đť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 4, 2024
Question for Anarchists: What is your strategy for achieving a revolution against the capitalist state and ensuring its overthrow without a centralized vanguard party?
I am not an anarchist
59.5%
I am an anarchist (answer below)
40.5%
Poll ended at .
Show threadTuomas AumalaJul 4, 2024

@Radical_EgoCom The global capitalist system doesn't need to be overthrown, because at some point it will inevitably fall by itself. Its unsustainability is a known fact. IMO the more important question to focus on is how to cultivate the resilience to not let it drag us down with it. As the old systems start to slowly decay and crumble, local networks of mutual aid will grow to fill in the cracks out of necessity. I hope that at some point such local and communal solutions will overtake capitalist states as people witness the old systems failing to protect them.

Now, an argument could be made that we can't afford to wait around for fossil capitalism to cause things to get that bad. I'm much too pessimistic to think that any large scale revolution could be achieved before the masses start to lose their bread and circuses. Things will have to get worse before they get better, but they're already slowly getting worse and will continue to do so for a long time. May we live in interesting times.

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 4, 2024

@aumalatj

That's false. Capitalism will not fall by itself. Capitalism has ways of self-sustaining itself and prolonging its existence. When capitalism is in decay, fascism arises to maintain capitalism's existence through force, specifically by smashing proletarian movements that would otherwise push for the abolition of capitalism and the creation of socialism. If we just wait around for capitalism to die on its own, fascism will arise and destroy any chance of it dying.

Show threadTuomas Aumala
@Radical_EgoCom Fascism is just capitalism in decay, ergo a more extreme, totalitarian form of late stage capitalism. As such it will continue to be unsustainable and therefore it can't be sustained. Widespread fascism is most certainly to be expected, we're seing it creeping in already. Yet I stand by what I said. All the resources the system pours into enforcing itself through violence will be off the plates of ordinary people, who will then increasingly seek alternatives.
Jul 4, 2024 at 11:04pmWeb
Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 4, 2024

@aumalatj

You're claim that fascism, being capitalism in decay, will destroy itself is untrue. Tell me, is Germany still capitalist? What about Italy or Spain? Yes? But they were fascist countries, so by your logic, capitalism shouldn't exist in those countries. Fascism is unstable, but when it inevitably fails, it doesn't result in the abolition of capitalism. It results in the restoration of the old, or very similar, capitalist order, which is literally the whole point of fascism.

Show threadTuomas AumalaJul 4, 2024

@Radical_EgoCom I'm not talking about the stability of a political system in and of itself. I'm talking about sustainability in the context of a global climate crisis, soil degradation, overfishing, global biodiversity loss etc. etc. In a word, polycrisis. Switching between unsustainable capitalism and unsustainable fascism won't change the fact the underlying capitalist mode of production is unsustainable and thus by definition has to end at some point, willingly or not.

And so I return to my original comment: The problem then is to not let the system take us down with it.

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 4, 2024

@aumalatj

Still, your claim that capitalism will abolish itself isn't true. Capitalism is inherently unsustainable and will inevitably end, but if there's no working-class movement to actually abolish capitalism when it's weak, then capitalism will just continue to sustain itself through its various tactics of prolonging its survival, such as fascism. Ultimately, capitalism will have to be forcefully overthrow by the proletariat because it's not going to die by itself.

Show threadTuomas AumalaJul 5, 2024

@Radical_EgoCom I think abandonment is more accurate than abolition to describe what I'm thinking of.

Economy exists within ecology. Historically, when capitalism has ceased to benefit the commoner, fascism has swooped in. Tyranny requires constant effort. My hope is that at some point in the future the ecological and environmental stresses applied on the economic system will force the state to spread its resources so thin that cracks open for communal solutions to grow in. Solutions that meet the needs of the people better than the increasingly strained state struggling to maintain control at the larger scale.

