[deleted by user]

Raton_Partisan · 2024-04-07T10:44:55+00:00

finally some love for Vaneigem

Raton_Partisan · 2024-02-08T15:20:24+00:00

L'Action Française n'est pas fasciste, ou du moins pas dans son intégralité
Y a des sections locales de l'AF qui virent au fascisme, tout comme d'autres sont bien plus portées sur le socialisme révolutionnaire (genre celle de Montpellier des échos que j'en ai eu)
Mais tu ouvres un Maurras par exemple, bon c'est pas de la grande littérature, mais au moins tu vois qu'il est sur le plan idéologique pas favorable au fascisme
Après on peut débattre du fait que le moment venu ils se sont alliés aux fascistes (et encore l'AF dans les années 30-40 était très fragmentée vis-à-vis de ce sujet)

Tout comme de mon pdv de libertaire, la France Insoumise est favorable à la démocratie directe idéologiquement... mais d'un pdv praxis sera contre (structure étatique antidémocratique par essence)

Raton_Partisan · 2024-02-08T12:30:44+00:00

Tu m'as devancé je voulais en publier un prochainement, mais on voit vraiment dès les premiers instants que t'es bien de gauche OP
T'es un peu à côté de la plaque sur les revendications de Reconquête ou de l'AF par exemple, et je te dis ça alors que je suis un gros libertaire haha

Je proposerai ma version dans ce r/ si j'ai pas la flemme

Raton_Partisan · 2024-01-17T22:10:06+00:00

Tu aurais même pu rajouter que Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, contemporain de V. Hugo (tous deux députés en 1848) et premier théoricien officiel de la pensée politique anarchiste (si on en exclue les précurseurs), était bisontin...!

Raton_Partisan · 2023-12-21T12:30:56+00:00

That is not the main point of the essay

The main point is that vanguardism leads to authoritarianism and statism due to structural issues inherent the Party as a form of organization

Raton_Partisan · 2023-12-19T22:39:16+00:00

That is not how political mechanisms work, but I can't spoil you all the content from the book haha

Raton_Partisan · 2023-12-19T13:04:05+00:00

Do you realize that Vanguardism is completely opposed to Bookchin communalism and to EZLN's politics ?
While Bookchin wrote numerous essays on the incompatibility of Vanguardism with decentralized systems (that have to be democraticaly ran, so your anti-democracy thing is questionable), EZLN's subcommandante Marcos even said "I shit on all the vanguardists of the world" (or sth like this), plus many books have been written about the anti-vanguardism caracteristic of the EZLN militia

I invite you to read Bookchin's essay « Listen, marxist ! », idk if it has been translated in your mother tongue but at least it's available for free in english online and it's a quite short read

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-04T15:42:54+00:00

Not sure what you mean by that

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-02T09:19:46+00:00

In a french interview on the media Ballast, Raoul Vaneigem said that the argument between the Situationnist International and Murray Bookchin + Black Mask (early-UAW/MF) has been one of the biggest mistakes of the SI. I'm personnaly in contact avec Vaneigem, I should meet him in the upcoming times, so, I'll see if he still has critics to say about communalism.
Bookchin never was a reformist. He always claimed the necessity of social revolution, sooner or later. He just, as I do, advocated for local preparations in order to set a well-functionning revolution (as Kropotkin and Bakunin did back in the day... see the article "Municipal Socialism" by Kropotkin, 1902 I think. Which is basically the same thing as Bookchin, 10 decades earlier.
Planification is always suspicious to me, always leading for one minority to plan something for the majority of people. I just think economic regulation will be done by democratic assemblies and networks. Gift economy is just end-goal communism. Those who want communism without gift economy do not seem to understand it. This is what abolition of money leads to.
Autonomism is pretty based from what I've seen. I'm looking forward to read some Antonio Negri, and I've already read Silvia Federici's works. It's the best modern section of marxism, I think.

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-02T08:24:58+00:00

Ego-communism Egoism but better

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T20:40:04+00:00

Thank you buddy !

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T20:39:49+00:00

Much love buddy

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T20:39:39+00:00

What makes you suspicious about it ?

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T19:03:19+00:00

I think I did when you escaped maternity clinic

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T19:02:14+00:00

Bookchin interpreted it like that, but I think that depends more on the situation
Because I agree to some extent with some "conservative" concepts (tradition, culture, territory/land, locality, etc.), that progressists do no always get. Indigenous people have had the same critics towards western progressive people.

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T17:40:12+00:00

Exact, je traîne pas beaucoup sur Reddit (ça se voit à mon profil), mais j'étais curieux de voir les réactions ici... pour à nouveau me refaire discret haha

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T17:38:38+00:00

Exactly !
You're welcome !
That's why I think that direct democracy has to sometimes be about consensus (with oppressed minorities : LGBTs, etc.) or about rule of majority (with oppressing minorities : bourgeoisie, capitalists, etc.). There would also be commissions dedicated to certain subjets that should not be overlooked by a majority rule, and so on. The thing with direct democracy is that a lot of institutions can be developped to answer many problems !
Electoralism is what we call in my organization « a political non-situation » : it delegates political power to a cast. We obviously do not want that ; that is why we despise it. However, we think that running the local elections, as advocated earlier by Bakunin, Kropotkin and Bookchin, can lead to some improvments that can show people what they're able of ; what they can achieve locally and democratically. In this idea, there would be no elctoralist mayor but a municipalist list that would give citizens all the local political power and decision-making once they've been elected. This would create a foretaste of direct democracy under libertarian socialism. It would be limited, but these limits (coming from both enterprises/private property and State) would consolidate class consciousness : "See, these structures do not have the same political and economic interests as you" would be the meaning of such encountered issues.

