Communist anarchism?

[Kingnothing]

I know it is basically anarchy which works towards common goals and in which the resources are owned by those who work them and wealth is distributed... but can anybody give me a good definition of the term communist anarchism?

[Xvall]

There's no 'true' definition. I consider myself an 'anarcho-communist'. (Desire to spread freedom and equality without corrupt governments or dictatorships.) But I'm not sure if everyone who calls themselves an anarcho-soclialist or communist has the same beliefs as me.

[oconner]

my brother's one of them, but he is about 8 years old so I don't think he understands :)

[El Che]

Here (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html) is a book on the subject.

[Kingnothing]

thanx... very useful book link thanx...

[TheDerminator]

I guess this is going to sound sectarian, but it seems to me, that anarchism is only utopian socialism. It is thus quasi-socialism.

Not the real thing. We can unite against the BORGS on some issues, but ultimately they are only an ineffective anti-BORG outlet.

The fact some call themselves socialists is only a source of confusion, and is a veritable albatross around the neck of the real socialist movement.

The share the same version of the history of the socialist movement as the BORGS and as such, they serve to some extent to reinforce the BORG mind set.

The split the left in two camps, that can never really be reconciled except in relation to common issues, which are bipartisan.

Anarchists are not socialists. The socialist spirit is one that possesses the capacity for leading the yet politically uneducated into political consciousness.

The anarchist movement damns the whole process as "undemocratic". How can a naive objective which can never be realised be the basis for their socialist credentials.

Marx never lived to see the muddying of the waters, the latter is reflected in his The Poverty of Philosophy. We though have the benefit of hindsight, and with hindsight we cannot allow the waters to become deeper and deeper muddied.

Resistance is Futile!

derminated

[libereco]

spoken like a true Red-Fascist.


P.S. This BORG Star Treck fetish you have is not really helpful when trying to understand your nonsense ramblings.

(Edited by libereco at 9:36 pm on April 14, 2002)

[El Che]

So if one disagrees with anarchism one is a fascist? I dont think that is a healthy atitude. For an anarchist that sounds rather closed minded, even dogmatic. Anarchism has its own dogmas you know.

[TheDerminator]

Libereco,

U copped out of trying to argue the case for anarchism, a long time ago. All, U are reduce to, is giving one liners.
Red-fascist. Does that make U an anarcho-fascist, or is that a black and red fascist?

The ole "fascist" tag is a nice way of avoiding debate. U have proved how completely inadequate U are at trying to convey the beauties of ultra-democracy. Pity U cannot do anything more than spout the anarchist line. At least vox tries to take the logic to its absurd logic and sometimes learn. Ure comfortable with the absurd logic of Ur postion.

I still believe, that anarchists and socialists can unite on anti-BORG issues, but calling Urselves socialists is a bad fucking joke, and muddies the waters for those interested in being effective against the BORGS.

Not a star trek fetish. BoRGeoiS mindset = BORGS, and I simply see it as more appropiate than "cappies" since capitalism is only the economic system, and the BORGS created the Frankenstein. I'm pretty consistent on that point.

Nonsense ramblings? Well, at least I don't argue Ur non-sensical ultra-democratic position, which denies the value of leadership, and believes that someone like Urself is the equal of a Karl Marx in leadership skills. For me, that is complete nonsensical rambling of the worst kind.

Resistance is Futile!

derminated

[libereco]

I know that that was a challenging move, and I usually don't call people names, but the Derminator has a long history of attacking anyone who believes in just the slightest form of Libertarian Socialism.

I don't even know who the hell he's talking about when he talks about the BORG, but it would help if he could just say what he means instead of using dork-ebonics.

My Problem is that from all posts I've seen by the "Derminator" so far he is basically saying: "Some people know better how to do things (he) and those have to tell all the poor, stupid people what to do in order to help them."

He is an elitist, he has no faith in the masses, yet claims to speak for them. People of his type have advocated hunting and killing of the Socialist Opposition before on the grounds of "knowing best" and, because all those others may be "BORG" deep inside.

follow the leader

[libereco]

I believe people involved in something will know better what to do than some Politbuero on the other side of the country. (filled with leaders like Marx)
I believe that any Socialism that is not free, not build on mutual agreement is wrong and can end in Slavery- Therefore I could argue that it's you who is not a Socialist.

