I know this is a tankie instance so I didn’t downvote but I’m surprised again and again how ignorant tankies are about the concept of prefiguration or “unity of means and ends” or “building the new in the shell of the old” or what ever you want to call it. It’s not about the state vanishing over night but about building a dual power that will fight the authority of the state. It’s the same type of people who say anarchists can’t read that have no idea about actual anarchist theory. Do better. Leave this strawman behind. It never was true and didn’t age well.
Marxists aren’t ignorant of prefiguration, we agree with some of it, such as building dual power. We don’t agree that doing so erases the basis of class, and thus doesn’t also erase the basis od the state. Marxists in general take the opposite approach to solving class struggle, believing in collectivization of all production and distribution to suit the needs of all, rather than creating loosely organized communalist cells, and this is because of analysis of class struggle being different for Marxists (and I believe more correct).
Sorry, I was overgeneralizating. I wasn’t talking about Marxist Leninists or Marxists in general or all tankies but I encounter this attitude OP shows far too often. People read Engels’s On Authority and think they know stuff which is frustrating.
I think having a shallow understanding of theory even within our own tendencies is a common problem that just comes with trying to study dense topics that are deliberately hidden from us. It isn’t a fun problem, but it’s one that comes with the territory. I try to do my best with it, that’s why I made my intro Marxist-Leninist reading list for those that want one.
This right here. The problem is tankies don’t like to admit there’s other philosophies WITHIN communism (council communism, anarcho-communism (which are basically the same fucking thing but no one realizes cause they only read the first page of das Kapital and nothing else)).
I should also distinguish between tankies and MLs before this instance dogpiles me calling me a liberal. Literally every ML I’ve met in real life understands the theory behind anarchism and I’ve had some great talks with them. It’s just this theory of leaderlessness comes off shaky to most. Meanwhile online ML who do no organizing, attend no protests and spend all their lives complaining online are the ones thinking this meme is the most hilarious shit. I believe this kind of behaviour to be exclusively online.
Take Rojava as an example: they built a system of councils that didn’t yield any real power until their day came (2011 if I’m not mistaken) and after the revolution, there was no power vacuum but this decentralized system took over. Same idea is anarcho syndicalism: they do union work now but are ready to run the factory/company when the opportunity is there.
Would you say the same about the Zapatistas? Or the Makhnovshchina. They fought against the Bolsheviks so in your black white thinking, they are evil, right? But back to West Asia: the common interest they share with the USA is to fight the IS or Islamism in general. The USA supported islamists when they fought against communists. Isn’t this “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” logic that made the US support Islamists until they didn’t and now Rojava got a little support but that doesn’t mean any ideological alignment as you seemed to imply.
Also, it’s not a state but I don’t expect tankies to get that.
For the Zapatistas, not so much (though they explicitly reject being labeled as anarchist), for Makhnovschina, absolutely, they were glorified bandits correctly seen through by anarchist Lucy Parsons.
As for Rojava being a state, it still has private property and class struggle, and as such does have a state:
Private property is still constitutionally protected by article 70 of the DAANES constitution: “Private property is protected and may not be taken away except for the public interest. It must be compensated fairly, and this is regulated by law.”
Not sure, to be honest, I would have to read more about the Zapatistas. They absolutely are a micronation with no geopolitical power whatsoever, though.
Or the Makhnovshchina. They fought against the Bolsheviks so in your black white thinking, they are evil, right?
I never called Rojava evil, and I don’t think they’re evil, so don’t put those words in my mouth. Regarding Makhnovshchina: if they weren’t capable of enduring a civil war-destroyed red army, how were they supposed to survive Nazi genocide? How is a loose set of preindustrial farmers going to stand a chance against total extermination by an industrial power? And no, Vietnam isn’t an example because Vietnam was well funded and armed by the Soviets. No Soviet weapons, no Vietnam.
Well, I would read less into your comment if it was clearer. I explained the concept of prefiguration with Rojava as an example and you brought up that they have the same interests as the USA. So what is the implication or relevance here? Are you saying they wouldn’t have made it without the USA, that the USA helped them build the structures before the revolution or during or after? Or that it’s a USA backed coup? Which is it? You can’t write obscure comments and whine for being misunderstood.
