So, I'm about halfway through The Eclipse and Re-emergence of the Communist Movement by Gilles Dauve, and I have a question. I understand the content of what's being said, the changes being proposed, the reasons why, etc. But, how is this any different from anarcho-communism? Both seek to abolish wage labour, the state, money, commodity production, and exchange value. Both, essentially, propose an immediate transition to communism. The only difference I can see is that Dauve proposes that communization will begin but not be completed for a generation or so, but the abolition of commodity production, money, and the state is the starting point for both. Also, the idea of communism as an existing movement in our current society that just sooner or later manages to fully "break through" was also more or less written about by Kropotkin in The Conquest of Bread. Is it really just a difference in word choice, or one being "marxist in nature?" The content of the actual revolution being proposed seems virtually identical to me.
Doesnt communization usually have a vanguard party to implement these polies and a semi-state? wouldn' that be the differance idk (i could be wrong and confusing it with trotskyism)
>>2933313 No, it rejects vanguard parties and unions as workers' organizations, arguing that they can only ever work within the bounds of capital. Otherwise it would just be normal hyper-internationalist Leninism (so yeah, basically Trotskyism).
>>2933315> it rejects vanguard parties and unionsis
anything permissible then lol
>>2933323The class itself, for itself, no organizers, no outsiders, no middle men, no bureaucrats
Designer ideology
it is anarcho-communism for marxists, yes
I left anarchism because I realized a decentralized horinzational organization would br impossible to overthrow the modern state appartus, the only anti-capitalist orgizations that surivive are ones with strong cadres and a vanguard. I think anarchism will have a place in history but not right now
>>2933363What has 150 years of organizing done? We’re further away from communism than the proletariat of the 1870s
>>2933325 Then what does that look like other than parties, unions, or councils? Are we just supposed to invent a fourth form of working-class organization which Dauve just never mentions?
>>2933365Vanguards and organizations have only ever taken power in semi feudal semi colonial conditions, in no country with a consolidated, strong bourgeois have the proletariat ever taken power
>>2933368It has to be the actual working class itself, it’s a total rejection of representative politics
>>2933365>I realized a decentralized horinzational organization would br impossible to overthrow the modern state appartusAnarchism is flawed because it’s theory is a mess and it ultimately does not fully accept proletarian class rule and suppression of the bourgeoisie. It is not unlikely in the slightest to catch them still promoting capitalist markets and being no different than a liberal.
Decentralized horinzational organization is exactly what communists call for. It is exactly what the real movement demands. It is part of the basis and foundation for communist.
>>2933373The real movement where? Point out where it physically exists
>>2933365>the only anti-capitalist orgizations that surivive are ones with strong cadres and a vanguardName one that has modern success.
>I think anarchism will have a place in history but not right nowAnarchism has it’s place in history as yet another failed liberal ideology
>>2933378Liberal ideology didn’t fail though, it’s been the status quo of the entire world since the 19th century
>>2933365 This is a based take and one I agree with, except I reject vanguardism, at least the Leninist idea of it. Maybe something more like Pannekoek's educative party would work better. Anarchism has proven itself viable under certain material conditions, and in terms of self-defense has faired pretty much as well as most ML movements (remember that most ML movements have been chrushed, just like the anarchist ones, it's really just that MLism has been attempted more often and therefore had many more chances. Anarchism, however, does actually establish communism). Anarchism cannot work in modern states such as the US due to the power of the state aparatus. It could work in, say, Mexico, where the state is weak (and in fact is working there) and industry is developed enough, but we Amerikkkans don't have the material conditions for it.
>>2933381>Liberal ideology didn’t fail thoughAs a whole, no. Individually for anarchists, yes.
>>2933371 Yeah, and so in anarchist-communism; that's kind of its whole thing.
>>2933383What premises where? I only ever see proles staring at brainrot their phones, I do it myself all the time. If I bring up a union it either stops at “that would be nice” or “they’re just bureaucrats who won’t stand up for you”.
>>2933386EZLN are still kicking if you count them as anarchists
>>2933373 Anarcho-communism DOES suppose and practice armed surpression of the buorgeois counterrevolution, just by militias and not a centralized state aparatus. Also "its theory is a mess" without specifying how is a nothing statement. I've also never seen an anarchist defending markets under anarchism, technically market-anarchists exist but I'm yet to actually see one, and I see a LOT of anarchists.
>>2933383>asked to physically locate a thing<posts a quotekek
>>2933389 I don't see how union's couldn't be reclaimed and reformed either. It has literally happened before, anarcho-syndicalism did actually overthrow a government and achieve communism (Yes, Bordigist, ik that you have a problem with saying "achieve" but you know what I mean), albeit briefly.
