Look, I agree that it's dumb to call yourself a socialist and have zero respect for most attempts at socialism, especially when your critique doesn't come from anything serious but just parroting of cold war propaganda. I agree that these countries weren't literally the devil, nor fascist, not "pretending", that's all fine.
But it's still so dishonest of MLs to dig for quotes and smugly boastbout how "libertarians never succeed". Even if we completely ignore all the very explicit and deliberate attempts at sabotage anarchists had to endure from their statist "comrades" (which we shouldn't but we always casually seem to be forced to do in the name of "unity"), it doesn't change the fact that vanguardist revolutions have all been incredibly flawed too.
You all are very often willing to recognize your failures, most of the people like you I have talked to seem to agree that at some point the revolution was "hijacked", usurped, corrupted, lost aim, usually coinciding with a figure they don't like taking over the revolutionary government and messing things up.
The supposed "strong state that crushes all opposition" being taken over by the reformist opposition and then the capitalist one in the case of the USSR and Leninists. The market reforms of Deng in the case of China and Maoists. But you all never seem to ask yourselves the question "Why was that allowed to happen?". Why am I supposed to put my trust in some authoritarian bullshit solution specifically justified as a means to protect the revolution when it failed at doing so? Why do you have to be so smug and condescending at me for not trusting in things that didn't work?
Why do you instead of learning from the mistakes in your methods that most of the time you yourself recognize and trying to come up with new ideas and systems for the current age, insist on still clinging to material analysis of the world of a hundred years ago as the gospel, the sole undying and absolute truth on how to Make Socialism, merely saying "it'll totally work right this time" instead? Why do you insist on mocking and """dunking""" on anyone who refuses to do that?
They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted.
This is all completely false. It genuinely is just lies. You can disagree with the explanations, but to claim there literally aren't any is just ignorance and a complete lack of good faith. Look, if you're a socialist in the internet, you probably have dealt with confidently incorrect liberals whining about strawmen that you don't believe, because they haven't read anything about it - and it's probably been incredibly frustrating. So why do you never think twice before doing the same thing with anarchists?
I'm always told to read Lenin and a ton of authoritarian essays and I always do in good faith, but it's extremely rare for me to ever be afforded the same honour, and then all the conversations I have end up with people telling me shit like this and me having to explain anarchism 101 to them because they genuinely don't actually know anything.
No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.
I am also always told to be charitable and nuanced about the failures and mistakes of vanguardist revolutions, but no one ever has the same honour with anarchist ones.
Sorry to disappoint. I don't have hard opinions about anarchists vs MLs. I generally think Engels was more convincing on authority, but I'm not well read enough to have a formed opinion on it and haven't read anything from the last decade or so. I especially don't think the things that you're asking here because I didn't write the statement, Parenti did, and he did so for rhetorical effect against western leftists putting ideology over AES. I'm happy to receive some recs I can follow up on.
I am sorry for being agressive. I mostly assumed you thought the same things as the person you were quoting. I appreciate that you at least admit you aren't well read enough, that's more than most people I talk to.
I’m happy to receive some recs I can follow up on.
I really appreciate this too. Thank you. I think as a direct expanding on what I'm talking about, this essay is very good:
Cheers pal, I've favorited this post to come back too. I've read Bakunin before, but I haven't read the rebuttal on On Authority or the other essays you linked. Looking forward to it! Appreciate the time you put into this
There were like two times your revolutions were important enough to exist: Spain and Soviet Union. Both times you were a competitor that killed us just as much
Miss, fuck off. Everytime I try to be reasonable and charitable and try to actually have a conversation I just get mocked. None of you have any interest to learn or reach out, no matter how much nuance you claim to stand for. You just repeat the same quotes and memes implanted in your heads ad infinitum. You don't know anything of what you're talking about, you've just been told things that you keep repeating without ever bothering to actually look into it yourself. You give us no nuance, no benefit of the doubt, no "its complicated", just a very big middle finger. But then you turn around, expect us to do be charitable to you, and pretend like we're at fault when we aren't. Happens alllll the fucking time.