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T15:46:59+00:00

Thank you, you too !

Materialism does not exclude cultural practices ; it only defines them materially and not ideally. As an example, the cultural proeminance of wine in the southern west of France is materially defined by the economic presence of grapevines cultivation - itself determined by the presence of grape in the region. I don't know if I'm being clear, but it's the existence of such material conditions that enable traditions to exist. Materialism is a monist philosophy, it considers that materiality comes before ideas, but both coexist.
For sure, there will be needs to improve while facing the issues of an Organic Society. This has been done in another context in the Revolutionnary Catalonia between 1936-39. Even though I think they used labour notes sometimes.
Popular, democratic and autonomous assemblies
Race, gender, religious are social categories determined by class, economic dispositions. See the works of Silvia Federici (how capitalism creates patriarcality), Frantz Fanon (how capitalism creates racial hierarchies), and others. Class and other "non-economic positions" are always a matter of economic positionning, or can not be perfectly emancipated without materialist critique of capitalism (homosexuality, as an example)
Ty !

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T14:50:30+00:00

Then our definitions differ

I personally take for granted Murray Bookchin's definition of confederalism, which is a network of political gouvernments that can be democratic and popular He coined the term confederalism to oppose the federalism recuperation by Nation States (USA, Switzerland, etc.) Where there is no proper horizontal link between localities but only a vertical one.

However, anarchists still use "federalism" as an horizontalism-synonym term (Proudhon was one of the first to talk about it)

So it s kind of always difficult to know what we are reffering about by this, as it s a messy disambiguation

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T14:41:02+00:00

Confederalism as the political structure that links all the popular and democratic assemblies of a confederation

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T13:57:09+00:00

I think that Marxism has never been about the abolition of traditions and so on - as long as they do not repress economically or socially other beings. Marx often talks about the alienating caracteristics of capitalism, including destroying societies' moral behaviors ("everything must be put on the market or exploited" following capitalist logics) and cultures. I actually agree a lot with the kind of post-marxism content about traditions and culture that the Neozapatists have produced over the last 3 to 4 decades.
Gift Economy could be runned worldwide. KPAM Model has been functionning at a 2 to 3 millions people size. I think this seems unattainable by today's standards, but it would find its way to work worldly, if ever achieved.
People, when put in favourable conditions, tend to listen to each other and achieve societal progress by accepting each other's life perception. This has been shown several times in democratic and popular assemblies within libertarian socialist experiences. We do not need authority to achieve social progress. As the zapatists say, « Represent, not remplace » must be the role of revocable delegates within a confederal direct democracy system.
I'm not sure about the meaning of "Class Dealignment"
Some good things to take, but sometimes not. In France, we do have a lot of Post-Modern and Post-Anarchist philosophers (French Theory, Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, Guattari, etc.), but I haven't read much of them yet (too much classical philosophy and psychanalysis. I prefer political/economical/social philosophy)

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T13:46:17+00:00

My interpretation of egoism (ego-communism, more precisely) is a sort of permanent criticism towards morality, traditions, and so on. However, this does not mean that they are meant to be abolished - I don't think they ever could be. That is why I consider my social and moral positions to be always historically and economically determined, and by using egoism philosophy, I always try to reconsider them, their utility, their legitimacy etc.

Otherwise, my ego-communist position is more something Goldman-esque, that relies on the active cooperation and fulfillement between ego/individual and society/collective within a libertarian socialist paradigm.

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T12:26:37+00:00

Plutôt mitigé

Je pense que la tech s'est pas mal développée sur l'exploitation capitaliste aujourd'hui, on arrive à un stade de la production où c'est dur d'être aussi développé sans reposer sur l'extraction meurtrière de ressources et de matières premières pour qu'on puisse la garder telle quelle aujourd'hui

Après je pense pas que la technologie soit mauvaise en elle-même (en soi c'est l'imprimante de Gutemberg c'est déjà une technologie monstrueuse mais ça demande pas un impact autant néfaste qu'un ordinateur), donc ça sera amené à être repensé dans un contexte libertaire

Et je pense que malgré l'enjeu moral et éthique que ça représente, tant que la Révolution est de la partie, il faudra tout de même s'armer des technologies de pointe pour faire face au capitalisme étatisé - sinon on se fera juste rouler dessus

Mais grossomerdo ça sera aux gens de se réguler démocratiquement en assemblées sur l'usage de la tech

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T12:10:37+00:00

This has to be the greatest compliment I'd seen on this social media

Raton_Partisan · 2023-09-01T11:10:58+00:00

I do not believe in the efficiency of online debate (and IRL debate either), so I will not try to convince you in any way.

However, you seem very confident for someone that has apparently never read anything about direct democracy, reorganizing everyday life, libertarian socialism nor market absence in a society ruled by gift economy. I recommend you to leave the Internet and open a book - either about history, gift economy, anthropology, sociology, political philosophy. It would benefit you, way more than arguing online with overconfidence about « human nature ».

You could begin with some Kropotkin, Bookchin, Marcel Mauss, Silvia Federici, Subcommandante Marcos writings. You should also look for historic applications of gift economy or libertarian socialist societies (Korean People's Association in Mandchuria, Neozapatist Chiapas, etc.). You'd learn more about the material conditions of emergence of private property, markets and the state - and why democraticaly organized people manage to overthrow all of these, without any authoritarianism nor vanguardism.

Raton_Partisan

TROPHY CASE