Maintaining a large scale communist society in a capitalist world

[EndaKenny]

So, obviously a defining ideological difference between anarchism and Marxism/Leninism is the issue of the state. I can see the logic in maintaining a proletarian state during/after revolution so as to consolidate the gains and help emancipate other revolutions that hopefully are/will be taking place in proximity or afar - eventually paving the way for a stateless, communist society.

However the past few years I've shifted away from Leninism and undoubtedly feel more comfortable calling myself an anarcho-communist. There are still certain aspects I agree with and I don't completely disassociate myself with Leninism, but after some years of maturing and a subsequent reanalysis of history and politics, I can't help but feel that an intermediary workers state always HAS unfortunately ultimately turned to deviation and authoritarianism. I really struggle to think of any socialist state that has successfully managed to provide equity and comfort to it's people without having devolved into a repressive police state. I really feel Lenin was on the right track (for the most part anyways) before the revolution failed to spread and ultimately radically shifted the policies of the Bolsheviks who had to adapt to these unforeseen, dramatic circumstances.

So, this is where the appeal for anarchism springs from. But what I wonder is, if an anarchist revolution happened say tomorrow right here in Ireland - and nowhere else - how is it meant to function in a world still dominated by supranational capitalism? It just doesn't seem feasible. Maybe I don't know enough but economically I don't see it being compatible in a world economy that is still capitalist, unless the community is self sufficient - and not every country has the capability to become self sufficient, not least Ireland. Politically I just dont see it happening either. Can you imagine if the Republic of Ireland was suddenly to become a stateless, classless society that has abolished capitalism and all its social diseases while on the SAME island, there exists some 14,000km2 in the north east corner that constitutes a province of the United Kingdom - the historic epitomy of capitalism, and still one of today's leading proponents in the solidification of this system. Or we can go even smaller and pretend if 5 out of the 6 counties in the province of Munster had a revolution and established a communist society - even if they militarily held out for eternity against the Republic of Ireland, how would they survive alongside the rest of the country?

To be honest I see this new-born communist society on the island of Ireland either collapsing or destroyed by external reactionary forces, such as the British state for example.

How would it survive in a capitalist world? If the answer is maintaining a revolutionary workers state then how do we prevent it from tumbling into an oppressive dictatorship, one that is OVER the proletariat and not OF, as history has shown...

And I know - the revolution is meant to be worldwide. But this isn't always the case. In fact it never really has been. What I need to know is what will happen, how do the people safeguard it, if the revolution happens on a smaller, more isolated scale which is 100 times more likely than an international global revolution.

Thanks

[ckaihatsu]

For this kind of postulation I have to point out that it's an arbitrary, abrupt *scenario*.

One can look to realistic potential future conditions as you're doing, but then, in doing so and concretizing it by putting it into words, one is necessarily *constraining* it -- the revolution.

If the conditions in one particularly hot spot happen to be barricades in the streets and the kicking out of managers in all factories nearby, that's *most likely* not happening in just that one spot, worldwide. Conditions like that would probably result from more-generalized upheavals everywhere else, since the capitalist economy is near-fully-worldwide and well-integrated throughout.

Why only one particular country? Why in a focused tight cluster and not in more-*diffuse* patterns of factory takeovers on all continents, instead -- ? And why should we speak only of one 'snapshot' in time, and not of *evolving* conditions that are enlarging and spreading over several areas and maybe being repressed and shrinking in other locations -- ?

I'm seeing the conventional academic-type mindset here which tends to conform to linear and rigid constructions, while the world actually operates in more-complexified kinds of ways.

[tuwix]

So, obviously a defining ideological difference between anarchism and Marxism/Leninism is the issue of the state. (...)

First of all, there is great difference between Marxism and Leninism. Leninism effected with a state capitalism and Marxism is for socialism. Besides a term Marxism/Leninism was invented by Stalinism to empower a Leninism that is intellectually poor.

In terms of maintenance of communist society, I think it is irrelevant issue. Working class don't have to be aware of Marx's theory to start a revolution. Marxism isn't needed to fall a capitalism. It will fall anyway. Will there be many communist or not, capitalism will fall and now it seems to be a case irrelevant of communist efforts because I think the greatest enemy of capitalism is capitalism itself.