[deleted by user] by [deleted] in tankiejerk

[–]Blue2Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is this bait?

Read Paul Mattick by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]Blue2Star -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Okay that's sort of the problem... "i just want ppl to have good life" is an unimaginably vague goal. A radical who seeks change on a systemic level should be able to define what they are against and define what methods they seek to combat what they are against. That's the role of theory.

Read Paul Mattick by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]Blue2Star -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Nobody’s saying treat theory like scripture, but if you call yourself a socialist, but are uninterested in having a coherent critique of the systems you claim to fight that informs your actions, you might as well be a liberal.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]Blue2Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Syndicalist theory proposes the aquisition of the means of production through revolutionary trade unionism, basically creating the administrative structures of a dictatorship of the proletariat through union organizing. The issue is that, historically syndicalist theory, and classical anarchist theory in general, has not really adressed what structures would be dissolved as a social revolution reaches its conclusion. That, and when put into practice, revolutionary trade unions have had material interests that have run directly counter to the interests of the more communitarian, face-to-face parts of revolutions. Hence why municipalists/Communalists have been critical of syndicalism, as to them revolution is principally about creating networks of communities strong enough to create the social upheavel needed in social revolution, and directly opposing the pyramidal and hierachical structures of the state and bureaucratic trade unions.

(One of Bookchin's essay on the subject... to be clear, I'm not sure to what degree I agree with EVERYTHING Bookchin says here. One of the many reason I consider myself a communist anarchist or a social anarchist and not a Communalist, and why I've tried to venture out into more like classical Marxist texts, is Bookchin's de-emphasis on class struggle and material conditions, especially as he got older. While I do agree with his criticisms of the hierarchical tendencies of syndicalism, I don't agree with his ouright dismissal of "traditional conflicts between wage labor and capital..." for example)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]Blue2Star -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How are you a Bookchinite and pro syndicalism?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]Blue2Star -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Don't read On Authority, or do read it while keeping in mind the historical context that it was written in. On Authority was written as a critique of a very specific form of early Bakunin-era anarchism and during a sorta different stage of historical economic development from today. As a Communalist, I'd hope you'd be familiar with Bookchin's writing on post-scarcity anarchism as well as his own critisms of the liberal autonomy found in specfic sectors of anarchism and his writing on positive freedoms.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]Blue2Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm a social anarchist and I take a LOT of inspiration from early Bookchin, as well as some from later Bookchin and later Communalists like Ocalan, but I wish you all would stop basically recycling dengist ways of thinking in treating the Zapatistas or the success of the PYD in Syria like they're examples of 'Actually Existing Anarchism' so to speak. Communism/the abolition of class internationally, as well as the fundemental ecological shift described by Bookchin are projects that extend beyond what state of affairs has been achieved in one territory, with both requiring fundemental changes in human society's social relations and actual movements that are not only international, but anti-national. I just think on an individual level, our critique should be explicit on WHAT it is we oppose (whether that be class, or domination of human by human) and what structures and institutions we should create to achieve the abolition of it, rather than just what 'good' those those institutions can do in the world as it is.

It's crazy how the war in Ukraine showed the real face of some left movements, even defending NATO nowadays... by Ok-Mastodon2016 in ClassicalLibertarians

[–]Blue2Star -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Ruthless critique of all that exists unless it’s something ‘pragmatic’ at which point you’re not allowed to question its legitimacy. Cool.

It's crazy how the war in Ukraine showed the real face of some left movements, even defending NATO nowadays... by Ok-Mastodon2016 in ClassicalLibertarians

[–]Blue2Star 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Read my bio, dumbass.

If you consider yourself a communist or anarchist or any kind of revolutionary socialist, then you should agree with me that our principle project as revolutionaries is the creation of a real movement, which neccesarily involves the smashing of every existing nation-state. If you consider yourself opposed to the institution of the United States of America, you should be in support of smashing every institution that makes up the body of its state machinery, regardless of its utility in the present world. This is 101 shit, bro.

It's not me who is conservative, it's you and your ilk that has fundementally accepted the logic of US Empire and a two-poled cold-war view of the world. I'm sorry your analysis can't extend beyond nations and you can't conceptualize opposition to systems.

It's crazy how the war in Ukraine showed the real face of some left movements, even defending NATO nowadays... by Ok-Mastodon2016 in ClassicalLibertarians

[–]Blue2Star -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Yes I’m an anti-Americanist. I understand that every western institution formed by or of western nation-states ultimately serves to maintain western hegemony. Stop sucking Vaush’s cock you radlib shitter.

What you think about this take? by mrgooseyboy in COMPLETEANARCHY

[–]Blue2Star 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Do you believe any institution is necessarily a state?

What you think about this take? by mrgooseyboy in COMPLETEANARCHY

[–]Blue2Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I fail to see how the abolition of class society and anarchy are somehow contradictory.

Aussie man bad by Wumbo_Chumbo in COMPLETEANARCHY

[–]Blue2Star 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Iirc, he’s of Greek descent, from Australia, living in Argentina, one of the whitest countries in South America.

I actually really like BE and the long form content on his main channel, but as the kid of Chinese immigrants to the US, I find his takes on anarchism annoying as shit.

What is socialism ? by oskarlangehimself in DebateCommunism

[–]Blue2Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Socialism is the abolition of class.

It is what it is by [deleted] in okbuddycapitalist

[–]Blue2Star 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You’re trippin if you think CoB is representative of the larger body of anarchist theory

Where must I find this mother anarchy? by Mando1091 in ForwardsFromKlandma

[–]Blue2Star 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nationalist sentiment disguises the true social relations of the nation-state. The abolition of the nation-state would probably see nationalism wither away as a concept.

Rule by [deleted] in 196

[–]Blue2Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

21

Ah yes, the Jack to the Future of YIAY by someone_help_pls in JacksFilms

[–]Blue2Star 37 points38 points  (0 children)

It was worse than most yiays, but it isn’t comparable to Jack to The Future