Wouldn't abolishing the state bring complete tecnological and cultural stagnation?

Wouldn't abolishing the state bring complete tecnological and cultural stagnation?
What if a imperialist military powerhouse decides to invade "your" lands?Do you guys honestly think that small communities would be able to stand against them?
Honest questions, I'm really trying to get along better with anarchists(muh left unity) but I have some severe problems understanding their views

Why would it?
We want to abolish the state, not the tanks

No

Why would it? Is your argument that without the state people would just sit around and stare at tv screens?

Then we're just as fucked as if a militaty power house decides to invade a small country like say Grenada. Communism can not be contained to small territories, it must be worldwide.

Why, because of lack of funding? You can distribute resources without a state ya know.
This is exactly why anarchism is supposed to be an internationalist movement fyi.

France was a state in 1940…they were still invaded by Germany. USSR the same thing.
Iraq was a state in 2003 with a very authoritarian dictator with no rebilions spawning to overthrow him. They were still invaded by the USA.

It's completely irrelevant if there's a state or not, if someone else wants to invade you, they will, nothing stops them.

I cant think of many big scientific advancements in the last decades that didnt had investment from a organized state, of course individuals contributed much to science, but you didnt saw Nazi Germany rise from a shithole to the biggest military power in the world without a state to push the advance, you didnt saw the Soviet Union rise as a world economic and military superpower without a strong state
Without a state many of the big scientific breakthroughs and advances of the last decade could not have happened, or at least its what I see based on history


Well, I didnt try to say that the existence of a state will make you never get attacked
What I tried to say was, without the backing of a professional military force, industry, natural resources and money of a organized state, what hopes do small bands of communities and tribes have against counter-revolutionary action, or imperialism?

Producing tanks requires an infrastructure that anarchists cannot maintain. I mean who the hell is going to "volunteer" at an explosives factory under anarchist system?

I actually have a very soft spot for anarchist communes, and one of my teenage dreams was to move to Christiania, Copenhagen and live over there to socialize, do gardening, paint street art and read books all day at a comfy squat, but at some point I got seriously disillusionized when I found out that these communes only exist at the mercy of capitalists, and will be destroyed at their whim by their mobs of right-wing reactionaries if that commune is getting in the way of their profits.

No but it would damage technological advancement tremendously. All the Anarkiddies who say otherwise have their heads up their ass.

Yes, within the context of a capitalist system where the majority of innovatione chased will be based on profit. The state takes the role of supporting capitalism by warding off technological stagnation caused by chasing profit, without the capitalist mode of production innovation will be driven by practical use or doing it because why not.

That assumes that for whatever reason these will abandon industry, military, and natural resoucres. Which quite frankly is absolutely retarded. We're still keeping factories, natural resources won't vanish with the state, and organization will still exist.

Whose going to volunteer to be a garbage man or fast foor server? We'll have automated most of the work and doing small amounts of "unpleasant" work will be part of living in society.


communism btfo

Never said that retard.
For the level of technological innovation that we have currently, a state that coordinates the work of researchers across territories and helps distribute the many resources they need to carry out their work is an absolute necessity.

t. P.h.D student

Ph.D*

Abolish the global state

There's no anime girl smug enough for this. We have technology that allows near instant communication across the globe and existing methods of allocating resources efficently yet for some reason we need a state to coordinate from above. Your desire for the state or the market to hold your hand is the mark of an impotent cuckold.


This but unironically

So, what about the USSR?You may like them or not, but they definitely werent capitalist

Of course that will not happen, but I can't see how is possible to keep an active military force and big industrial complexes without a solid hierarchy and a fucking lot of money, with public ownership, thats even more excellent

What the fuck, I meant even more excellent

Like what? What "existing methods" will function in the case of worldwide Anarchism that can permit international research projects to be carried out effectively?
Yes. We literally do. If it weren't for the state I can assure you certain technological wonders like the Internet, Commercial Airliners, and GPS still wouldn't have been developed.
Okay kiddo

They definitely were.

The state isn't just any kind of organization across society. A state implies class division.

Not necessarily. I think Cockshott's CyberSoc society is a state without class division.

That's because right now it's state or profit motive.

Not OP, but you're assuming that people would voluntary give up their money/time/labour on large infrastructure projects that don't benefit them directly.

...

Except if people want infrastructure then it does benefit them directly

They were, wage labor and commodity production still existed.

Why would any of that require class division?


Cybernetic planning and existing communication technology.

You sound like a christcuck. Those listed were created for military apilcations or have to be influenced by the state to ensure the market doesn't crash it because muh profits.

Sure thing utopian.

TIL…

Cybernetic planning is a top down system that literally requires a state to work you faggot
This is not an argument. The point still rests that if it weren't for the coordinative powers and resources of the state such research would never have been possible.

They were, wage labor and commodity production still existed. Socialism isn't when the goverment does something, it's the abolition of wage labor and commodity production.


No it literally isn't you literally retarded faggot. Literally decentralized communes can literally adapt the technology to literally preform literally the same tasks.

No it doesn't. The state was performing it's function in preserving capitalism, there is nothing to suggest that if it disappeared it would be impossible to create the internet or GPS or whatever future analoge would exist.

