Rogo

The specific structure of a state is a response to preserving the dynamics of material power.

Centralization will never result in the material decentralization of socialism. Sure, the means of production are taken from the bourgeoisie, but they're only replaced by the authoritarian state.

The new bourgeois class.

I guess what I'm trying to say is...the Nolan chart is shit in regard to praxis. It's only somewhat accurate when charting ideology.

Jun 25, 2017 at 1:38amWeb
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017
Why compromise our path to communism by supporting those who slow us down?
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017

I just don't understand why we cannot trust ourselves to exact political change instead of some state who is incapable (on every level) of representing each of our individual interests.

I don't care who the rulers look like. I don't care what their class background is. I don't care to chase some mythic "enlightened" ruler.

I only care what I care about and that's why communism not only works but can only be effectively pursued on an individual basis.

Show threadjjgJun 25, 2017
@Rogo what you describe sounds more like anarchy than communism to me (and I mean that in a good way).
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017
@jjg I view them both as the same tbh
Show threadjjgJun 25, 2017
@Rogo they are certainly complementary.
Show threadshoutcacophonyJun 25, 2017
@Rogo In some cases, adamantly opposing them can slow us down more than cautious good faith. Not because that changes the political landscape, but because time spent fighting with people who don't care is an impediment to the world we want to create
Show threadshoutcacophonyJun 25, 2017
@Rogo Also, people work together on things, so some degree of parity is required. Not saying that's good or bad (it depends), but it happens, regardless
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017
@shoutcacophony I agree.
Show threadshoutcacophonyJun 25, 2017
@Rogo I disagree about "only," but that's because of my politics. anarch@-communism = both individual and collective, as well as "sure, we disagree on this, at least in part, but that doesn't mean I'm going to set up a fucking nation state to oppose you, either"
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017
@shoutcacophony This only compliments my point of effective political change occurring on an individual basis—meaning what you see as effective (meaning what you and I see as effective will always differ).
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017

@shoutcacophony Sure, this is why I don't judge other anarchists for voting, joining parties, etc. I only speak for myself.

This is also not a post advocating for a behavior, but for an understanding of the state's relationship to communism, which is theoretical.

Show threadshoutcacophonyJun 25, 2017
@Rogo thank you for clarifying + i agree. I think even marxist states have *slowly* been working towards more of an actual relationship to communism, at least in relation to incorporation of people having active input and participation in shared power. but that's over decades, and for a lot of us, too slow obviously, at best. but it is a documentable thing.
Show threadRogoJun 25, 2017
@shoutcacophony And actively opposing such things only puts us in harm and slows down our progress.
Show threadshoutcacophonyJun 25, 2017
@Rogo especially when we're not actually fighting for our lives, yes. people confuse the possibility/probability of oppression happening based on the past with the likelihood of it happening in the future, with so completely flipping out when trots are doing their trot thing or w/e that it's as if all three are the same, which they aren't
Show threadshoutcacophonyJun 25, 2017
@Rogo meanwhile, a lot of us have people who want to literally kill us right now. which...ok sure, i have time for your imaginary crusade against a hypothetical future disaster, sure /s