United Front of Revolutionary Leftists

A forum for members of all revolutionary left wing currents to converge, and discuss theory, news, and so on.
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
KenCat
Anarcho-Communist
avatar

Posts : 37
Join date : 2008-10-29

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:07 pm

Stos wrote:
KenCat wrote:
I, as well as most anarchists I know, have come to the conclusion that equality and classlessness cannot be reached with a state (which holds an unequal power itself) and rulers who are in a completely different class: the ruling class. It's simple, really.
Yes, which is pretty much Marxism. Well, it depends pretty much on one's definition of the 'state', which, for example, lead to the question by Bakunin which I've already quoted.

No, Marxism switches right wing dictatorship with left wing dictatorship in hope to later create an equal, classless society. SOME Marxists advocate political parties, others advocate rulers -- I want neither.

I was also intrigued by the term "libertarian socialism" as a Marxist, and found that Marxism was NOT libertarian -- autonomism, which is based off of Marxism and anarchism, is a form of libertarian socialism with a state. However, most libertarian socialist philosophies advocate the abolition of the state.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
solpacvoicis



Posts : 45
Join date : 2008-10-22

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:11 pm

lol, well, since marxism is based off the political philosophy of a man who's theories varied widely throughout his life, one has to wonder which stage in his life people mean by "marxist" - i had heard that marx became libertarian toward the end of his life...i think it was from stos, actually...

and was there a "left wing" and "right wing" back in marx's day?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Stos
De Leonist


Posts : 123
Join date : 2008-10-23

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:16 pm

KenCat wrote:
Stos wrote:
KenCat wrote:
I, as well as most anarchists I know, have come to the conclusion that equality and classlessness cannot be reached with a state (which holds an unequal power itself) and rulers who are in a completely different class: the ruling class. It's simple, really.
Yes, which is pretty much Marxism. Well, it depends pretty much on one's definition of the 'state', which, for example, lead to the question by Bakunin which I've already quoted.

No, Marxism switches right wing dictatorship with left wing dictatorship in hope to later create an equal, classless society. SOME Marxists advocate political parties, others advocate rulers -- I want neither.
No, that's Blanquism. Haven't I already pointed this out somewhere here?

solpacvoicis wrote:
lol, well, since marxism is based off the political philosophy of a man who's theories varied widely throughout his life, one has to wonder which stage in his life people mean by "marxist" - i had heard that marx became libertarian toward the end of his life...i think it was from stos, actually...

and was there a "left wing" and "right wing" back in marx's day?
He did change, certainly. However, by Marxism, we generally don't mean 'Blanquism', since I don't know of any time where Marx was a Blanquist. However, he did call the 10 planks and such antiquated later, as well as slowly develop out of Hegelian mysticism.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
KenCat
Anarcho-Communist
avatar

Posts : 37
Join date : 2008-10-29

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:34 pm

Stos wrote:

No, that's Blanquism. Haven't I already pointed this out somewhere here?

I understand the difference between Marx and Blanqui, Marx DID believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat -- whether or not most people were the proletariat is irrelevant. I want no dictatorship, not even over my opponents (I can learn from them, discuss with them and perhaps even teach them).

I believe most of the anarchists from Anarchist Underground used to be state socialists as well.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Stos
De Leonist


Posts : 123
Join date : 2008-10-23

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:06 am

KenCat wrote:
Stos wrote:

No, that's Blanquism. Haven't I already pointed this out somewhere here?

