Listen, Marxist!

anarchism.pageabode.com/anarcho/on-the-bolshevik-myth

"In 1793 the provinces starved the large towns, and killed the Revolution. And yet it is a known fact that the production of grain in France during 1792–93 had not diminished; indeed the evidence goes to show that it had increased. But after having taken possession of the manorial lands, after having reaped a harvest from them, the peasants would not part with their grain for paper-money. They withheld their produce, waiting for a rise in the price, or the introduction of gold. The most rigorous measures of the National Convention were without avail, and even the fear of death failed to break up the ring, or force its members to sell their corn. For it is matter of history that the commissaries of the Convention did not scruple to guillotine those who withheld their grain from the market, and pitilessly executed those who speculated in foodstuffs. All the same, the corn was not forthcoming, and the townsfolk suffered from famine.

But what was offered to the husbandman in exchange for his hard toil? Assignats, scraps of paper decreasing in value every day, promises of payment, which could not be kept. A forty-pound note would not purchase a pair of boots, and the peasant, very naturally, was not anxious to barter a year’s toil for a piece of paper with which he could not even buy a shirt.

As long as worthless paper money — whether called assignats or labour notes — is offered to the peasant-producer it will always be the same. The country will withhold its produce, and the towns will suffer want, even if the recalcitrant peasants are guillotined as before.

We must offer to the peasant in exchange for his toil not worthless paper money, but the manufactured articles of which he stands in immediate need. He lacks the proper implements to till the land, clothes to protect him properly from the inclemencies of the weather, lamps and oil to replace his miserable rushlight or tallow dip, spades, rakes, ploughs. All these things, under present conditions, the peasant is forced to do without, not because he does not feel the need of them, but because, in his life of struggle and privation, a thousand useful things are beyond his reach; because he has no money to buy them.

Let the town apply itself, without loss of time, to manufacturing all that the peasant needs, instead of fashioning gewgaws for the wives of rich citizens. Let the sewing machines of Paris be set to work on clothes for the country-folk: workaday clothes and clothes for Sunday too, instead of costly evening dresses. Let the factories and foundries turn out agricultural implements, spades, rakes, and such-like, instead of waiting till the English send them to France, in exchange for French wines!

Let the towns send no more inspectors to the villages, wearing red, blue, or rainbow-coloured scarves, to convey to the peasant orders to take his produce to this place or that, but let them send friendly embassies to the country-folk and bid them in brotherly fashion: “Bring us your produce, and take from our stores and shops all the manufactured articles you please.” Then provisions would pour in on every side. The peasant would only withhold what he needed for his own use, and would send the rest into the cities, feeling for the frst time in the course of history that these toiling townsfolk were his comrades — his brethren, and not his exploiters."

Kropotkin, conquest of bed

I'll conquer u in bed bby ;^🍀🍀🍀))

Bookchin being narrow-minded and utopian again, as much as I like him.

enjoy your cybernation

...

lel

davidharvey.org/2015/06/listen-anarchist-by-david-harvey/

Anarchists hate him.jpg

Anarchists, everyone.

That's a shit tier retort that doesn't address the main criticisms raised, and you know it.
also
How dumb can one be?

Demonstrate so
Literally nothing wrong with it

dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bookchin/ghost2.html

Do you understand what the main criticism raised in the article titled "the makhno myth"?

Do you?
: ^ )

Yes, I do. It's basically saying that the Anarchist FAQ (et al.) uses very very few credible historical sources in order to portray Makhno as a positive character. What is ridiculous is that it takes Makhno's diary as self-evident truth and the ultimate authority on the issue. This claim, originally proven by this book, is about historiography and not about >muh bolshevik vs. anarchist meme.

If you understand so far you can see how ridiculous it is when they try to defend their position referencing again the same sources here

As to why anarchist faq is dumb ass shit: do I really need to point it out? This "TL;DR, self-help, X for dummies, FAQ" culture is typical of late stage capitalism is utter cancer. If you study your politics or history or philosophy on TL;DR sites you are a complete and hopeless imbecile.

Have you read it? Are you familiar with it? Iain McKay is a pretty prominent figure in anarchism and it's pretty comprehensive tbh. Of course it's biased and it shouldn't be anything to base your views off of even as an anarchist, but it's still a pretty good piece.

I don't read FAQs. I don't have questions that are frequently asked by others.

wow, you're unique. It's just a fucking title, man

I'm not saying it would be possible to organize the peasantry into communes. But how long would that last? What would happen to the cities?

Wouldn't*

You're a fucking dumbass, your literary elitism is a symptom of late stage capitalism.

It's not as if people in agrarian communes wouldn't need anything from a city. Industrial goods have their own value obviously

Care to explain?

Pretty self-explanatory. That was a shitty post

...

Ebin

Marxists, everyone

your entire ideology is reddit personified. Everyone in this thread needs to be gulag'd tbh

...

Except that's exactly what the soviets did, offer mechanical goods in exchange for foodstuffs and even then the fucking peasants hoarded. Pieces of shit would rather kill their livestock and destroy their property then hand it over during the worst of the post-October period.

...

fucking read you mong. all you goddamn SJWs are ruining my board

Funny how you're criticizing anarchists for relying on biased sources when that's all that the various flavors of marxism use, though it differs from flavor to flavor.

No

...

That's my point exactly

I wonder what anarchist flavor tastes like. I bet it tastes like starbucks coffee and disappointment

anarkiddies everybody

this is why markets exist

The book I posted looks through the Whites', Bolshevik's, and the anarchists sources and constantly contrasts them to speculate on the validity of each claim.

Here's an idea. Just read the fucking book. If you are so sure in Makhno's unquestionable heroism and excellence you really have nothing to lose, but fuck off if you think that you'll be taken seriously if your only source is a man's diary (a.k.a. "how I want to be remembered" - the genre).

The faces of anarchism.

Anarchist morality, everyone.

not an argument!

or maybe join them to farm the land together?

yes, like, totally, dude, everyone should like grow his or her own food, like, let's all leave the cities, and live in harmony with nature, maaan

pass the bong, will you?

READ THEORY YOU DEGENERATE

cheers

the point went right over your heads, you are simply forgetting how vital farmland work is and why, if you want to achieve other forms of industry and services you cannot forget it

my point is that if you think you should obtain some portion of the farmer surplus, you should exchange it in the market, you can offer him medicine, clothes, tractors and so on

Do you expect me to believe that people actually want to spend their time trading, bartering for their most basic necessities? Fuck that, I'd rather have a state doing shit for me.

any proof central planning is not going to end in a fucking disaster?

...

...

...

So, Darch is wrong because
(what does that even)
Truly horrible! History is one sided. Read Makhno's diary to get the full story. Burn everything else.

Terrible strawman. It's almost like you didn't even read the quote.

ad hominem

red herring

bump