You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Antifa Threatens to Burn Down Theater Hosting Debate on Political Violence
Bill Ottman is the CEO of minds.com - I have spoken with him privately before, I didn't get any sense of his political position but I've never heard him say anything I would call 'right'. I am not a communist, but if you research the origins of communism, you will see that the version you are referencing is not really anything at all like the original version. I am absolutely not an expert on communism or anarcho communism but I do know that the versions of communism listed on this site bare little relation to the authoritarian version most people are familiar with: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-conquest-of-bread
"Real communism has never been tried". Well, if we haven't seen "real communism" then I'd hate to see what amount of hundreds of millions of lives lost in war and atrocity would be 'worth the cost' to get an actual communist government. Communism always requires authoritarianism to break the will of those who will become compliant and to 'break off' those who rebel. "Real communism" is demonic, requiring apocalyptic destruction of innocent lives and innocence of societies. That propaganda site represents nothing of communism in action. Only polished words to deceive the gullible.
the 'anarcho' part of anarcho communism is quite a major deviation from what you are referencing. 'anarcho' refers to anarchy and anarchy means 'no rulers'. any form of non voluntary action forced onto another equates to the presence of a ruler and thus true anarchy can never involve authoritarianism. government itself is not really in alignment with anarchy or anarcho communism - so what you are describing is literally nothing like what i am describing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-communism
Anarcho-communism
Anarcho-communism, also referred to as anarchist communism, communist anarchism, free communism and libertarian communism, is a political philosophy and anarchist school of thought which advocates the abolition of the state, capitalism, wage labour and private property (while retaining respect for personal property, along with collectively-owned items, goods and services) in favor of common ownership of the means of production, direct democracy, and a horizontal network of workers' councils with production and consumption based on the guiding principle: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". Some forms of anarcho-communism such as insurrectionary anarchism are strongly influenced by egoism and radical individualism, believing anarcho-communism to be the best social system for the realization of individual freedom. Most anarcho-communists view anarcho-communism as a way of reconciling the opposition between the individual and society.Anarcho-communism developed out of radical socialist currents after the French Revolution, but it was first formulated as such in the Italian section of the First International. The theoretical work of Peter Kropotkin took importance later as it expanded and developed pro-organizationalist and insurrectionary anti-organizationalist sections.
Except for the fact that every time you debate with an 'anarcho-communist' they eventually revert to someone being an authority. That or they bring up concepts, such as imposing social justice 'policies', that require a central authority, a collective that runs completely in opposition to anarchism. And with anarchism as policy, these same far leftists support the fight for social justice through the means of purges. Which too require a central authority, centralized power. Anarcho-communists are very liberal in their definition of what it means to have no rulers. They only mean "no rulers" in a capitalist context, not a communist one. I don't care about what you believe you're describing, because it's a pipe dream that's sold to the gullible. One that will be exploited for those communists who seeks power. They don't care about anarcho-Communism. Because that would just be stage one of Communism, a stepping stone. The so-called utopia would be for them, not you. Imagine being ruled by Hollywood?
I don't really believe anything here - I'm just talking about principles that are defined. Pretty much exactly your issues with anarcho communism also apply to anarcho capitalism in that there really isn't any way to enforce private property boundaries and related phenomena associated to private ownership of the means of production other than either a government or a private equivalent to government (which would basically just be a government).
In reality, the point I make over and over in anarchy groups online is that pretty much no 'sub genre' of anarchism can live up to real anarchy very easily without pretty radical shifts in the hearts and minds of the people involved. As far as I'm concerned, if there is a ruler then there is no anarchy, period. If we haven't experienced such a state then we don't really know it's benefits.
If anarcho communists want to initiate purges and governmental control then they aren't anarchists, period.