Literally literally literally lmao. Good luck getting a decentralized commune to adopt a system of resource distribution that would have to be effective throughout. You still don't realize that even in this scenario the managers of the planning system would literally literally be a kind of state.

Yeah sure. As if the fact that such research projects require the coordination of researchers and enterprises across vast amounts of territory to actually work isn't proof enough

A state isn't any type of organization you idiot. A planning system is not a state, a militia is not a state, Dom/sub is not a state. Literally literally literally, you market worshipping faggot.

It isn't, because that is in context of a capitalist system where creating or maintaining those thing would be unprofitable. We aren't going to stop communication and dissolve into isolated towns similar to fictional westerns after the state is disolved, we will still coordinate and there will be projects coordinated across territories. We don't need the market, the state, or god to force us into it.

Nice strawmen but the managers of the cybernetic planning system would still constitute a state because they would govern the distribution of resources throughout the country, making it an organized political organization with a muh privileged position in society, making it a state.

This has nothing to do with profit you brainlet Anarkiddie. It has to do with huge top down organizations that unite millions of people together to get them to efficiently coordinate with each other. Something that WOULD NOT EXIST under anarchism.

Yeah, in your entirely hypothetical imaginary anarchist society that has never existed before in history right? Very believable

It's what you're saying you retard. Planning isn't a state and the planners will not constitute a new class in communism.

Yes it does you market cucked moron, there will be nothing stopping cooperation between millions using communication in communism. The reason it needs the state to force it in capitalism is because under capitalism firms who control MoP are pursuing more profitable ventures like breakable iPhones or fidget spinners. And since under capitalism if you do not work you will die, most stemcucks who would otherwise be working on the next internet are instead designing useless shit to pay their bills. This would not be the case in communism, where projects would be pursued because it is in the collective intrests and scarce food or shelter isn't an issue.

Yes communism hasn't been reached yet, I assume muh hooman naytur is your next argument why it is impossible.

Yeah sure. Good job ignoring literally everything else I said there that proved you wrong.
Communication =/= cooperation, also good job ignoring the rest of my paragraph that proved what you said before otherwise here too.
You're really not getting this through your skull are you? I'm not saying that the state is allowing this research to take place where Capitalism wouldn't. I'm saying that it's thanks to the resources of the state that such research can happen at all.
Like I've said before this is besides the point. What I'm saying is that without the state such research could not take effectively place whether there be incentive or not.
No, but strawmanning again I see. Nice.

You haven't, saying "literally" doesn't literally make something true. Planners won't make a new class because they won't have material interests opposed to that of the non-planners. Neither would a worker's council or whatever scheme for managing production would be used in communism.

No, but that wasn't the point. Cooperation will happen because it is in self-interest, just as it is now except self-interest is no longer to make a wage or profit off the proletariat's labor depending on the class in question.

I didn't ignore your autism, I just didn't quote it you imbecile.

You don't have a point sharp enough to make it through wet paper, let alone some autist's skull. The state does not magically control the resources by being a state, it controls them through state enforced ownership which is coincidentally how private business manages to control it's resources. If you're here on Holla Forums I assume you're familiar with "seize the means of production"? In this likely case, why would you assume that the state's resources would not be seized along with the rest of property? That's a ridiculous notion, the state's MoP or resources will be seized as well, it isn't going to be destroyed because keeping the weapons or technology would be "authoritarian maaaan".

And that's retarded. Again, resources do not disappear with the state, we are going to seize them. With resources being seized and under common control, we will use them as we collectively see fit. In terms of coordinating and funding research the state is ultimately an employer paying wages. If we do not need private firms paying wages to grow food, build housing, or give us art then we will not need a "public firm" paying wages to ensure that there are well-maintained roads or supply what private firms wouldn't because it wasn't as profitable as a juice machine or new version of windows.

You admitted to communism being unbelievable and that's a strawman? You are aware that communism requires the absence of a state or did you not read Marx? If you don't think any research can be done without a state, then you must believe that communism entails technological stagnation, if not technological collaspe.

They definitely were.

It kind of sickens me when MLs, who supposedly share our goal for society (Communism and Anarchy are synonyms for a society that is stateless, classless, moneyless), will cowardly proclaim that humanity requires a state, i.e. authoritarianism, to function properly. So to your first point, I believe it would be quite the opposite. Why wouldn't you think that allowing people to selfactualize and to work according to their desires rather than profit or because they are commanded to do so would result in a greater development of technology? States are myopic and selfcentered. They seek only to perpetuate themselves. To your second point, a state isn't necessary to be able to defend oneself. It might make things more efficient if we had a fascist state that was able to react to invasion lightning fast. Is it worth it to sacrifice everything for the sake of security? We can have security and utopia at the same time.

conversation
this aint Holla Forums

...

He was right too btw. The Anarchist was strawmanning in almost every post

there are no rules to conversation period. stop being a faggot.

Debate =/= conversation you retard

"the debate" is in the end just a conversation you retard.

You're a retard and anticommunist, the argument that without a state technological progress would fail is an argument against communism predicated on the necessity of wage labor. Given half the board fantasizing about a $$$transitional stage$$$ of red capitalism it isn't surprising such idiocy is spewed here.