1020
What happened? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 47 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

There's a good retrospective on the mass protest movements of the 2010s called If We Burn. The main takeaway I got was that leaderlessness and horizonalism do not work.

If you don't pick your leaders, they will pick themselves.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 18 hours ago

Anarchism is the worst social order, except for all others that have been tried.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 12 points 13 hours ago

Anarchism can't defend itself. That's the point. Either it gets coopted and recuperated under capital, or it gets hijacked by reactionary forces for their own purposes.

[-] zloubida@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

While Marxism-Leninism gets hijacked by reactionary forces for their own purposes and gets recuperated under capital after that.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

The USSR lost the Cold War, but there's plenty of ML counties still around. I'm sure you'll whine they aren't paradises, but they're all generally progressing and developing in a positive direction (when they aren't being strangled to death like Cuba)

Not a lot of anarchist spaces by comparison. There's the Zapatistas and they're pretty cool, but like, the record is pretty clear.

[-] zloubida@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

And before the end of the cold war, USSR was a reactionary country governed by an elite for its own interests. It's the same in China. The same in Vietnam, the same in Cuba (but at least there they have the excuse of the unjust US politics against them).

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Eliminating homelessness, eliminating illiteracy, eliminating hunger, increasing life expectancies, increasing graduation rates, increasing quality of life, actually existing socialist countries accomplish incredible things (some more than others, admittedly). They're not perfect utopias, but you can't ignore the context they exist within (i.e. they're still developing countries and they exist within US global hegemony)

I'm sure you have some specific criticisms of China or Cuba or whatever, but they're doing pretty fucking good considering what they're up against.

While you keep on dreaming of utopia, I'm more concerned with defeating than US empire in the real world. Anarchism can't.

[-] zloubida@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Capitalist countries did the same thing without building walls to stop their population to flee…

[-] Derp@lemmy.ml 1 points 14 hours ago

I mean, anarchism was the initial state, so it has been tried. It seems that it is not very resilient against being replaced by other systems, so it can't really be the best system in the real world.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 9 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Unlike the resilient anti-capitalism of Marxist states amirite.

It's almost like you need to learn and evolve from the mistakes of the past to create systems that work in the present.

For example, when white colonizers land on your shores, don't ignore them and start an escalating series of tribal wars to sell them war-slaves.

Also, maybe don't have slaves.

See? We've already improved on proto-anarchism.

this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2024
1020 points (98.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

5881 readers
4144 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS