I really don’t believe anarchist communism makes any sense at all. If you’re living in anarchy you can decide to form a commune, but that doesn’t make it communism.
Then you need to read Kropotkin and Graeber. Because anarchism and communism are perfectly compatible and makes leagues more sense than authoritarian communism.
Communism is just an economic system where the laborers share ownership of the means of production. Anarchism is a system of government that is decentralized, avoiding the authoritarian structures such as a state.
I stopped reading about communism after my grandpa got me The Gulag Archipeligo and it fucked up my sleep for weeks. The word itself should be radioactive in the exact same way “Nazism” is. Those who treat it like it isn’t are either ignorant to history or in denial of it. You need a whole new word if you want to cleanse the associated ideas because saying it with anything other than disgust in your voice is making excuses for inexcusable atrocities.
I really can’t stand to poison my brain with more commie shit, man. I used to humor it but after the thousanth time I realized how it goes. Someone called me retard liberal, then someone tells me to read some random whothefuck book, it starts off agreeable and then at a certain point I realize the author of what I’m reading is ontologically evil and has no regard for human life
I’m sorry that I don’t have it in me because I want to talk about these things but genuinely I have been worn down to a nub by the endless “but what about…” and the “real communism…” for like 15 years straight. I feel like I need to protect myself from becoming a husk like the person who originally called me liberal (utterly meaningless word since 2014, by the way.) There’s a fundamental compassion and respect for life that’s missing and I see it lacking in this entire swath of ideology, it’s so bad I don’t even consider its proponents human anymore
Alexander Solzhenitsyn was an anti-semitic Nazi sympathizer, and was arrested as such. His fiction is based on the folklore of the gulag system, and archival evidence and historical texts paint a much clearer picture of the soviet prison system. He’s essentially Yeonmi Park but for the USSR.
From an excellent thread going over his many ideological failings:
In his 2003 book, Two Hundred Years Together, he wrote that “from 20 ministers in the first Soviet government one was Russian, one Georgian, one Armenian and 17 Jews”. In reality, there were 15 Commissars in the first Soviet government, not 20: 11 Russians, 2 Ukrainians, 1 Pole, and only 1 Jew. He stated: “I had to bury many comrades at the front, but not once did I have to bury a Jew”. He also stated that according to his personal experience, Jews had a much easier life in the Gulag camps that he was interned in.
According to the Northwestern University historian Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern: Solzhenitsyn used unreliable and manipulated figures and ignored both evidence unfavorable to his own point of view and numerous publications of reputable authors in Jewish history. He claimed that Jews promoted alcoholism among the peasantry, flooded the retail trade with contraband, and “strangled” the Russian merchant class in Moscow. He called Jews non-producing people (“непроизводительный народ”) who refused to engage in factory labor. He said they were averse to agriculture and unwilling to till the land either in Russia, in Argentina, or in Palestine, and he blamed the Jews’ own behavior for pogroms. He also claimed that Jews used Kabbalah to tempt Russians into heresy, seduced Russians with rationalism and fashion, provoked sectarianism and weakened the financial system, committed murders on the orders of qahal authorities, and exerted undue influence on the prerevolutionary government. Petrovsky-Shtern concludes that, “200 Years Together is destined to take a place of honor in the canon of russophone antisemitica.”
His own wife called the Gulag Archipelago “folklore,” why on Earth are you listening to a rabid anti-semite and fiction author over actual historical evidence? You continue your Nazi ideology by dehumanizing communists.
To place Russian communism on the same moral level with Nazi fascism, because both are totalitarian, is, at best, superficial, in the worse case it is fascism. He who insists on this equality may be a democrat; in truth and in his heart, he is already a fascist, and will surely fight fascism with insincerity and appearance, but with complete hatred only communism.
The problem is that anarchism proposes decentralized, communalist cells, making it impossible to actually practice total global collectivization along a common scientific plan. That’s what Marxist communism actually is, a fully collectivized world economy, while the decentralized nature of anarchism is in some respects totally opposite. They share in common statelessness, classlessness, etc. only when judged from how Marxists and anarchists individually recognize class and the state, ie for Marxists anarchism retains class, while for anarchists Marxism retains the state.
I don’t think this is particularly convoluted. Anarchists seek full horizontalism, Marxists seek full collectivization. That isn’t particularly difficult to grasp, nor a rant. Further, some people do listen to me, otherwise I wouldn’t keep trying to talk to people about Marxism.
I really don’t believe anarchist communism makes any sense at all. If you’re living in anarchy you can decide to form a commune, but that doesn’t make it communism.
Then you need to read Kropotkin and Graeber. Because anarchism and communism are perfectly compatible and makes leagues more sense than authoritarian communism.
Communism is just an economic system where the laborers share ownership of the means of production. Anarchism is a system of government that is decentralized, avoiding the authoritarian structures such as a state.
There is nothing incompatible about the two.
I stopped reading about communism after my grandpa got me The Gulag Archipeligo and it fucked up my sleep for weeks. The word itself should be radioactive in the exact same way “Nazism” is. Those who treat it like it isn’t are either ignorant to history or in denial of it. You need a whole new word if you want to cleanse the associated ideas because saying it with anything other than disgust in your voice is making excuses for inexcusable atrocities.
I really can’t stand to poison my brain with more commie shit, man. I used to humor it but after the thousanth time I realized how it goes. Someone called me retard liberal, then someone tells me to read some random whothefuck book, it starts off agreeable and then at a certain point I realize the author of what I’m reading is ontologically evil and has no regard for human life
I’m sorry that I don’t have it in me because I want to talk about these things but genuinely I have been worn down to a nub by the endless “but what about…” and the “real communism…” for like 15 years straight. I feel like I need to protect myself from becoming a husk like the person who originally called me liberal (utterly meaningless word since 2014, by the way.) There’s a fundamental compassion and respect for life that’s missing and I see it lacking in this entire swath of ideology, it’s so bad I don’t even consider its proponents human anymore
Alexander Solzhenitsyn was an anti-semitic Nazi sympathizer, and was arrested as such. His fiction is based on the folklore of the gulag system, and archival evidence and historical texts paint a much clearer picture of the soviet prison system. He’s essentially Yeonmi Park but for the USSR.
Here’s a real quote:
From an excellent thread going over his many ideological failings:
His own wife called the Gulag Archipelago “folklore,” why on Earth are you listening to a rabid anti-semite and fiction author over actual historical evidence? You continue your Nazi ideology by dehumanizing communists.
The problem is that anarchism proposes decentralized, communalist cells, making it impossible to actually practice total global collectivization along a common scientific plan. That’s what Marxist communism actually is, a fully collectivized world economy, while the decentralized nature of anarchism is in some respects totally opposite. They share in common statelessness, classlessness, etc. only when judged from how Marxists and anarchists individually recognize class and the state, ie for Marxists anarchism retains class, while for anarchists Marxism retains the state.
Removed by mod
I don’t think this is particularly convoluted. Anarchists seek full horizontalism, Marxists seek full collectivization. That isn’t particularly difficult to grasp, nor a rant. Further, some people do listen to me, otherwise I wouldn’t keep trying to talk to people about Marxism.