Do you make a distinction between state and government?
Other urls found in this thread:
Do you bother to read before making shit threads?
Communalists do, though whether they are anarchists is debatable.
As for anarchism, Bakunin expressed the typical view of its adherents in 1871 when he wrote that the new social order could be created “only through the development and organization of the nonpolitical or antipolitical social power of the working class in city and country,” thereby rejecting with characteristic inconsistency the very municipal politics which he sanctioned in Italy around the same year. Accordingly, anarchists have long regarded every government as a state and condemned it accordingly—a view that is a recipe for the elimination of any organized social life whatever. While the state is the instrument by which an oppressive and exploitative class regulates and coercively controls the behavior of an exploited class by a ruling class, a government—or better still, a polity—is an ensemble of institutions designed to deal with the problems of consociational life in an orderly and hopefully fair manner. Every institutionalized association that constitutes a system for handling public affairs—with or without the presence of a state—is necessarily a government. By contrast, every state, although necessarily a form of government, is a force for class repression and control. Annoying as it must seem to Marxists and anarchist alike, the cry for a constitution, for a responsible and a responsive government, and even for law or nomos has been clearly articulated—and committed to print!—by the oppressed for centuries against the capricious rule exercised by monarchs, nobles, and bureaucrats. The libertarian opposition to law, not to speak of government as such, has been as silly as the image of a snake swallowing its tail. What remains in the end is nothing but a retinal afterimage that has no existential reality. - Bookchin
Yes. A state holds the monopoly on force and exists to hold classes intact, a government is how the conditions in the society are altered. In anarchism you're going to have worker councils, that is a government, but a freer, efficient, more humane system then representative democracy because it substitutes this for a direct democracy or liquid democracy model. It's not mob rule, either. Some entry level anarchists may say they hate government but really what they mean is that they hate *the* government.
tbh I don't really care about whether there's a state or a government or what the difference is between them
I much prefer the umbrella term libertarian socialism, cause even a lot marxists are in favor of decentralized councilist democracy
MLs do have a point about anarchists who reject organization of any kind being complete idiots, it's important to make the distinction between sensible anarchists and autists
You mean make the distinction between social anarchists and lifestyle anarchists
sounds like sectarianism.
They are hands down the shittiest communists imaginable.
I'm fucking tired of punks, smashies, lifestylists and LARPers who give anarchism a bad name. The stereotypes around anarchos aren't made up.
The state is an abstract entity which in a democracy is supposed to represent the people; a government is the institution that serves the interest of the state mainly through its unique attribute of being the owner of the monopoly on the legitimate use of force and therefor coercion. Anarchists are against any coercive system therefor necessitating them to also be against governments, though ultimately governments cannot exist without a state.
That is not to say anarchists are against organization, but such an organization must be voluntary and non-coercive or it effectively becomes no different than a government serving the interests of whomever the state represents.
What do you mean? They are different things. Amerifats like to confuse the two but they are retarded.
There is literally nothing wrong with insurrection, illegalism, or post-left critiques. Build all you like but it doesn't matter unless you're negating shit.
I concur with this post.
These are actual political practices, lifestylism is what smashies do
there is no distinction all councils and delegations are a form of government. All voting, all representation all use of violence on behalf of abstract groups or concepts is a form of the State. If you organize a lynch mob to go attack someone for not wanting to share their girlfriend with the """"community""" you're creating a form of the state and you're a filthy Statist
sounds like sectarianism.
What we don't tell you is anarchists don't stand for anything. We literally just exist to fuck up trashcans.
Except for the fact that this bullshit alienates actual working class people and fills your movement with drug addicts, lifestylists, anarcho-liberals etc.
Like I said in , the stereotypes around anarchism aren't made up
It is the working class.
Why do you think the Zapitistas prohibited them?
what have bookchinfags done to us?
Who are you quoting?
im replying to everyone in this thread
Tradefag here, it really does. Manufacturing workers and mechanics (at least those around me) look at you guys and see mostly university or college level kids breaking stuff or LARPing against other college level kids and can't stand but get angry at you guys. Even the non-union guys would rather join a union then come near or respect an anarchist.
