196

16458 readers

1720 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

829

Being the Only Socialist in the Family Rule (midwest.social)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Anarchism is Socialist. It may not be Marxist, but Anarchism cannot exist when property rights create hierarchy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It does resemble socialism, but there are differences depending on the school of thought of Anarchism that you prefer It is not completely incompatible with individual property.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How do you have property rights without hierarchy and without a state?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

By having the means to defend them

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Private Property is hierarchy. You cannot have an employee/Owner relationship without unjust hierarchy. Personal Property is allowable within Socialism, as such Anarchism is only Socialistic, unless you change the very meaning of Anarchism.

Being able to kill anyone that opposes your ownership of Capital also implies a monopoly on violence, and thus a form of State.

There's no such thing as Anarcho-Capitalism, just Libertarian Capitalist LARPing with Anarchist aesthetics.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

We used to call anarchy "socialism puberty"