Ah yes, the good ole “statelessness can only be achieved with a state, trust me bro” argument.
Did you get whiplash just now from contradicting yourself? Also, I just love the assertion that defending yourself needs a state. Every time I think communists can’t get any fucking stupider, you guys really go the extra mile to prove me wrong
No, that’s just a misunderstanding about the definition of a state. Anarchists often define it as a monopoly to violence in a territory. This definition has its flaws. Marxists define it differently as anything that can suppress a class.
Anarchism has real enemies. Marxists generally want to work together with Anarchists. Those enemies do not. Their interests are fundamentally opposed to anarchism and Marxism. They constitute a class, because they are defined by their control over exploitative production. Defending against them is suppressing their class interests. Many Marxists are open about an how this struggle is fought. Anarchists will have to fight it too and they will use their own strategies. Whatever those are, if they are effective, than they constitute a state in the eyes of marxists.
Every time I think communists can’t get any fucking stupider, you guys really go the extra mile to prove me wrong
Almost all real life Anarchists are communists too. Did you just insult basically all anarchists that aren’t terminally online?
Because I said most anarchists are communists? Anarchists want a stateless classless society. That’s the textbook definition of communism. Have you ever heard of the anarchists Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Goldman, Makhno? None of them were marxists, but they were, all of them, communists. And they said so. You should try learning some basics about the movement you identify with.
Ah yes, the good ole “statelessness can only be achieved with a state, trust me bro” argument.
Did you get whiplash just now from contradicting yourself? Also, I just love the assertion that defending yourself needs a state. Every time I think communists can’t get any fucking stupider, you guys really go the extra mile to prove me wrong
No, that’s just a misunderstanding about the definition of a state. Anarchists often define it as a monopoly to violence in a territory. This definition has its flaws. Marxists define it differently as anything that can suppress a class.
Anarchism has real enemies. Marxists generally want to work together with Anarchists. Those enemies do not. Their interests are fundamentally opposed to anarchism and Marxism. They constitute a class, because they are defined by their control over exploitative production. Defending against them is suppressing their class interests. Many Marxists are open about an how this struggle is fought. Anarchists will have to fight it too and they will use their own strategies. Whatever those are, if they are effective, than they constitute a state in the eyes of marxists.
Almost all real life Anarchists are communists too. Did you just insult basically all anarchists that aren’t terminally online?
You are one very confused communist.
Because I said most anarchists are communists? Anarchists want a stateless classless society. That’s the textbook definition of communism. Have you ever heard of the anarchists Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Goldman, Makhno? None of them were marxists, but they were, all of them, communists. And they said so. You should try learning some basics about the movement you identify with.
nah, you’re confused because you’ve obviously read more theory than you actually understood.