The reason why I often write one-lines is, because I hardly have time to post at all nowadays, but some posts like this one just piss me off too much, so I post for the hell of it.

After next week, after my exams are over I may have more time.

(Edited by libereco at 8:37 pm on April 15, 2002)

[El Che]

Actualy I rather like the word BORG. Saves up alot of typing, but of course you have to know what it means :P It reminds one of automatons, which is exactly what bourgoise mind set and this disgusting consumerism culture (that is spreading like wild fire all over the globe) makes you. BORGS!

[TheDerminator]

libereco,

"I believe people involved in something will know better what to do than some Politbuero on the other side of the country. (filled with leaders like Marx)"

I too believe in participation politics, but to believe everyone can all participate at the same level is naive and even egoistical. U are still no Marx, and to believe U can participate on the same level as Marx is naive egoism.

"I believe that any Socialism that is not free, not build on mutual agreement is wrong and can end in Slavery- Therefore I could argue that it's you who is not a Socialist."

"Not sure, what U mean by free? There is the BORG idea of "free" which can be reduced to anything goes for those who are born with the most freedom. I don't think U mean that. It has to be freedom with societal responsibility and that is Socialist Freedom.

Mutual agreement? Why cannot we have democratic mutual agreement with leadership performing its task and people democratically deciding on its viability during elections. The agreement is the democratic concensus of the majority. That real socialists favour, but it is still different from egotisitical ultra-democracy. The all Indians on chiefs stuff, is idealistic backward thinking, that simply does not work in our epoch, and can only work in some future time when people have similar capacities.

The Slavery tag is simplistic. Democracy can be truly representative with a leadership, and can act in the interests of all.

Of all, because our enemies a suffering their own spiritual crisis. They are still all brutalised alienated individuals, and we act in their long-term interests too.
Mighty big of us!

I believe the poor require leadership to get out of poverty. If it sounds like me telling everybody what to do from on-high, I am afraid that goes with the territory in believing that there should be leadership. Besides, vox, comes from Ur position and must be one of the most authorative persons who contribute to the theads. Personally, I don't mind that at all.

Hope U do well in Ur exams!

El Che,

At last someone else might use the term BORG!

"It reminds one of automatons"

The BORGS are an automaton race in Star Trek the new generation! They are a mindless collective of units all joined together mechanically. It was meant as the individual against the collective! They never realised that they are a huge collective of alienated individuals all thinking they have independence of thought, wherein reality they all possess a very similar mind set that is in the most part very unquestioning of their stunted neanderthal version of freedom, democracy and usual a belief in God and the righteousness of some form of religion.

Socialists who believe in collective responsibility question the traditional beliefs, BORG individualists collectively do not. Now, there must be one the largest ironies in history!

Resistance is Futile!

derminated

[Hayduke]

Quote: from libereco on 1:31 am on April 16, 2002
I know that that was a challenging move, and I usually don't call people names, but the Derminator has a long history of attacking anyone who believes in just the slightest form of Libertarian Socialism.

I don't even know who the hell he's talking about when he talks about the BORG, but it would help if he could just say what he means instead of using dork-ebonics.

My Problem is that from all posts I've seen by the "Derminator" so far he is basically saying: "Some people know better how to do things (he) and those have to tell all the poor, stupid people what to do in order to help them."

He is an elitist, he has no faith in the masses, yet claims to speak for them. People of his type have advocated hunting and killing of the Socialist Opposition before on the grounds of "knowing best" and, because all those others may be "BORG" deep inside.

follow the leader


Talke it easy libereco.......if we commies go fighting against each other, the capies will roll over from laughing........so just take it easy....

[RGacky3]

social anarchy would be great, but think about it, it can't work soon some greedy cappie will take over, and exploitation will be worse, there must be some type of government.

[Hayduke]

I finally found out the term anarchist communist

Check the topic in the Commie Club.

Cheers

D-Day

[Dhul Fiqar]

Woh, woh, woh......

I just have one question: who says anarchists label the socialist process "undemocratic"?? That just jumped out at me, since I've long considered myself an anarchist with leftist tendancies and don't understand in what context an anarchist would resort to such a statement.

Voluntary co-operation doesn't necessarily have anything to do with elections or 'democratic' mob-rule.

--- G. Raven

(Edited by Dhul Fiqar at 4:54 am on April 25, 2002)

[IrieLittleDub]

damn fascist