Anarchists Disgruntled With Marxists, Communists, And The General Socialist Left - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The 'no government' movement.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14788523
Joka wrote:Being poor has much more to it than material basis as there are other attributes to it specifically social and existential that has nothing to do with acquired wealth although that does have a huge part of it. There is nothing glamorous about being poor in the United States especially concerning reduced lifespans, health, and the ability to acquire healthcare.


And yet an NHS (a free health care system in the UK) rather than a space agency would pretty much solve this problem over night. Also higher taxes for the rich and working tax breaks for the poor would share the wealth throughout the US too. Capitalism isn't America's problem today. It's your politician's lack of common sense policies that's your real problem. The fact Trump has convinced working class voters that OBAMACARE is BAD for America speaks volumes of US societies stupidity. So perhaps rather than be an anarchist, you should really be a reformer. Someone who wants to change the establiament for the better. You should be a Bernie supporter.
#14788526
B0ycey wrote:And yet an NHS (a free health care system in the UK) rather than a space agency would pretty much solve this problem over night. Also higher taxes for the rich and working tax breaks for the poor would share the wealth throughout the US too. Capitalism isn't America's problem today. It's your politician's lack of common sense policies that's your real problem. The fact Trump has convinced working class voters that OBAMACARE is BAD for America speaks volumes of US societies stupidity. So perhaps rather than be an anarchist, you should really be a reformer. Someone who wants to change the establiament for the better. You should be a Bernie supporter.


Except that I don't believe any kind of state can be reconciled or reformed as I alluded to Immortal Goon.

I see the impossibility of political reform of any kind concerning statist societies. Higher the complexities the more problems are created and at the end of the vicious cycle an environment that collapses in on itself. (Problems and conflicts exceeds people's abilities to solve them.) This is the problem of any kind of centralization that thinks it can control every facet of existence and human life.
#14788547
Joka wrote:Except that I don't believe any kind of state can be reconciled or reformed as I alluded to Immortal Goon.


If the option is available, you can vote for change. Anarchism isn't really an answer if you are going to topple Capitalism. Capitalism is the reason the West is wealthy after all. You might make society more fairer by destroying the establishment and eliminating the concept of money but everyone will be worse off, including the poor. Who will invest and create jobs in an environment where money is worthless or is in danger of being taken away from you? A wealth class system might not seem fair to the working poor who do all the labour for society, however they tend to not have the money to invest or the ideas to create new jobs. So without fatcats, you have no jobs. No jobs equals no money. No money and you have to hunt and gather your own food. There is a reason the wealthiest countries in the world are Capitalist countries. Be against the system of you like. But should your wish come true, you'll be much worse off than you are today. It is that simple.
#14788726
B0ycey wrote:If the option is available, you can vote for change. Anarchism isn't really an answer if you are going to topple Capitalism. Capitalism is the reason the West is wealthy after all. You might make society more fairer by destroying the establishment and eliminating the concept of money but everyone will be worse off, including the poor. Who will invest and create jobs in an environment where money is worthless or is in danger of being taken away from you? A wealth class system might not seem fair to the working poor who do all the labour for society, however they tend to not have the money to invest or the ideas to create new jobs. So without fatcats, you have no jobs. No jobs equals no money. No money and you have to hunt and gather your own food. There is a reason the wealthiest countries in the world are Capitalist countries. Be against the system of you like. But should your wish come true, you'll be much worse off than you are today. It is that simple.


Voting in a controlled representative body under corporate or oligarchical control achieves nothing. At best it's the illusion of freedom within controlled outcomes.

I have no problem with a world without money or jobs. Life shouldn't be a personal biography of living on a global corporate super state plantation. I also have no problems with people hunting, fishing, or growing their own food either. Worse off? I don't think so.
#14788766
Joka wrote:I have no problem with a world without money or jobs. Life shouldn't be a personal biography of living on a global corporate super state plantation. I also have no problems with people hunting, fishing, or growing their own food either. Worse off? I don't think so.


If you genuinely believe this and are prepared to return civilization to medieval times, then I accept your opinion. But I certainly don't share it.
#14788769
Joka wrote:Worker protections? Nonexistent under communism especially after the inner political party or vanguard becomes the new elite (manager class) essentially becoming the new oppressive dictatorship of the working class altogether. Marxist or communist hypocrisy is always amusing and never ceases to amaze me. It all comes down to the Marxist and communist historical betrayal of anarchists, my motto is never again.

Communist gov'ts provided guaranteed full employment even for those who turned up late, skipped entire workdays and told their boss to eat a dick. Capitalist countries with similar levels of development force young women to work 36 hour shifts with no toilet breaks before their boss tells one of them to eat his dick.

Do you believe that if the anarchists had won in Spain that they would let everyone do as they pleased? The commies could continue being commies and the fascists could continue practicing fascism?

David Graeber wrote:Let us imagine that anarchist militias in Spain had routed the fascist army, which then completely dissolved, and kicked the socialist Republican Government out of its offices in Barcelona and Madrid. That would certainly have been victory by anybody’s standards. But what would have happened next? Would they have established Spain as a non-Republic, an anti-state existing within the exact same international borders? Would they have imposed a regime of popular councils in every singe village and municipality in the territory of what had formerly been Spain? How exactly? We have to bear in mind here that were there many villages towns, even regions of Spain where anarchists were almost non-existent. In some just about the entire population was made up of conservative Catholics or monarchists; in others (say, the Basque country) there was a militant and well-organized working class, but one that was overwhelmingly socialist or communist. Even at the height of revolutionary fervor, most of these would stay true to their old values and ideas. If the victorious FAI attempted to exterminate them all — a task which would have required killing millions of people — or chase them out of the country, or forcibly relocate them into anarchist communities, or send them off to reeducation camps — they would not only have been guilty of world-class atrocities, they would have had to give up on being anarchists. Democratic organizations simply cannot commit atrocities on that systematic scale: for that, you’d need Communist or Fascist-style top-down organization, since you can’t actually get thousands of human beings to systematically massacre helpless women and children and old people, destroy communities, or chase families from their ancestral homes unless they can at least say they were only following orders.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library ... of-victory


Also, the zionists already use your motto.

B0ycey wrote:But that's just it. The US poor look at these people and believe that his what a fair lifestyle should be. The US poor in terms of the real poor (poor in poor countries) are not poor. They are in fact very wealthy and I'm sure people living in poor nations would love to trade places with them. If you can feed yourself and your family, and have the time and money to write your discontent on the internet, I think perhaps your lifestyle isn't so shit after all. But that doesn't mean the US shouldn't share its wealth more fairly throughout its society.

I think you don't have much knowledge of 3rd world poverty. A family of peasant farmers can scratch enough coin together to buy a 2nd hand iphone 1 and can buy a fully charged car battery each week to charge it. Internet is cheap when you aren't subject to a monopoly, too. Even if you can't afford your own phone you can still talk to the other people in the village and benefit from their access to youtube and facebook.

You also aren't familiar with the lifestyle of the wealthy who own multiple mansions, yachts, aircraft and private islands, which allows them access to multiple organ transplant registries whilst the poor are bankrupted my medical emergencies.

Bread and circuses isn't good enough.
#14788781
AFAIK wrote:
I think you don't have much knowledge of 3rd world poverty. A family of peasant farmers can scratch enough coin together to buy a 2nd hand iphone 1 and can buy a fully charged car battery each week to charge it. Internet is cheap when you aren't subject to a monopoly, too. Even if you can't afford your own phone you can still talk to the other people in the village and benefit from their access to youtube and facebook.


I know enough to know that the world's poorest do not have access to a phone or the internet. That is a fact. But that doesn't mean poor nations don't have access to the internet. But so what? You moan that your life sucks but fail to realize that there are people much worse off than you. The US poor think they are poor. But compared to the rest of the world (who can't afford health care either), you are not that bad off.

You also aren't familiar with the lifestyle of the wealthy who own multiple mansions, yachts, aircraft and private islands, which allows them access to multiple organ transplant registries whilst the poor are bankrupted my medical emergencies.

Bread and circuses isn't good enough.


So change the rules and the establishment. Vote for change. Capitalism isn't the problem. It's your politicians not spreading US wealth through fair tax policies and working tax incentives. Your government would also rather spend their money on spacerockets and missles rather than free health care. So I am very familiar with what you write. But I suggest other means to solve the problem than what you suggest.
#14788825
Source for no one has a phone, please.
I live in Cambodia, an LDC with more phones than people.

He added that 70 per cent of the 20 million or so SIM cards in use in Cambodia, where many residents own more than one, have no ID attached to them, meaning as many as 14 million phone numbers could be discontinued.
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/s ... -crackdown
#14788831
North Korea. Mud huts in Ethiopia. If you think everyone has access to a mobile phone and the internet, you are delusional. Think what you like. I know I am right. So think the US poor have it bad. I'm sure plenty of your Cambodian colleagues would love to trade places with some of the US PoFo communists on here babbling about how shit they have it because they can't afford health care. To be frank, it's actually patronising and insensitive to the worlds poor who struggle to buy a fucking bike so they can sell their produce at market that you are defending your position. But what do I care. You're clearly a communist and I find communists the most delusional people on the planet.
#14788901
Oh yes, N Korea and Ethiopia, the true representatives of the global south.

I've yet to meet a Cambodian who feels he has lost face because an American living on the other side of the world has a fancier phone or car than he does. You're the one who is out of touch if you think people compare their situation to those located 5000 miles away or those who lived 500 years ago. By your standards present day Cambodians should be happy that their standard of living is higher than the kings who ruled over Angkor.
#14788911
AFAIK wrote:Oh yes, N Korea and Ethiopia, the true representatives of the global south.

I've yet to meet a Cambodian who feels he has lost face because an American living on the other side of the world has a fancier phone or car than he does. You're the one who is out of touch if you think people compare their situation to those located 5000 miles away or those who lived 500 years ago. By your standards present day Cambodians should be happy that their standard of living is higher than the kings who ruled over Angkor.


This has absolutely nothing to do with my previous posts. Quotes would be nice. All this is, is a statement of your experience. I refer to my own experience. I never even mentioned Cambodia until you brought it up because I have never been there. So I can refer to any poor person in ANY country I like. But let's be honest here. We are arguing about a minor point anyway. As I said earlier, so what? The US poor are not worse off than the poor in other countries. Are you arguing to the contrary?
#14789079
I'm arguing it is irrelevant since people don't compare their situation to those living thousands of miles away or hundreds of years past. If Americans are supposed to compare themselves to the poorest people in the world then those poor people should compare themselves to the poorest people in their country's history.
#14789127
I'm actually more tolerant of anarchism than a lot of Marxists, which comes from having a certain amount of Connolly in my ideological blood. But it really is an anarchism related to syndacalism, and I generally think that they're wrong, but that ultimately our goals are similar enough that everything could work out well enough should the conditions be right.

As for the topic now brought up after the high-five between the capitalist and the anarchist (displaying part of this problem), this seems relevant:

Marx wrote:Let us suppose the most favorable case: if productive capital grows, the demand for labour grows. It therefore increases the price of labour-power, wages.

A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut. The little house now makes it clear that its inmate has no social position at all to maintain, or but a very insignificant one; and however high it may shoot up in the course of civilization, if the neighboring palace rises in equal or even in greater measure, the occupant of the relatively little house will always find himself more uncomfortable, more dissatisfied, more cramped within his four walls.

An appreciable rise in wages presupposes a rapid growth of productive capital. Rapid growth of productive capital calls forth just as rapid a growth of wealth, of luxury, of social needs and social pleasures. Therefore, although the pleasures of the labourer have increased, the social gratification which they afford has fallen in comparison with the increased pleasures of the capitalist, which are inaccessible to the worker, in comparison with the stage of development of society in general. Our wants and pleasures have their origin in society; we therefore measure them in relation to society; we do not measure them in relation to the objects which serve for their gratification. Since they are of a social nature, they are of a relative nature.


It's always funny when a capitalist says something like, "Have you ever thought about how there were poor countries?" To a Marxist, as if this has never crossed anybody's mind before.

Educate yourself.
#14789583
anarchist23 wrote:Image


I have a hard time identifying with any of the traditions of anarchism as my views are complex.

We have a disgruntled communist, George Orwell praising Anarchism.


One of my favorite writers George Orwell is.

B0ycey: If you genuinely believe this and are prepared to return civilization to medieval times, then I accept your opinion. But I certainly don't share it.


Your views are irrelevant since modern civilization will destroy itself and eventually run out of natural energy resources where powering modern technological infrastructure will become more impossible overtime.

Fifty years from now assuming global war doesn't destroy and eradicate the planet humanity will go through a period of peak everything. Humanity will be so lucky if it is afforded to return back to medieval times versus the prospect of total extinction.


To Immortal Goon,

Is capitalism even a thing anymore? It seems to be molding itself very nicely within global state run socialism and liberalism quite well acting only as a means of private finance for those aims.

Capitalists are always complaining about crony capitalism or there being no genuine sense of capitalism in practice anywhere in the world. What they fail to realize is that the remnants of capitalism today has infused itself entirely with socialism and liberalism since the 1960's. There is no pure form of capitalism practiced today in the world. Is Capitalism dead? What exists now in its place?
#14789636
Joka wrote:Your views are irrelevant since modern civilization will destroy itself and eventually run out of natural energy resources where powering modern technological infrastructure will become more impossible overtime.


You can debate whether we are on the verge of wiping ourselves out of not. I believe the doomsday clock is set at 2 1/2 minutes to midnight. But I think you are underestimating technology. Giant leaps are being made in fusion and renewables. And technology is becoming more fuel efficient. In fifty years time I would like to think we will have started to use something other than oil for our energy needs.

As for capitalism, I wouldn't say it's a fair system or ideology. I am a Centrist not a Capitalist after all. But I cannot think of an alternative system that benefits society, gives an incentives to make money and create ideas, promotes progression, makes work pay and increases living standards than it. Even China turned to Capitalism in the end, and fuck me, they are better off by doing so. But if you believe the world is doomed, then all I can say is you have picked the right ideology to believe in.
#14789648
B0ycey wrote:You can debate whether we are on the verge of wiping ourselves out of not. I believe the doomsday clock is set at 2 1/2 minutes to midnight. But I think you are underestimating technology. Giant leaps are being made in fusion and renewables. And technology is becoming more fuel efficient. In fifty years time I would like to think we will have started to use something other than oil for our energy needs.

As for capitalism, I wouldn't say it's a fair system or ideology. I am a Centrist not a Capitalist after all. But I cannot think of an alternative system that benefits society, gives an incentives to make money and create ideas, promotes progression, makes work pay and increases living standards than it. Even China turned to Capitalism in the end, and fuck me, they are better off by doing so. But if you believe the world is doomed, then all I can say is you have picked the right ideology to believe in.


Not entirely doomed but close to it, humanity globally has chosen this path now and there's no stopping how it will all unfold. I want to believe there is some sort of hope or redemption for the world but there seems to be very little redeeming qualities left of it. I hope that I am proved wrong of course for the sake of the world's plight, only time will tell.

I'm very familiar with technology and more specifically acquainted with its limitations.

For me capitalism like socialism is just another doomed ideology, I hope for a new realization globally in their place instead as the world needs it now more than ever.
#14789660
AFAIK wrote:What's your opinion on the Spanish civil war, Joka?


Very quickly I would say anarchists lost Spain due to Stalin's meddling. The anarchists of Spain were stuck between western fascists and the communism of Stalin. Neither groups wanted to see the Spanish anarchists succeed in revolution.

@Deutschmania None of what you posted contradic[…]

Election 2020

running up huge national debts. I believe that O[…]

HBO's Leaving Neverland

This film debunking the OP film just got released […]

End of maduro - hopefully.

https://twitter.com/VenSolidarity/status/116263466[…]