I understand the difference between Marx and Blanqui, Marx DID believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat -- whether or not most people were the proletariat is irrelevant.
They are, especially without the capitalists (who wouldn't remain capitalists after the revolution), and thus most of the lumpen. What's your point here? Also, when did Marx say he ever wanted a minority dictatorship?
Quote :
I want no dictatorship, not even over my opponents (I can learn from them, discuss with them and perhaps even teach them).
What the hell does dictatorship over your opponents have to do with anything here? At all? Unless you mean we should just submit to invasion or counterrevolution, and not aid other revolutions. You don't, hopefully.
Pretty much, the problem here was that Marx believed that class hierachies created the state, and thus it was impossible for there not to be a state when there are class differences, thus the main focus would be to abolish capitalism rather than the state. To quote Engels, "We, on the contrary, say: Do away with capital, the concentration of all means of production in the hands of the few, and the state will fall of itself." Also, of course, "Anarchy: that is the great war-horse of their master Bakunin, who has taken from the socialist systems only the labels. All socialists understand this by Anarchy: once the aim of the proletarian movement, the abolition of classes, has been attained, the state power which serves to keep the great productive majority under the yoke of an exploiting minority small in numbers, disappears, and the governmental functions are transformed into simple administrative functions. The [Bakuninist] Alliance turns the thing upside-down." Or, of course, to go back to Bakunin's question, “The Germans number about 40 million. Will all 40 million, for example, be members of the government?”
"Certainly! Since the thing begins with the self-government of the Commune."
No minority rule here, certainly. Crud, he even said it in English, he obviously meant business. Of course, Marx also says, "He should have asked himself: what form can the administrative functions take on the basis of this workers’ state [Arbeiterstaat], if one wants to call it that?" ('If one wants to call it that'? Yes, basically, it wouldn't have the meaning that Bakunin seems to take from the 'state'.)
Also, of course, Marx used 'dictatorship of the proletariat' to refer to the Paris Commune, which was perhaps the most democratic society to yet exist (perhaps the anarchist communes in Spain before the Stalinists got pissed off). No dictatorships of the minority, or anything like that. Pretty much, he used 'dictatorship of the proletariat' to refer to, firstly, the fact that it was not Blanquist, and, secondly, to refer to the fact that it is the opposition of the bureacratic and oppressive dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, thus making it a completely different 'state', which presumably many wouldn't call a 'state' altogether. Of course, it's a vague term, but Marx is not referring to any kind of 'dictatorship' here, to use the modern definition. This basically means that the dictatorship of the proletariat would be something like the Paris Commune, quite similar to socialism, just not international. Basically, the state in Marx's definition would only cease to exist once capitalism had been ended globally. So basically, the dictatorship of the proletariat could be wholly participatory, non-hierarchal (though hierarchies would still exist elsewhere), and have federated workplaces, community councils, consensus democracy, whatever. The main point is that they're not international, and thus a 'dictatorship of the proletariat', as opposed to a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie that dominates the rest of the world (for a while, at least), but not a Blanquist dictatorship either. They are a dictatorship of the proletariat, and as such the bourgeoisie will be fought if they attempt to take the state, as now all people in the country are in power, so it is the dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie attempting to take back what they had.

Anyways, I think I referred to a 'central governing authority' earlier. I was sleepy, sorry about that, it's a pretty bad term. The original term used by De Leon was a 'central directing authority', which would pretty much co-ordinate the economy internationally (for example, organizing gettting extra food and resources to a place hit by natural disasters, helping fight malnutrition during the early days, where capitalism's shadow would still hang over the land, along with what De Leon termed the "easy" jobs "... the easy one which can be summed up in the statistics of the wealth needed, the wealth producible, and the work required....") It would have representatives from each industry, elected by the rank-and-file in the workplace (with preferably not a 'first-past-the-post' system, though the majority can decide that themselves, though presumably in a decentralized manner, that is, not just one big vote on it) with the possibilty of removal at any time when the majority decide as such. Of course, it would be decentralized, with these councils taking part not only on a large scale, but small ones too, where they would probably decide on how industries are to co-operate with each other, as well as other stuff such as how much of production is to be put aside for schools, hospitals, and the elderly, etc. Think of it as workers in a co-operative factory electing a manager so as to co-ordinate production, with perhaps a few differences and larger scale, though presumably managers are somehow unnecessary and hierarchical, due to the hierarchal nature of elections? Presumably there's too much 'ruling' going on here? Sad
"YOU ass! This [would be] democratic rigmarole, political drivel! Election – a political form, in the smallest Russian commune and in the artel. The character of an election does not depend on this name but on the economic foundations, on the economic interrelations of the voters; and as soon as the functions have ceased to be political, there exists (1) no governmental function; (2) the distribution of general functions has become a businesslike matter entailing no rule; (3) the election has none of its present political character."
Of course, this system depends largely on what the people want after a revolution, as determined by a majority dictatorship, probably.


