• superkret@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          “Are you a communist, too?” the kangaroo asked.

          “No, I’m an anarchist!”

          “Great”, the kangaroo said, “then we can be friends — until after the revolution…”

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            10 days ago

            To be fair, throughout history it has been common for the two general camps of Leftists, Marxists and Anarchists, to willingly join the other and convert. The biggest problem is that it isn’t a mere disagreement with means, but on ends as well.

            Marxists seek full public ownership and central planning in a democratic world republic. This is “Stateless, Classless, and Moneyless” in the Marxist sense, but not the Anarchist.

            Anarchists typically seek decentralized networks of mutual aid and cooperation, in a sort of spiderweb formation, a sort of “building the new out of the shell of the old.”

            Left-Unity serves a vital role in aligning in similar interests and achieving broader goals, but at some point these conflicts in desire must be rectified in some manner.

            I’m not arguing against Anarchism, I’d rather people read and decide for themselves what they believe is the best course.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 days ago

                Lmao! For what it’s worth, I used to consider myself an Anarchist, so I’m familiar with common tenets like “Means-Ends Unity” enough to hopefully represent Anarchists faithfully.

                My personal belief is that the more people that read theory of both the Marxist and Anarchist variety and actually put theory into practice, the more data points we can have, so to speak. Theory guides practice, which affirms or denies aspects of theory to allow modification of theory to be re-applied to new practice, in an endless spiral of repeated testing.

                This is actually just straight up the Marxist conception of the Dialectical Theory of Knowledge. It’s sometimes dismissed as common sense, of course, but this sense isn’t so common. It’s extremely similar to the Scientific Method.

                • TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏ@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  Yeah people, including myself, tend to forget that, before dialectics/etc were explicitly articulated in writing, such methodologies absolutely weren’t common sense. The concept of hypotheticals wasn’t even widely comprehended until the last couple centuries iirc

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    I’m not saying violence is the solution, but [REDACTED]