Sure, that could result in a collection of syndicates forming an armed opposition against the state, but that may not be necessary. If the state is so strained that it can't take care of its citizens, at some point it would just become irrelevant in the shadow of the communal networks.

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 5, 2024

@aumalatj

Your "solution" for getting rid of capitalism isn't a solution at all. It amounts to waiting for capitalism to mess up the environment and society to a severe degree and then hoping that it just dissolves by itself. Any solution that relies on hope doesn't have the assurance necessary for me or many other rational people to take it seriously.

Show threadBl4ckst4rJul 5, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @aumalatj "Don't put your trust into hope"
Show threadTuomas AumalaJul 5, 2024

@Radical_EgoCom Is it in your opinion unsustainable? If yes, then it will end. There's no way around that. And there's no need to wait for anything to join a local anarchist group. Plenty already exist.

One could argue that fantasizing about a socialist revolution like it's the early 1900's is more far fetched. The concessions made to the workers and the huge gains in living standards since then have pretty much defused the threat of that happening in any large enough scale in the developed world. Or IDK maybe in the US workers have it bad enough, but there's other problems to deal with over there. For example that a considerable portion of the population has been programmed to violently resist any such movements by the red scare and all. In the rest of the developed world one would have to wait until capitalism messes up society so badly that the common worker is convinced about the need for a communist revolution. (If you look at the polls, they're currently voting the polar opposite of that.) But that would necessitate *waiting around for capitalism to mess up the environment and society to a severe degree.*

Yes, my solution relies on hope. I don't think a solution exists that doesn't.

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 5, 2024

@aumalatj

Revolution is still possible despite the living standards of workers increasing and constant anti-revolutionary propaganda. Despite the living standard growing for workers, workers still face many of the same problems of wealth inequality, poverty, unemployment, etc, and there is the ever growing wage disparity that only gets bigger and bigger each year. The living standards may have gotten better, but the workers are still suffering, and as long as they are, they will have an...

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 5, 2024

@aumalatj

...incentive to engage in the proletarian revolution. As for the propaganda against the proletarian movement, it may be numerous, but the way to combat propaganda of lies is with propaganda of truth, of the experiences and struggles of the working class and the necessity of revolution against capitalism. There is more propaganda against workers than for them, but that can change as workers organize, network, and gain more avenues of propagating their ideas and, in turn, more support.

Show threadBl4ckst4rJul 5, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @aumalatj I think his "solution" doesn't really need your or other peoples seriousness to work anyway (; but if you are looking for a "solution", whatever that might be, a theory, a critique, a prognosis I think you are a hunting a ghost. In the end, mostly what you can do is to built more robust and complex relationships and, and that is the more abstract part, you have to critique the living shit about this joke of an society. I think the first step is to make power relationships transparent, in the end people don't want to be ruled, neither today nor in a future centralized vanguard party.
Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 5, 2024

@Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj

What people want doesn't change what has to happen in order for a proletarian revolution to be successful. People may not want to live in a vanguard one-party state, but that doesn't make it any less necessary.

Show threadandhoJul 5, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj whatever state that exists is the state necessary for revolution. Whatever state exists, should be dismantled.
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj no what people want does effect the stakes. And to say a vanguard is necessary is an opinion. Some will disagree and resist the actions and ideas that say we need statehood and will act accordingly in a way where they do not use statehood to resist capitalism.
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj I personally think capitalism and statehood is unsustainable and will collapse on itself, eventually.Building communities that R decentralized With a focus on social responsibility and cohesion that is hostile to coercion May lead us to a just solution but there’s so many possibilities that IDK, where the solution, revolution will follow suit but ignoring people who say they don’t want 2 b ruled is not a solution in my opinion. All perspectives must be equal
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj also if the proletariat party tries to oppress, suppress, or force people to abide by its rule and attempts to force people to accept the rule of a one party state. There will be even more injustice that gets added to the pot in my opinion
Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 6, 2024

@Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj

1/3 The idea of a vanguard party being necessary isn't just opinion (it is not a subjective belief based on personal feelings), it's a hypothesis, a proposed explanation for how a revolution realistically has to be done, one that is based on logic and evidence. The logic behind the necessity of a vanguard party derives from the fact that the revolutionary people need ideological unity and strategic/tactical cohesiveness in order to be successful, and...