>>2933389>I only ever see proles staring at brainrot their phonesThen you aren’t being very observant. Start looking for contradictions, for signs of historical progression.
>If I bring up a union it either stops at “that would be nice” or “they’re just bureaucrats who won’t stand up for you”.Don’t know what to tell you on that other than just find other ways of organization.
>>2933401Organizations only ever turn from revolutionary to reactionary, the reverse order literally never happens
>>2933402Or maybe organization itself is ultimately useless, at least under current conditions. Capitalism will go on until it’s physically impossible to keep it going, human agency or politics are irrelevant.
>>2933325 So do we collectively just rush at Congress with guns, burn police stations, sieze the means of production, and magically coordinate the overthrow of the buorgeoisie via telepathy or something?
This sounds like the liberal charicature of anarchism, just a bunch of spontaneous, formless, chaotic destruction in which the masses immediately arrive at communist organizational forms. Anarchist-communism couched in Marxist lanuage and arrived at using Marxist analysis is what I'm seeing.
>>2933418We don’t have to do anything, entropy will take care of the nation state, all the proletariat has to do is survive
>>2933325It's so funny that ultroids/leftcoms actually think this position is correct lmfao. Imagine being that retarded, "uhhhh yeah the class is just uhhh "for itself" yeah… Elaborate?? Uhhhhh it's like the thing when you don't have a party yeah"
>>2933366Achievements of vanguard parties:
Multiple world historic social revolutions
Several decades of communist rulership and beginning construction of of socialism
Literal 100s of millions of people lifted up out of third world poverty in a matter of decades
Achievements of any other retard leftoid stream:
Less than nothing
>>2933422AES got destroyed and absorbed into world capitalism, you’re as stupid as anyone in 1917 trying to do the Paris Commune again. New era requires new thought.
>>2933406 CNT-FAI.
There has never been a case of "the masses" spontaneously rising up and organizing themselves into communism without some network of coordination that allows large-scale action, and I don't see how their could be on a national, let alone international scale.
This is a problem I ran into a while ago when trying to discuss revolution on Bordiga.party, people just saying that there's nothing that can be done so we have to sit around and wait and trust that the proletariat works it out magically by overthrowing the state and producing communist transformation out of thin air.
>>2933426That’s why I argue entropy is the real historical actor, not any class struggle
>>2933427 Okay so you're literally not even a Marxist, just basically a secular Calvinist about history.
>>2933392>just by militiasNot supposed to divide up the proletariat like that.
>not a centralized state aparatusSo a decentralized state apparatus? And also you do realize a centralized state apparatus can take the form of worker councils right?
>Also "its theory is a mess" without specifying how is a nothing statementYou have no meaningful structure that actually defines you. And this is a consistent trait that defines all anarchists. Anarcho-communism? It’s a nonsense name. Bet you can’t even meaningfully distinguish yourself.
>I've also never seen an anarchist defending markets under anarchism, technically market-anarchists exist but I'm yet to actually see one, and I see a LOT of anarchists.I have met plenty. Even an anarcho-feudalist at one point.
>>2933406>Or maybe organization itself is ultimately useless, at least under current conditionsOrganization is not useless, it is difficult
>Capitalism will go on until it’s physically impossible to keep it goingAnd one of the factors that makes it impossible could be the freeing up of human agency.
>>2933428I think it is complete determinism, feudalism needed to exhaust all the coal in Europe through more or less complete deforestation and get its population halved by the plague for the mercantile class to eventually take power. COVID, both World Wars, decolonization, and every other financial bubble popping simply isn’t enough.
>>2933429I don’t care about being a “marxist”, I care about being correct, Marx would agree on that level.
>>2933392The failure of anarchism is self evident. The most successful example of Marxism-Leninism in the 21st century is China, the most powerful nation on earth. The most successful example of anarchism in the 21st century was CHAZ and the BLM riots which put Biden in power, kickstarting the Gaza genocide
>>2933456If Every time you buy plastic bullshit from china in your local walmart, target, and dollar tree you’re building socialism, then I am a full and proud reactionary
>>2933456>The most successful example of Marxism-Leninism in the 21st century isCuba
>>2933458Coherent political forms cannot conquer power in a postmodern reality
>>2933371>It has to be the actual working class itself, it’s a total rejection of representative politicsrepresentative politics emerges insofar as the ruling class (in this purely hypothetical case, the working class) will be made up of a wide variety of people, who do not agree on everything, do not specialize in the same matters, are at different stages of life, have different levels of responsibility, different capabilities, different backgrounds, different interests, different amounts of duties unrelated to ruling society (like raising children or taking care of elders), different levels of competence, different levels of interest in ruling society (some will find this utterly boring). Governance as a duty is yielded to a narrow strata because only a narrow strata of any given class will express interest in governing. The real question is how to prevent that narrow strata from taking advantage of this and reinventing class society by becoming unaccountable bureaucrats.
