this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
722 points (84.8% liked)

Comics

5897 readers
48 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine 🇵🇸 . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It isn't just the wording that's problematic, it's the way Marx was dismissive towards the existing methods of collectivism and horizontal organizing. Yes, subsistence farming is a "primitive" mode of production, but the way peasants and indigenous people organized and collectivized resources is not irrelevant to modern industrial modes of production. Marx dismissed the way peasants and indigenous people collectivized resources as "primitive" and argued in favor of centralized power structures. I believe this to be a mistake.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As I said, no such organizing has successfully fended off capitalism for more than a few months, not in the last 150 years. It could work, under some sort of ideal conditions, but not under the material conditions of contemporary history.

[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It baffles me that marxists will dismiss anarchist ideas using the exact same talking points that liberals use to dismiss communism.

Communism also failed to fend off capitalism - and before you say b-but actually the USSR lasted a really long time, ask yourself if the USSR at any point actually lived up to the ideals of the revolution. We should be focusing on finding new solutions that work, and being dismissive of anarchist ideas doesn't help.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

Communism also failed to fend off capitalism

That is true: in quite a few cases—most in fact—it only lasted about 70 years. Cuba has lasted about that long and is still standing, and China even longer. Vietnam, North Korea, and Laos are also still standing.

Fending off imperialism, “the highest stage of capitalism,” is no mean feat. They’ll do almost everything in their power to crush socialism. The imperial core countries are in decline right now, so it may get easier should the trend continue. They’ve significantly deindustrialized themselves, and they’re losing their grip on the periphery states.

We should be focusing on finding new solutions that work

Sure, but no other solutions have worked so far.

being dismissive of anarchist ideas doesn’t help

I mean, show us a win and you’ll have our attention, otherwise I don’t see why we shouldn’t be dismissive. Seize the state and fend off imperialist forces for an appreciable length of time through horizontal organizing.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Communism also failed to fend off capitalism - and before you say b-but actually the USSR lasted a really long time,

The USSR being couped didn't stop it from sponsoring revolutionary movements around the globe until the coup. The US still hasn't defeated places like Cuba. In this sense the project still lives on.

ask yourself if the USSR at any point actually lived up to the ideals of the revolution.

Yes, in many ways. In some ways it did not.