[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1758149320673.png (1.13 MB, 1500x1000, ClipboardImage.png)

 

It seems to me that our old pro-revolutionary Anarchist literature has ceased to answer the demands of the modern day. Without going now into any discussion as to whether Anarchist literature has ever adequately dealt with the practical application of our ideas, the question at issue now is whether the time has not come for a new and more popular interpretation of our ideas, particularly in light of the World War, the Russian Revolution and the subsequent vital social developments.

I feel that with the almost generally admitted fact of the bankruptcy of Socialism and the growing conviction of the failure of Bolshevism and of revolutionary party dictatorship, the opportunities for Anarchist propaganda have immeasurably increased. People demand to now what Anarchism really is; they want an exposition of our ideas that they can clearly understand; they demand to know how it will work and how it is to come about.

Now, can we refer them to the old Anarchist literature with any hope of their finding there a direct and clear answer to their pressing questions? I personally feel that we cannot.

Because of these considerations, very briefly state here, I have come to the conclusion that what is of the utmost need just now is a new Anarchist literature based particularly on the recent experiences of mankind; on the War, the Russian Revolution, the German Revolution, as well as on the modern development of capitalism and on the new forms that industrialism is assuming in international proportions.

The fundamental spirit of that new literature must deal primarily with the following matters:

1. The Anarchist attitude to modern life in its new political, industrial, agrarian and social aspects;

2. the problem of Anarchist propaganda in view of the new development of capitalism and of the changing relationships between capital and labor;

3. does the modern phase of capitalism justify the old Socialist and Anarchist conception of the meaning of the Social Revolution?

4. is the old conception of the social revolution not subject to revision? Have we not over-emphasized the destructive side of revolution at the great cost of its constructive phases?

The new character and the inter-relationship of the destructive and constructive sides of revolution.

5. a) The character of an Anarchist revolution; or at least of a revolution inspired by Anarchist ideas and spirit;

b) the question of political parties, of dictatorship and of the State in the Revolution;

6. The place of the labor unions and the role of Anarcho-syndicalism in the revolution;

7. The manner and methods of the revolution developing along Anarchist lines toward the ultimate Anarchist society;

8. Means and ways of beginning NOW the educational and preparatory of work of inspiring the revolution with the Anarchist spirit and ideals;

What is to prevent the repetition of the Bolshevik experiment in the next revolution?

9. The new literature dealing with these matters in a direct, concise and popular form and language.

The above is merely a brief general outline of the issues to be discussed, a few preliminary suggestions.

im sure im in the minority on this one but my biggest criticisms of anarchism have always been

1. how to develop and maintain organizational integrity and efficacy in historical circumstances not spontaneously suited to them (i.e. outside of embattled train unions and immiserated peasant life)
2. how to seriously answer the issues of managing the logistics and infrastructure of a planned economy without a state and a long transitionary period of adapting people towards self-governance in both cultural attitudes and straightforward practical capacities

>>2484272
btw im not suggesting non-anarchist communism has an easy or ultimate answer to these questions. but allowing for the use of the state makes the potential answers that communists have far more compelling and convincing. and as much as my specific questions might not reflect general skepticism in form, i think if youre being generous towards your skeptics, a lot of people mean something more or less equivelant when they say "ok i dont see how that would work tho"

>>2484272
>>2484274
Replying to your own LARP thread, leave the site already you fucking merchant retard, you are neither anarchist nor communist you're retarded as fuck and contribute to the status quo, not its change.

>>2484312
lmao i am not OP you fucking schizo i was replying in good faith to try to start an actual discussion

>>2484274
>>2484272
Why do you think that administration and logistics solving problems we all deal with work better when a state is making the decisions? Do you think people are dumb and/or unwilling to cooperate on solving problems without being forced? Do you think that the state body will understand the problems and the best solutions better than the people who actually deal with them? What is your reasoning for thinking a state would handle these problems better than the workers collaborating without being alienated from political power by a ruling party that exists separately from them?

>organizational integrity

It is better to be able to adapt the organization and change it according to people's needs. Institutional ossification/rot has been one of the major hurdles to building socialism. The ability of the state to wither away is taken as a given, but if this is the goal then what you want isn't simply organizational integrity but the capacity of the organization to persist or dissolve as demanded by the context.
>managing the logistics and infrastructure of a planned economy
People already do this now within large corporations and state bodies. Their skills are directly transferable to a socialism that doesn't lord over workers keeping them in line (in their best interests supposedly) rather than being subservient to them.
>a long transitionary period of adapting people towards self-governance in both cultural attitudes and straightforward practical capacities
People already manage organizing things in their personal lives, but a cultural revolution will still be necessary regardless what shape political revolution takes.


Unique IPs: 4

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]