You're not even from lemmygrad! You're from the "left unity" one! I see now that it's the "almost entirely ML but anarchists that shut the fuck up are fine I guess" kind of "left unity".
Everytime I try to be reasonable and charitable and try to actually have a conversation I just get mocked.
I have very little time to care about your personal feelings on the matter. I mock everyone, from friend to foe. I'm a bitch.
None of you have any interest to learn or reach out, no matter how much nuance you claim to stand for.
Just because I'm a bitch who doesn't want to give your shit the time of day, doesn't mean thats the same for everyone else. You even have a very nice comrade giving you some nice conversation in this same reply chain!
You just repeat the same quotes and memes implanted in your heads ad infinitum. You don't know anything of what you're talking about, you've just been told things that you keep repeating without ever bothering to actually look into it yourself.
I could say the same thing about you, but in this case it would be true. I have read quite a lot of theory, and done a lot of work in my community (primarily in environmental relief). Its really offensive to say that I just don't know what I'm talking about. Like, I know you know what you're talking about, I just don't care that you do. I have decided that Marxism Leninism is the best way to go about things, due to its usefulness, and will discard every other answer until I see Marxism Leninism as less useful.
Other comrades are better than me, I just really don't care. I will care more at some point, but I'm in a really shit place mentally, so im not going to try for this.
I regard your opinions as shit, not that of all anarchists, I debate their criticisms to myself every day (many are fair). I do not regard them with the same attitude as you. I respect them, you have not earned that.
You're not even from lemmygrad! You're from the "left unity" one! I see now that it's the "almost entirely ML but anarchists that shut the fuck up are fine I guess" kind of "left unity".
ive been on lemmygrad for two years, baby. This is my hexbear alt. Get a grip and stop jumping to conclusions.
you seem to be the same thing as me, but in reverse. Don't try to take a moral high ground where you have none, its very infantile.
Look, I agree that it's dumb to call yourself a socialist and have zero respect for most attempts at socialism, especially when your critique doesn't come from anything serious but just parroting of cold war propaganda. I agree that these countries weren't literally the devil, nor fascist, not "pretending", that's all fine.
But it's still so dishonest of MLs to dig for quotes and smugly boastbout how "libertarians never succeed". Even if we completely ignore all the very explicit and deliberate attempts at sabotage anarchists had to endure from their statist "comrades" (which we shouldn't but we always casually seem to be forced to do in the name of "unity"), it doesn't change the fact that vanguardist revolutions have all been incredibly flawed too.
You all are very often willing to recognize your failures, most of the people like you I have talked to seem to agree that at some point the revolution was "hijacked", usurped, corrupted, lost aim, usually coinciding with a figure they don't like taking over the revolutionary government and messing things up.
The supposed "strong state that crushes all opposition" being taken over by the reformist opposition and then the capitalist one in the case of the USSR and Leninists. The market reforms of Deng in the case of China and Maoists. But you all never seem to ask yourselves the question "Why was that allowed to happen?". Why am I supposed to put my trust in some authoritarian bullshit solution specifically justified as a means to protect the revolution when it failed at doing so? Why do you have to be so smug and condescending at me for not trusting in things that didn't work?
Why do you instead of learning from the mistakes in your methods that most of the time you yourself recognize and trying to come up with new ideas and systems for the current age, insist on still clinging to material analysis of the world of a hundred years ago as the gospel, the sole undying and absolute truth on how to Make Socialism, merely saying "it'll totally work right this time" instead? Why do you insist on mocking and """dunking""" on anyone who refuses to do that?
This is all completely false. It genuinely is just lies. You can disagree with the explanations, but to claim there literally aren't any is just ignorance and a complete lack of good faith. Look, if you're a socialist in the internet, you probably have dealt with confidently incorrect liberals whining about strawmen that you don't believe, because they haven't read anything about it - and it's probably been incredibly frustrating. So why do you never think twice before doing the same thing with anarchists?
