Cowbee [he/they]

I disagree, then.

Then what is?

What are the problems with wanting production and distribution to be collectivized and oriented around needs, rather than profits? How is this comparable to Reddit?

That’s fair, haha.

I wouldn’t say social media is a good space for intelligent conversations, haha.

Yep, it’s kinda fun that way.

Usually when people leave reddit, many communists do come and find a much better place here. I think it’s good that we have a lot of left wing people here, and have little tolerance for right-wing and pro-imperialist views.

Many more communists and linux enthusiasts.

Check their modlog, they were banned for being a bigot.

It has some anti-features that make it worse IMO, like the social credit score “feature,” not to mention the right-wing and anti-communist views of the lead dev.

Just agitate in communist and other anti-imperialist communities on reddit, not on reddit in general, for now. The liberals usually flock to Lemmy.world anyways, leftists tend to go to left instances like Hexbear.net or Lemmygrad.ml.

Depends on the instance.

It has some features and some anti-features. Lemmy is better IMO as it doesn’t have a weird social credit score system like PieFed does.

Look up Assata Shakur, and read Assata: An Autobiography.

Depends on what your time frame is and what you consider a state. Anarchists tend to analyze states as unjustifiable hierarchies entrenched through monopolies on violence, and that they form a “class” in and of themselves. Marxists analyze class by its relation to production and distribution, as a social relation, and see the state as a result of class struggle for the purposes of oppressing other classes. What statelessness looks like, therefore, differs.

Anarchism is primarily about communalization of production. Marxism is primarily about collectivization of production.

When I say “communalization,” I mean anarchists propose horizontalist, decentralized cells, similar to early humanity’s cooperative production but with more interconnection and modern tech. When I say collectivization, I mean the unification of all of humanity into one system, where production and distribution is planned collectively to satisfy the needs of everyone as best as possible.

For anarchists, collectivized society still seems to retain the state, as some anarchists conflate administration with the state as it represents a hierarchy. For Marxists, this focus on communalism creates inter-cell class distinctions, as each cell only truly owns their own means of production, giving rise to class distinctions and thus states in the future.

For Marxists, socialism must have a state, a state can only wither with respect to how far along it has come in collectivizing production and therefore eliminating class. All states are authoritarian, but we cannot get rid of the state without erasing the foundations of the state: class society, and to do so we must collectivize production and distribution globally. Socialist states, where the working class wields its authority against capitalists and fascists, are the means by which this collectivization can actually happen, and are fully in-line with Marx’s beliefs. Communism as a stateless, classless, moneyless society is only possible post-socialism.

Abolishing the state overnight would not create the kind of society Marxists advocate for advancing towards, and if anything, would result in the resumption of competition and the resurgance of capitalism if Marx and Engels predictions are correct.

Communism itself is not static either. It will have its own contradictions that resolve and propel it forward. Gradually, habit replaces more and more of what is already formalized by the state today, but it doesn’t look like the communalist, decentralized cell formation anarchists propose.