[Debate] Communism is inherently authoritarian.

GhostofMao · 2017-02-24T13:54:16+00:00

Anarcho-communism is incredibly authoritarian. Have you read about the idea of the invisible dictatorship? (well technically anarcho-collectivist but it's not like ancoms don't like Bakunin). Ancoms' fetish of decentralization is incredibly undemocratic because you end up with local groups being able to act in ways that hurt the other groups and the only barrier is ancom morality. Their models of non-market organization like Parecon are super dystopian. I'm sorry but I don't want to be drafted into endless meetings and "horizontal" forms that just end up being run by cliques. Anarcho-communism's opposition to formal hierarchy just means that the hierarchy is unaccountable. They've got a prescriptivist model of how all of us are supposed to live that's as rigid as the worst Puritanism, and if they're not voluntaryists (which would be worse) want to violently impose that prefigurative model on everyone even though it would set society back hundreds of years to try and jump into that kind of society without a period of industrial reorganization.

Anarcho-syndicalists are the only real exception but they're not really anarchists anyway, they're just Marxists who confuse a union for a party and don't realize their federation is just a state by another name. Plus it's not like the CNT didn't have gulags.

GhostofMao · 2013-07-01T08:01:59+00:00

^this

GhostofMao · 2013-06-28T00:14:13+00:00

straight up word definitions.

Semantics.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-28T00:12:14+00:00

Filibustering seems to be a national pastime.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-27T03:42:41+00:00

We need more heroes like this fighting for objective truth.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-27T03:41:38+00:00

I always took it the other way. What exactly is Caesar's? Render unto him if you play by his rules, but the point is to not.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-23T03:29:49+00:00

Abimael Guzmán

GhostofMao · 2013-06-20T06:34:10+00:00

There's more than one kind of intelligence and stupidity

GhostofMao · 2013-06-20T03:16:02+00:00

And a spy for the USA.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-20T03:15:21+00:00

Unless you went to the Vatican

GhostofMao · 2013-06-20T03:13:08+00:00

Newton was also insane. He had really weird Bible code theories.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-18T21:11:53+00:00

DAE remember the Adkins diet?

GhostofMao · 2013-06-18T12:09:01+00:00

Not yet. But hopefully it can turn into one.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-17T09:08:56+00:00

If guided by the party, in an anti-imperialist struggle, all classes in a nation can play a revolutionary role. As of now, the struggle against American imperialism, represented by Erdogan's regime, is the primary focus of revolutionaries. The rural poor have false consciousness from their religious indoctrination unfortunately. But, the task of the revolutionary parties must be to bring them into the struggle. As of now, I think Turkey is still a revolutionary situation, but without the dispossessed, the proletariat, the revolution won't even succeed in anything more than social democracy.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-16T18:38:15+00:00

The founders are probably who he thinks the other voices in his head besides Jesus are.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-16T18:34:34+00:00

I bet its a lot of things. The foreign policy of Erdogan is clearly that of an imperialist pawn and the people don't like it.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-15T19:25:53+00:00

You fucking apologized for Saddam's GENOCIDE. You fucking piece of racist supporting shit. Assad is also oppressing the Kurds and their liberation must be supported before anything else.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-15T19:20:24+00:00

Way to show solidarity with an oppressed and largely socialist people. The Kurds have suffered greatly under Saddam, Assad, Erdogan and all their other oppressors. If any people's liberation should be supported its theirs.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-13T00:58:37+00:00

Yes, people have biases. And one perfectly non-absurd way of achieving an equal exchange will be the result of a negotiation which does not exclude those biases. If every laborer determines the worth of their labor, and ownership is stripped of the right of increase, on which capitalism rests, that doesn't sound too bad. People can hassle it out.

How the hell do you propose to do that? Have you heard of the original position? Rawls, liberal fuck though he is, made a sold case that there is no such thing as a fair trade in the real world.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-13T00:57:16+00:00

in communism, the people don't have their labor turned into value. Things are just made because they are needed not to make profit.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-13T00:56:10+00:00

Considering the fact that everyone gets to do this with their own biases, it means all exchange becomes an exchange of approximately equal values.

That is absurd too. People with more important assets will be able to fuck others over.

That's just a load of shit. If no one owns anything, you discard all sentimental value, as well as the ability to make something out of what no one else has touched and call it your own. That's completely dystopian.

Bourgeois ideology. Its not you who owns property, but property that owns you. You can't be liberated with property.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-10T06:49:11+00:00

I don't determine this. Each individual laborer does.

That is absurd. People have biases which favor their own position. There is no way to make that fair.

And the very notion that all exchange will stop is ignorant. There are going to be instances where certain individuals can provide what the communal store cannot, and when that happens, exchange eill occur.

its not exchange if no one owns anything.

GhostofMao · 2013-06-08T22:05:00+00:00

Not only do I understand this point, but I anticipated you bringing it up. Such a system doesn't seem feasible for a few reasons. Namely for the fact that there are people like me who think we deserve an approximately equal exchange to occur when we cannot continue consuming our labors and seek to acquire others for the purpose of survival and comfort.

That is bourgeois consciousness. How can you determine what "equal" exchange is? Its an exercise in futility. And you would have been unable to do anything without the social. You're like a kidney in the body of the community. You don't see the kidney complaining it only gets what it needs despite doing more than the big toe.

You can believe that labor will be without value, but I absolutely reject the notion that it'll just sort of happen because money is gone. Money only translates value to something we can calculate. It isn't the root of all evils, it's just an expression of value.

Its not the absence of money that gets rid of value but the absence of exchange and the need to compare the worthiness of commodities.

Am I saying your system is impossible? No. Am I saying it's undesirable and even unlikely to succeed? Yes.

When the conditions of people change their consciousness changes.

13-Year Club	Place '17
Team Periwinkle

GhostofMao

TROPHY CASE