>>2933462A bold statement requiring evidence and elaboration
>>2933464Marxism Leninism was only able to conquer half the world during the modernist period, in a postmodern period marxism leninism has a track record of absolute zero, China is America’s 51st state, they are the same country and have been thoroughly absorbed into the NATO sphere, the supposed cold war is fake.
>>2933466>Marxism Leninism was only able to conquer half the world during the modernist period,a 3rd
>in a postmodern period marxism leninism has a track record of absolute zero, disagree
>China is America’s 51st state, disagree
>they are the same country disagree
>and have been thoroughly absorbed into the NATO sphere, disagree
>the supposed cold war is fake.disagree
china is humpty dumpty straddling the wall between the highest form of capitalism and the earliest form of socialism. this is why china is so controversial. the new cold war is very real, otherwise there would be no trade war, no iran war, no israel conflagration, no kidnapping of maduro, no increaed hostility towards cuba, etc. every country that chooses china over the USA will feel massive pressure from the USA. in fact any attempt to downplay the new cold war is either massive cope or an overcorrection of china dickriding. in the latter case it is understandable but still wrong.
>>2933469>china is humpty dumpty straddling the wallChina is the wall
>>2933456 We're not talking about economic success. We're talking about building communism. What brought China to prosperity was foreign capital and a mixed economy, not communism. Our goal as *communists* is to build *communism* not 100 years of non-Western centralized social democracy without the democracy.
>>2933469Let’s discount China, where has ML succeeded outside of China? Laos and Vietnam are both more or less following the Chinese model, either Vietnam agreeing to participate in the Gaza genocide. The JVP in Sri Lanka got elected but I haven’t heard any news out of there since it happened and they’re Sinhala chauvinists who fully endorsed Tamil genocide when it was most intense.
>>2933471A great wall even
>>2933472The point of communism is to end both politics and the economy
>>2933433 Fair, but then don't call yourself a marxist. You're a utopian socialist, albeit with strong marxist influence on your analysis and langauge.
>>2933475Entropy is literally the opposite of idealism or utopianism but whatever, I think we can respectfully disagree
How do ancoms and leftcoms ensure that reactionaries don't get elected / selected to be a part of the people's council o algo
>>2933474 Yes, I'm aware. I'm the one who said that economy (mixed economy in this case) is not communism, and China is materially wealthy because of good economic management, not because of communism being the mode of production.
>>2933472Communism IS “economic success”, or more accurately the building and development of the productive forces as managed by the proletariat through the communist party
>>2933474*either
I meant “with”
>>2933478 Fair, I suppose, but it's not scientific socialism either. But then again, it's all about what actually leads to society arriving at communism. The correct philosophy will be proven when we get there, I'm just pretty certain that Marxism is the closest we'll get to a coherent analytical framework of it. Thank's for at least being civil; you're better
>>2933482We’ve had more than enough productive forces to enter full communism since Kropotkin wrote Conquest of Bread, he literally proved it with math. This is purely a cope to pretend your preferred faction of the ruling class does so in your long term interests.
>>2933432>I think it is complete determinism, feudalism needed to exhaust all the coal in Europe through more or less complete deforestation and get its population halved by the plague for the mercantile class to eventually take power. COVID, both World Wars, decolonization, and every other financial bubble popping simply isn’t enough.trvke
>>2933486 Based and true. China could've achieved higher phase communism last decade if not well beforehand.
>>2933485Is entropy a law of physics or not? What’s unscientific about putting it at the level of class struggle or even above it as a historic mover?
>>2933489 Because entropy garuntees that things get more disordered in the sense that they progressively become more complex than they were in their starting state. It's "disordered" in comparison to the initial state. Society becoming increasingly complicated is inevitable, but whether or not that increasing complication results in collapse or not depends on the situation. Complication can also lead to uncomplication in a way. The set of historical circumstances that would lead 5000 people to flee society and start a commune in the mountains would be complex. And that new commune society, smaller and thus less complicated socially, is in a higher phase of entropy than before, because it has "decayed further from the original state."
>>2933488Okay I guess I’ll go tell the 100 million + members of the CPC that they’re all wrong and this white petite bourgeois anarchist who’s never worked a day in his life has it all figured out
>>2933495 Not a borgeois, not an anarchist, and I have in fact worked a day in my life. 100 million people believing something does not make it true. If the belief that has the most subscribers is the most true, then Christianity is objectively true (it's not).
>>2933495The BJP is bigger and has more members, who are you to criticize them and glorious Hindustan? Go back to Pakistan
>>2933498Quick question which party is a DotP?
>>2933495 Logically fallacious tankie cope and racebaiting. You're a woke 1 liberal with a red suit on. Unironically the kind of person who would argue against trans women having bathroom access because that could oppress disabled gay black women.
>>2933499If merely saying you’re a Dotp makes you one than I am a a DOTP in one person
>>2933505Good thing they’re a DotP both in theory and in practice
>>2933478consciousness as a self-aware self-correcting feedback loop that some forms of matter develop to more efficiently distribute heat is literally the universe's solution to entropy, and the dialectical position is that entropy and consciousness are in a clear struggle but it is not clear which one will win.
>>2933495>no argument, just ad hominem and appeal to authorityXi aint sending his top guys today
>>2933508My money is on entropy winning that fight
>>2933507the PRC has always been a democracy of multiple classes, not a DOTP, you are a bourgeois socialist, you are a DSA member
>>2933474i understand that complicity in the gaza genocide is very important and urgent but i don't see why people compare china and the USA on this matter when america is both qualitatively and quantitatively much more supportive of the genocide than china is. see
>>2932026 for some empirical data comparing the two.
>>2933431 Cooperative militias. Decentralized, voluntarily cooperative federations of councils/trade unions organized horizontally. There is a set theory, go actually read some. Market-anarchism is fake, and anarcho-fuedalism is even more fake. You should not be counting teenage ideology shoppers who were identifying as anarcho-nazi-market-marxists-with-gay-characteristcs last month as serious adherents a theoretical tendency.
>>2933515i think it's impossible to know given our relatively local and limited perspective in the uni/multi-verse
>>2933517China has leverage it refuses to use, the whole world is complicit at this point, less or more doesn’t matter
>>2933510Quick question how many hundreds of millions of people has anarchism lifted out of poverty?
>>2933306 Original poster here, I've determined that, as one user put it, it's just anarcho-communism for Marxists. I have actually learned though that the difference in theory is that communization will occur naturally as a product of historical conditions, and cannot be hastened or prompted by any workers' organization. Ancoms, on the other hand, believe in doing something to actually improve society and destroy capitalism, so now my bias towards anarcho-communism over communization theory is cemented. I think that communization as a process is technically possible, and so is anarcho-communism, all given the right conditions, but anarcho-communists believe in something.
>>2933529 How many hundreds of millions live under communism in China?
>>2933531 I'll still finish reading though, because it's an interesting text.
>>2933530Infantile whining
>freedom must mean freedom for the group, not freedom for the individual. Men must not be slaves to other men but they must be slaves to their group. For if they are not, they will surely become enslaved by another >>2933535Or you can stop pretending selling treats to treatlers is progress
>>2933535>you are an infantile if you dont think communism is when slaverykek
>>2933535So communism is when you subjugate yourself to the absolute will of some homogenous mass and are not allowed to do anything unnaproved by others?
Damn, really appealing ideology. Its definitely going to spread like wildfire.
inb4 "it's not an ideology, it's da real moovement!!!"
>>2933572>subjugate yourself to the absolute will of some homogenous massYou discovered why people hate collectivism
>>2933572That's every society tho, there always are limits and social pressure
>>2933456why do so many marxists think reproducing nationalism, liberalism and capitalism is a success for a communist party? are they retarded?
>>2933644>are they retarded?Some are. Some are cynical bastards who don't care about politics and just want to gain personal wealth and power.
>>2933406>Organizations only ever turn from revolutionary to reactionary, the reverse order literally never happens decemberists → narodnya volya → RSDLP → bolsheviks
In any case we've already solved this dialectically.
Thesis: Statist Communism
Antithesis: Anarchist Communism
Synthesis: Council Communism
>>2933474>The point of communism is to end both politics and the economyi have never heard this definition of communism from anyone before and it seems to be an utterly absurd definition, like something a conservative would come up with if they were trying to denounce communism as utopian
>>2933525>less or more doesn’t matterignorance of qualitative comparison is unscientific. i don't think anyone in their right mind would say that 1000 and 1 are equal just because they are both greater than zero.
Unique IPs: 19