A good wayq also needs a sage
maybe you should focus on explaining those actions and showing that its not just college students (as if that matters more than their arguments) instead of blaming the anarchists.
that word has lost all meaning at this point
A lot of the people here care more about their families and general pay/lifestyle then what a bunch of younger people are doing. Anarchists are disconnected from the majority of the working class, especially those who work the means of production. Fighting a small (and it is small comparatively) group of "fascists" (who are really just alt-right larpers with nothing better to do) doesn't relate to factory workers because they sincerely don't like either group. Maybe a few are radical politically, but for the most part even the conservatives here think the alt-right is fucking retarded and and think of them as just skinhead 2.0. Most have seen this before and pay more attention to how they can organize union wise (where they have a voice) then some groups of people fighting in mostly over in cities over things that mostly don't concern them. It will when it hits near, but even then its just "wow, what a bunch of retards", talks of "do they even work", and how neither side even gets what its like working here. The people who get the most shit on in conversations are those who cause the most stir, if fascists do something stupid then their talked about and vice versa.
The main point is theirs no real relation, people work their ass off here, go home late, and turn on the TV or computer and see a bunch of people in black breaking stuff and people in weird "meme" garb shouting nonsensical stuff like "Praise Kek" at them. Don't expect people to explain how you present yourself, thats your job. Call them "classcucks" or whatever but no one is pushing fascist or anarchist thought here, its just work, talk to the guys, go to the bar after on weekends, and go home to the wife and kids (the people who matter to them).
Everyone fucking knows that there is zero class consciousness in almost all workers. People live out their lives aimlessly toiling for the bourgeoisie and are okay with it because they know they can't change shit, why get worked up about it, people who think otherwise are just [trust fund] kids who just don't understand real life. Do you think we don't know that most workers don't know/don't care about why things are the way they are? People are too tired and complacent to care let alone fight, and because they want to provide for their family (like everyone on Earth, shocking) and don't want to stir things up due to the fact that they are so utterly castrated and hold zero power in their workplace that they don't want to get fired, go broke, and commit triple murder-suicide when their family loses their home. Smashies and fashies are boring spectacle actors, that's true. What they do is pointless. But you know what sitting around the bar talking about the sport game and how stupid those damn kids are is? Pointless. If you're here, why don't you do something useful and slowly spoonfeed your fellow workers some Marxist ideas about work and the workplace, and encourage them to unionize? Sitting around calling antifa retarded is fun and all, for a minute, but doing something that might change people's lives directly, people you know, is worth your time too.
fighting fascists are just one part of what anarchists do. and its easy to say the alt right isn't a big deal AFTER they've been exposed and pushed back against. don't pretend as though if we just left it alone that it wouldn't continue to fester.
anarchists also organize workers unions (the IWW for fucks sake and they even show up with antifa), build squats/community gardens, set up primary care clinics (see greece and new orleans), book fairs to distribute propaganda and *explain* their ideas and how they can help working class people.
and being able to successfully organize armed resistance in places like chiapas.
We do unionize, and you must be really disconnected if you think people think all these things. Yes, stress is there and when things are really bad, bad thoughts crop up. But work is half on the job and half joking with your workers. You think people want to talk about Marxist thought all day or during drinking hours? Most political discussions are practical or hobby-like things that mostly effect us now, like how the economy is and what how our favorite sports team is doing. Community matters more to people here and relations between common people, even among different political beliefs (bare a few), matter more then an abstract movement. Its sad when I can listen to Leftcoms and actually hear between the armchair memes and Bordiga posting some actual understanding for the workers.
It probably wouldn't fester tbh, at least in the first world. Its mostly popular among young, disenfranchised, sexually frustrated males who blame "normies" for their position and make up a small portion of the population as they were (conjecture here) mostly the few kids in school who were "cast aside" and never found a real clique. If it did get big, it would just become commoditized, lifestyled, and absorbed into the market like the punks and skinhead were until a new non-normie group popped up. The movement is literally built on memes at this point, it getting cringy and stale to most people. Anarchists do some stuff and I'll give them credit to that, but I think you overestimating what impact they've had far currently. Most worker advocacy is done by either locally formed unions or huge national ones focused on particular industries that get stuff for the workers more often then anarchists do.
i assumed you wanted examples of non reformist unions considering you're on Holla Forums.
Not everyone here is an anarchist or ML.
No, I don't mean "We like to break stuff". I mean trashcans specifically. All anarchists only exist to topple over trashcans and only trashcans. NOTHING else matters.
Bad theory. Bad practice.