Last edited by Stos on Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:53 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Black_Cross
Anarcho-Communist
avatar

Posts : 45
Join date : 2008-10-21
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:22 am

Quote :
And yes, I've read just about every text uploaded to the CrimethInc site.

I hope you at least see how CrimethInc is Ideologically unsound. Isolationism with no ideological core. They're typical "american" anarchists. But they do have some useful ideas on how to fuck with capitalists and such.

And i think we're the only two anarcho-communists on this site, so we've gotta hold it down for Kropotkin and Malatesta.

_________________
"Here then is the problem which we present to you. Stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?"
--Albert Einstein--Bertrand Russell--
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Stos
De Leonist


Posts : 123
Join date : 2008-10-23

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:36 am

Black_Cross wrote:
Quote :
And yes, I've read just about every text uploaded to the CrimethInc site.
And i think we're the only two anarcho-communists on this site, so we've gotta hold it down for Kropotkin and Malatesta.
...Alright, then?
Stand back, I am about to dictate a letter.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
KenCat
Anarcho-Communist
avatar

Posts : 37
Join date : 2008-10-29

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Mon Nov 03, 2008 12:25 pm

Black_Cross wrote:
Quote :
And yes, I've read just about every text uploaded to the CrimethInc site.

I hope you at least see how CrimethInc is Ideologically unsound. Isolationism with no ideological core. They're typical "american" anarchists. But they do have some useful ideas on how to fuck with capitalists and such.

And i think we're the only two anarcho-communists on this site, so we've gotta hold it down for Kropotkin and Malatesta.

This is true, their texts are very different (not necessarily post left, just different). Stos, I'll respond to your message soon.. You misunderstood me (after writing all that). lol
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Laura
Titoist
avatar

Posts : 29
Join date : 2008-11-09
Age : 27
Location : Berlin

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:01 pm

You are very lucky to live in Sweden! It is the best country in the world!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
beatnikzach



Posts : 71
Join date : 2008-10-21
Age : 26

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:16 pm

Black_Cross wrote:
Quote :
And yes, I've read just about every text uploaded to the CrimethInc site.

I hope you at least see how CrimethInc is Ideologically unsound. Isolationism with no ideological core. They're typical "american" anarchists. But they do have some useful ideas on how to fuck with capitalists and such.

And i think we're the only two anarcho-communists on this site, so we've gotta hold it down for Kropotkin and Malatesta.


i most definitely support anarcho communism ad_bc!

_________________
[img:255d]http://www.anarchosyndicalism.net/usermedia/image/10/guts_banner.jpg[/img:255d]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
KenCat
Anarcho-Communist
avatar

Posts : 37
Join date : 2008-10-29

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:51 pm

beatnikzach wrote:
i most definitely support anarcho communism ad_bc!
Glad to hear it. ha
Back to top Go down
View user profile
beatnikzach



Posts : 71
Join date : 2008-10-21
Age : 26

PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:36 pm

KenCat wrote:
beatnikzach wrote:
i most definitely support anarcho communism ad_bc!
Glad to hear it. ha
mos def glad your here kencat i have heard many a good thing about you

_________________
[img:255d]http://www.anarchosyndicalism.net/usermedia/image/10/guts_banner.jpg[/img:255d]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile   

Back to top Go down
 
KenCat/Cheveyo's political profile
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» Report & Profile of Mark Harrison MBE
» Your Profile - Avatar
» Senior Political figure will be outed TONIGHT on BBC
» WHY wINSTON CHURCHILL WILL ALWAYS BE THE LAST WORD IN POLITICAL WIT
» Personalized Profile fields / Warning System

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
United Front of Revolutionary Leftists :: Member Introduction :: Political Profile-
Jump to: