Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Anarchism - Petty Utopianism

Good that we got this bit of cobwebbery in before the end of the year (100 years since his death). From next year, it's officially antique cobwebbery. :thumbs:
 
I'm enjoying how this thread about how rubbish anarchism is has turned into a thread showcasing Leninism's modern nadir as an impotent, cobwebbed faith arguing over the faded declarations of a failed, long-dead messiah. Capture the State, smash the State - the State wouldn't even know you exist if you didn't have a national insurance number. Talk about putting cart before horse, petty utopianism indeed.

As I started this exchange, let me explain.

1) The question about the state is actually of immediate importance. Every time there is a proposal which involves increasing state powers maybe in terms of state censorship or increased police powers, the nature of the state is or should be brought into question. If someone thinks the state could be captured then they are unlikely to be too fussed about encroaching state powers.

2) It’s worth highlighting that socialist traditions, particularly Marx and Lenin's communism, that many people (particularly Stalinists and anarchists on either side if the argument) assume are pro-state actually have a critique of the state.

3) Thinking about Yugoslav in particular, they come from a tradition ("Marxist/Leninist" ie Stalinist/official communist) which lies about its own tradition. I'm hoping this little exchange about State and Revolution will get them thinking about what they've got in to. Because it's not in anyway ambiguous about not capturing the state.
 
Oh I'm not naysaying your efforts, in fact I'm agreeing with your core view. My point is this is what happens with Leninism, far more interested in arguing its canon than anything else - even to the point of abandoning a thread set up specifically to rubbish anarchism. It's not a faith capable of seriously engaging with why it's irrelevant and what to do about that.
 
Oh I'm not naysaying your efforts, in fact I'm agreeing with your core view. My point is this is what happens with Leninism, far more interested in arguing its canon than anything else - even to the point of abandoning a thread set up specifically to rubbish anarchism. It's not a faith capable of seriously engaging with why it's irrelevant and what to do about that.

I wish Yugoslav was more interested in the canon tbh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTK
Does it? I'd love to see your workings there, beyond just "hrumph me grumpy". Also what's wrong with a bit of community crochet, are we supposed to spend our time doing Full Revolution without warm mitts?
 
Oh I'm not naysaying your efforts, in fact I'm agreeing with your core view. My point is this is what happens with Leninism, far more interested in arguing its canon than anything else - even to the point of abandoning a thread set up specifically to rubbish anarchism. It's not a faith capable of seriously engaging with why it's irrelevant and what to do about that.
Are you suggesting that Leninism was once relevant?
 
Down with the knitists!
Ah! I see you liked my post. You have revealed therefore that you are anti-knitting. You are a knitist. I woudn't bother smashing the state for people like you. Smash your own bloody state.
 
Ah! I see you liked my post. You have revealed therefore that you are anti-knitting. You are a knitist. I woudn't bother smashing the state for people like you. Smash your own bloody state.
I'm a gradualist - smash it one CEO at a time. :thumbs:
 
I'm a gradualist - smash it one CEO at a time. :thumbs:
Marxism-Leninism is not "gradualist" lol. Is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat now "gradualist" despite the obvious revolutionary fervor to crush the bourgeois elite and have the power be to the workers? (more specifically the revolutionary vanguard party)
 
Yes, he wanted to establish a proletarian state, which woud come about as a result of the smashing of the capitalist state, as I have explained to you, but you do not seem to understand.
I already said that the proletarian state socialism is better than anarchist approach to getting communism. But then a group of few went on a crusade to pursue the most anti-Leninist of the things from constant misinterpetation of the State and Revolution.
 
I mean, you don't have to have to think Leninism is a good thing to acknowledge that in, say, the 1930s it was certainly pretty relevant.
Leninism is more relevant today than anarchism, if you ask me. By which I mean that there are more Leninists than anarchists, but there are not many of either.

The booklet State and Revolution propounds a point of view would be accpeted by many who do no describe themselves as Leninists.
 
Leninism is more relevant today than anarchism, if you ask me. By which I mean that there are more Leninists than anarchists, but there are not many of either.

The booklet State and Revolution propounds a point of view would be accpeted by many who do no describe themselves as Leninists.
What have Leninists crocheted recently, eh?
 
Marxism-Leninism is not "gradualist" lol. Is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat now "gradualist" despite the obvious revolutionary fervor to crush the bourgeois elite and have the power be to the workers? (more specifically the revolutionary vanguard party)
(((My jokes))) :(
 


This seems to sum up much of modern day anarchism tbh.

I mean, on one hand I want to disagree, but on the other I recently ordered a book from PM Press and it came with a thing plugging this:

£42 as well, there's good money to be made in liberatory tarot apparently.
 
Back
Top Bottom