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 .

@Radical_EgoCom making ourselves ungovernable in a thousand different ways. Centralized efforts to overthrow and socialize will also have single points of failure and advance singularly powerful people who will inevitably be singularly corrupt due to the nature of power, whereas a balkanized/indigenized continent will be harder to govern and more naturally address the needs of its people.

Given climate collapse this may happen anyway, and indeed has been previewed with state cannabis legality

@wilbr

A centralized effort is necessary, though. The tasks that have to be followed out during a revolution must be done with all of the revolutionaries united ideologically, strategically, and tactically. A centralized effort would ensure this unity, as it would allow everyone to be united by ideology, tactics, and strategy by having them all be united under a centralized vanguard that embodies all of these traits.

@Radical_EgoCom maybe, but that presumes that we all agree as to the tasks that need to be carried out.

A power vacuum is surely dangerous, but consider futile efforts to control splintered bands with divided loyalties like middle eastern "warlords." America is already almost fifty countries (with even more micro-nations within, indigenous and otherwise) so it's barely a union. We're also seeing armed governor and Fed clashes.

I don't dream of a nuclear United Socialist States of America.

@wilbr

Regardless of your rather valid criticisms of American governance, a centralized effort of some kind is still necessary for a successful revolution for the reasons I listed above.

@Radical_EgoCom some cooperation certainly, but to me centralized sounds like one party for the entire country to 1:1 replace the existing national government. And that's what has me questioning its corruptibility, inherent authoritarianism (and associated violence/injustice), and inherent Euro-centric-colonial ideals.

@wilbr

A single vanguard party to lead a country on a revolutionary path isn't a bad thing. Such a vanguard party provides many benefits to a revolution, such as having the ability to unite the masses without having counter-revolutionary forces sway people off the revolutionary path. There is a possibility of corruption, but the best thing to do would be to eliminate corruption and its possibility from the party instead of abandoning the party centralization and all of its benefits.

@Radical_EgoCom @wilbr why not eliminate corruption from the current state instead?
@andho @Radical_EgoCom lollll I got blocked. So much for left unity and sincere questions for anarchists, I guess I'll be up against the wall when the glorious communist revolution comes too
@andho to be clear the current state is an imperial genocidal colonial state founded on slave labor that still has legal slave labor (as long as the cops manage to convince a judge that you did something) so reforming the current state is pretty fucking hard, but yes trusting that some centralized vanguard powerful enough to overthrow a country won't let that power corrupt them is pretty ahistorical as revolutions and governments go. We don't get worker communes by delegating power to Washington