this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024
108 points (92.9% liked)
Solarpunk
5405 readers
1 users here now
The space to discuss Solarpunk itself and Solarpunk related stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere.
Join our chat: Movim or XMPP client.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Anarchism is a kind of socialism. It is a society which is structured as to eliminate rulership, which inherently means giving the people control over the means of production, which is the core of socialism.
You can't make anarchism happen without meeting the goals of socialism too. I don't accept any of the flavours of anarchism that don't look after vulnerable members of society. Anarchism is anti-ruler, and not looking after the vulnerable leaves an opening for rulers to return to dominate and exploit those people under the guise of being their saviours, or just because they are, you know, vulnerable.
If you've learned that socialism is statist, that's just statists coopting the term. There is nothing in the concept that requires a state unless you believe a state is necessary to organise people, which obviously anarchists don't.
The revolution will continue after this message from our sponsors.
Ancap aren't real anarchist (nor socialist) to begin with.
Uh, yeah, I know.
What about that was unclear?
I do apologize. Obviously when you ignore the parts of anarchism, which are not socialist, then all of anarchism is socialist. I overread it and should have known better.
AnCap is an oxymoron.
ancap is American chuuni – 14 year olds being edgy
Okay, I don't want to antagonise you unnecessarily. My snarky tone was because it sounded like you were promoting an ancap ideology, but your profile tells me I was wrong about that. Personally if I bring up any ideology that I consider harmful like ancap, I am very careful to frame it as something I disagree with.
It does seem like you're saying that I'm making a truism, like I've constrained my definition of anarchism artificially so that it excludes certain kinds. If that's what you're saying, I don't think that's true. I think the concept of ancapism is based on the notion that anarchy means "no rules", which is not true. Anarchy means "no rulers", which is a very, very different thing. If an ideology is indifferent to the emergence of quasi feudal states and warlords, as ancapism is, then it fails on the first test of even ideologically opposing the one thing anarchism is against.
Here's a very good writeup on how even Murray Rothbard, the originator of right-"libertarianism" or "anarcho"-capitalism concluded that his ideas were not anarchist: https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/blog/rothbard-not-anarchists.html