I know this is a tankie instance so I didn’t downvote but I’m surprised again and again how ignorant tankies are about the concept of prefiguration or “unity of means and ends” or “building the new in the shell of the old” or what ever you want to call it. It’s not about the state vanishing over night but about building a dual power that will fight the authority of the state. It’s the same type of people who say anarchists can’t read that have no idea about actual anarchist theory. Do better. Leave this strawman behind. It never was true and didn’t age well.
Marxists aren’t ignorant of prefiguration, we agree with some of it, such as building dual power. We don’t agree that doing so erases the basis of class, and thus doesn’t also erase the basis od the state. Marxists in general take the opposite approach to solving class struggle, believing in collectivization of all production and distribution to suit the needs of all, rather than creating loosely organized communalist cells, and this is because of analysis of class struggle being different for Marxists (and I believe more correct).
Sorry, I was overgeneralizating. I wasn’t talking about Marxist Leninists or Marxists in general or all tankies but I encounter this attitude OP shows far too often. People read Engels’s On Authority and think they know stuff which is frustrating.
I think having a shallow understanding of theory even within our own tendencies is a common problem that just comes with trying to study dense topics that are deliberately hidden from us. It isn’t a fun problem, but it’s one that comes with the territory. I try to do my best with it, that’s why I made my intro Marxist-Leninist reading list for those that want one.
This right here. The problem is tankies don’t like to admit there’s other philosophies WITHIN communism (council communism, anarcho-communism (which are basically the same fucking thing but no one realizes cause they only read the first page of das Kapital and nothing else)).
I should also distinguish between tankies and MLs before this instance dogpiles me calling me a liberal. Literally every ML I’ve met in real life understands the theory behind anarchism and I’ve had some great talks with them. It’s just this theory of leaderlessness comes off shaky to most. Meanwhile online ML who do no organizing, attend no protests and spend all their lives complaining online are the ones thinking this meme is the most hilarious shit. I believe this kind of behaviour to be exclusively online.
So building a rival state?
Build a stateless, hierarchy-critical, egalitarian society that rivals the hegemony of states
Where?
Take Rojava as an example: they built a system of councils that didn’t yield any real power until their day came (2011 if I’m not mistaken) and after the revolution, there was no power vacuum but this decentralized system took over. Same idea is anarcho syndicalism: they do union work now but are ready to run the factory/company when the opportunity is there.
Take [irrelevant microstate with same interests in the region as the USA] as an example:
Would you say the same about the Zapatistas? Or the Makhnovshchina. They fought against the Bolsheviks so in your black white thinking, they are evil, right? But back to West Asia: the common interest they share with the USA is to fight the IS or Islamism in general. The USA supported islamists when they fought against communists. Isn’t this “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” logic that made the US support Islamists until they didn’t and now Rojava got a little support but that doesn’t mean any ideological alignment as you seemed to imply.
Also, it’s not a state but I don’t expect tankies to get that.
For the Zapatistas, not so much (though they explicitly reject being labeled as anarchist), for Makhnovschina, absolutely, they were glorified bandits correctly seen through by anarchist Lucy Parsons.
As for Rojava being a state, it still has private property and class struggle, and as such does have a state:
Not sure, to be honest, I would have to read more about the Zapatistas. They absolutely are a micronation with no geopolitical power whatsoever, though.
I never called Rojava evil, and I don’t think they’re evil, so don’t put those words in my mouth. Regarding Makhnovshchina: if they weren’t capable of enduring a civil war-destroyed red army, how were they supposed to survive Nazi genocide? How is a loose set of preindustrial farmers going to stand a chance against total extermination by an industrial power? And no, Vietnam isn’t an example because Vietnam was well funded and armed by the Soviets. No Soviet weapons, no Vietnam.
Well, I would read less into your comment if it was clearer. I explained the concept of prefiguration with Rojava as an example and you brought up that they have the same interests as the USA. So what is the implication or relevance here? Are you saying they wouldn’t have made it without the USA, that the USA helped them build the structures before the revolution or during or after? Or that it’s a USA backed coup? Which is it? You can’t write obscure comments and whine for being misunderstood.
Sorry you’re getting downvoted by the tankies.
I didn’t expect otherwise but thanks for your empathy
Jesus Christ, get a grip. They’re just down votes.