I'm always told to read Lenin and a ton of authoritarian essays and I always do in good faith, but it's extremely rare for me to ever be afforded the same honour, and then all the conversations I have end up with people telling me shit like this and me having to explain anarchism 101 to them because they genuinely don't actually know anything.
I am also always told to be charitable and nuanced about the failures and mistakes of vanguardist revolutions, but no one ever has the same honour with anarchist ones.
I am quoting Parenti. You'll need to read Blackshirts & Reds to get an answer -- that's where the quote is from -- or one of his other books.
Thanks for ignoring everything I said.
Sorry to disappoint. I don't have hard opinions about anarchists vs MLs. I generally think Engels was more convincing on authority, but I'm not well read enough to have a formed opinion on it and haven't read anything from the last decade or so. I especially don't think the things that you're asking here because I didn't write the statement, Parenti did, and he did so for rhetorical effect against western leftists putting ideology over AES. I'm happy to receive some recs I can follow up on.
I am sorry for being agressive. I mostly assumed you thought the same things as the person you were quoting. I appreciate that you at least admit you aren't well read enough, that's more than most people I talk to.
I really appreciate this too. Thank you. I think as a direct expanding on what I'm talking about, this essay is very good:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anark-the-state-is-counter-revolutionary
It's available on video form too, but the video doesn't have citations.
Here's a good rebuttal of On Authority:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/london-anarchist-federation-the-problems-with-on-authority
A modern and a classical reading on how anarchists view authority and power:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anark-power
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/mikhail-bakunin-what-is-authority
Cheers pal, I've favorited this post to come back too. I've read Bakunin before, but I haven't read the rebuttal on On Authority or the other essays you linked. Looking forward to it! Appreciate the time you put into this
Thank you for being willing to engage sanely in the first place. <3
There were like two times your revolutions were important enough to exist: Spain and Soviet Union. Both times you were a competitor that killed us just as much
Miss, fuck off. Everytime I try to be reasonable and charitable and try to actually have a conversation I just get mocked. None of you have any interest to learn or reach out, no matter how much nuance you claim to stand for. You just repeat the same quotes and memes implanted in your heads ad infinitum. You don't know anything of what you're talking about, you've just been told things that you keep repeating without ever bothering to actually look into it yourself. You give us no nuance, no benefit of the doubt, no "its complicated", just a very big middle finger. But then you turn around, expect us to do be charitable to you, and pretend like we're at fault when we aren't. Happens alllll the fucking time.
You're not even from lemmygrad! You're from the "left unity" one! I see now that it's the "almost entirely ML but anarchists that shut the fuck up are fine I guess" kind of "left unity".
I have very little time to care about your personal feelings on the matter. I mock everyone, from friend to foe. I'm a bitch.
Just because I'm a bitch who doesn't want to give your shit the time of day, doesn't mean thats the same for everyone else. You even have a very nice comrade giving you some nice conversation in this same reply chain!
I could say the same thing about you, but in this case it would be true. I have read quite a lot of theory, and done a lot of work in my community (primarily in environmental relief). Its really offensive to say that I just don't know what I'm talking about. Like, I know you know what you're talking about, I just don't care that you do. I have decided that Marxism Leninism is the best way to go about things, due to its usefulness, and will discard every other answer until I see Marxism Leninism as less useful.
Other comrades are better than me, I just really don't care. I will care more at some point, but I'm in a really shit place mentally, so im not going to try for this.
I regard your opinions as shit, not that of all anarchists, I debate their criticisms to myself every day (many are fair). I do not regard them with the same attitude as you. I respect them, you have not earned that.
ive been on lemmygrad for two years, baby. This is my hexbear alt. Get a grip and stop jumping to conclusions.
you seem to be the same thing as me, but in reverse. Don't try to take a moral high ground where you have none, its very infantile.