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 6, 2024

@Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj

2/3 ...therefore, supporters of vanguard parties conclude that a vanguard party that promotes revolutionary ideology, organizes the masses strategically and tactically, and helps guide them towards their revolutionary goals is a requirement for a revolution to succeed. The evidence for this comes from practically every single successful revolution in history, all having some kind of political organization that led the revolutionary masses to success.

Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 6, 2024

@Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj

3/3 There may have been successful revolutions that had no kind of vanguard party, but given that the vast majority of them did, I would say that those instances are the exception and not the rule.

Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj and i would just have to disagree with you no big deal. I’m not a proponent of your theory. And I don’t think these are exceptions to the rules more than I think they’re telling us the “rules” have been disproven
Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 6, 2024

@Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj

Is there any logical or evidence-based basis for this disagreement, or is it based on subjective personal preference?

Show threadandhoJul 7, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj you seem to be asking for a lot of evidence, but offering only conjecture.
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj and you didn’t say this but I just want to point out I personally don’t think if there is organization by leaders in an revolution it automatically means means a revolution is non anarchistic as long as it’s decentralized in nature.
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj I think revolution could and can be centralized in some aspects but can and must also be decentralized in others and that’s allowed in anarchic theory. I think I disagree both personally, and based on evidence
Show threadandhoJul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj by that logic, Vanguard led revolutions lead to oppression of the proletariat (as a rule)
Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 6, 2024

@andho @Bl4ckst4r @Madaligned @aumalatj

I don't see how that logically follows at all.

Show threadTuomas AumalaJul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @andho @Bl4ckst4r @Madaligned There may have been vanguardist revolutions that had no kind of oppression of the proletariat, but given that the vast majority of them did, I would say that those instances are the exception and not the rule.
Show threadđť—– đť—” đť—§Jul 6, 2024

@aumalatj @andho @Bl4ckst4r @Madaligned

That still doesn't disprove the logical basis for the necessity of a vanguard party.

Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @aumalatj @andho @Bl4ckst4r the logical basis for a vanguard party is a belief you hold.That benefits the principles & standards you’ve created to determine what validates a revolution or not. But logically you’re revolution demands other be ruled despite what people want or their personal opinion or despite their lifestyle being taken into account.Your revolution will produce an injust society in my opinion. Everyone does not need a one party state to lead/ guide their tactics
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @aumalatj @andho @Bl4ckst4r you don’t need to be engaged with a structure that doesn’t work for you let revolutionaries be nomads, be loners, be united and decentralized, let them work towards different objectives during the revolution. They Don’t need the a okay from someone with status in the vanguard to push for revolutionary changes. We won’t know everything that happens during the revolution and we can’t demand that all revolutionary agents report back to the proletariat.
Show threadReckonin’Jul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @aumalatj @andho @Bl4ckst4r revolutionaries can be allowed to just do. And we can either learn to quickly and un strictly adapt to new circumstances. Or let those new circumstances kill of an organizational struggle because said structure didn’t want to allow the ungovernable to be ungoverned
Show threadandhoJul 7, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Bl4ckst4r @Madaligned @aumalatj if majority of x had y, than y in x is the rule not the exception. The statements from you and me both follow this logic.
Show threadandhoJul 7, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj the exceptions also prove that the Vanguard is not "necessary".
Show threadandhoJul 7, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @Madaligned @Bl4ckst4r @aumalatj "the fact that the revolutionary people need ideological unity and strategic/tactical cohesiveness", how is this a fact?
Show threadandhoJul 6, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom @aumalatj that's a false conclusion. Fascism was destroyed by external capitalists to prop up capitalism, so fascism was not allowed to continue. Just like socialism was replaced with capitalism in many countries.