this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
1204 points (91.1% liked)
Memes
45581 readers
2 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
it's not new. gallianists have been at it for a century.
Sorry, I set the bar too low.
Feasible plans for a classless society day one.
How far have they gotten in that century? Because honestly the whole "at it for a century" thing reeks of failure.
they got the fucking arch duke (and dozens of other heads of state). they blew up wallstreet. i think these are pretty big accomplishments.
Oh, wow, so they killed some people and bombed wall street.
How successful was that in achieving their political objectives?
very. they inspired millions, which was the goal of those actions.
Okay, so, the end result of inspiring people means that their political project succeeded? Their end goal was to inspire people? I thought their end goal was a classless, stateless society?
right, but since we (they) eschew(ed) prefigurative theories, we (they) only organized to fight. the actual structure of society is up to the people who live in the world that we (they) make possible.
that wasn't their only goal, but it was one of them.
Okay, so would you agree that they failed at forming a classless, stateless society?
i'd say they haven't succeeded yet.
Okay, and why haven't they succeeded yet?
plainly, I'd say it's state repression. they struck fear in their hearts in the state struck back.
That's incredibly unspecific, repression is one of the main things states do and is a broad category.
they were hunted down and framed for crimes. they were executed. they were exiled.
I feel like they probably shouldn't have done those things then, if they weren't able to sustain themselves in the face of that sort of state repression like communists could.
I know you disagree with anarchist tactics. That's what our whole discussion is about.
Do you not also disagree with those tactics, given how spectacularly they've failed to amount to anything material?
no. I think they could have won 100 years ago and I think they could win tomorrow. I like the tactic. people can be inspired and it can happen in an instant.
this is just posturing.
you don't know the future anymore than I. you don't know what the next revolution will look like or what would start it.
do I want to bet that you don't know the future? absolutely. here's a proof.
qed
edit: oh fuck. I was supposed to bet something. how about a loaf of bread?
are you suggesting that Marxist revolutionary theory is a science like meteorology? it's not.
I'm saying they can't know the future.
They can’t perfectly predict the future in the same way that meteorologists can’t, but both beat a coin flip by a mile.
"predict" is moving the goalposts. i said they can't know, and they asked if i wanted to bet. i know that they can't know the future.
they can predict all they want. they can't know, though.
i don't really want the loaf of bread. please give it to someone who does though.
i figured if you lost a bet you wouldn't welch on it. and calling me tankie, when this whole discussion is about me opposing authoritarian regimes no matter how they wish to portray themselves, is simply dishonest.