded really rubs me the wrong way.

Being useful to the strategic interests of a capitalist power does not make a political faction intrinsically bad. Lenin was sent to Russia to serve the German Empire's interests in getting Russia out of the war - does that invalidate his actual ideals?

Well Democratic Confederalism and Neo-Zapatismo have a lot in common. IMO, it is the modern dual-state structure coming into play: a form of soviet democracy integrated into decentralised government acting parallel to the state. I think as the years go on, we will see more experiments like Rojava and they will continue to prove successful.

I can't speak to the problems with China, but I'm sure the terrible bureaucracy in place probably had a lot to do with it. Inter-communal administration is not a burden, but a necessity to truly empower the people and maintain a healthy politc. To hell with statecraft.
Confederation of municipalities is the method by which municipalities cooperate, and become interdependent upon one another. Your appeal to the current technological trends ignores the existence of decentralized meshnets, and ignores that the current technological trends are determined by the logic and idelogy of capitalist nation-states.
Marxism, not just M-L, is inherently flawed ideology based on a false historical narrative i.e. historical materialism. The only way to truly empower the people is through the process of developing a healthy politc, by which I mean creating informed and empowered citizenry. Not subject or taxpayer, but citizenry. The vanguard merely becomes an elite that manages society instead of society managing themselves.
This is just showcasing your ignorance of communalism, and the work of Bookchin and social ecology in general. Technology is not the enemy, and bookchin never suggested it was. Technology has the potential to emancipate society as much as it has the potential to enslave society. It depends merely on the society that technological progress is taking place in.