@gronkt A duginite?

capitalism is already a coercive system of exploitation

the state under capitalism is violent, only sometimes that violence comes out in other ways, like wars overseas. follow the trail of property and money

exactly capitalism is inherently exploitative and forces every to become a blood sucker

not really, one has to understand the force of history, the spirit as hegel would say

the proletariat might have had its time, but the contradiction between capital and labour persists

labour has not fulfilled its potential, either in the ussr or under liberalism

the communist idea persists because it is the idea of emancipation from thraldom to the cash nexus

the offshoring of labour is a problem but the search for profits is a capitalist problem

i am anarchocommunist so i am communist without the state, which is what marx and engels were when they weren't playing politics

the search for more and more profit is the problem

it creates a vicious cycle of exploitation whether here or overseas, destruction of environment and bodies

the very definition of communism is the withering away of the state as marx and engels say, the interim before that goal is the dictatorship of the proletariat which granted led to disaster

@gronkt Marx worked plenty, intellectual labour is very difficult

and he got paid peanuts for it, his legacy is huge and writings are pure genius

the power of the people is all

one can say that america in its early phases was one of the most successful communes since everything was decided by councils

that was before big government and the civil war

no it wasnt ancap because capitalist was in its early phases

there is nothin wrong with self starters, but having an advantage like the americans or australians where your given land is not really ancap, that is communism

yes but if you also share with community it is

bartering local trade

decentralised everything is communism

i think federalisation within nations and maintain trade on a planetary scale idealistic but possible

yes i agree i hate th idea of any nwo world governemnt

hahah perhaps time will tell

trade is necessary for a good life

plus all knowledge and technical advancement relies on sharing, localism is anathema to knowledge growth

youre talking about a national spirit, as though the collective owns anything

i dont sacrifice myself for my country, in fact, i dont want the ideology of sacrifice for anyone or anything, that is for me to decide

i can take on any philosopht, epicurean, stoic, buddhist, christian, yes i can sacrifice to realise my spiritual potential, or artistic potential etc

but i will not sacrifice for some imagines nation

culture and tradition is important but all the greatest individual growth will also come from antagomism with it

Are you orthodox @gronkt

i can see the merit of this argument, but this Malthus not Marx. Population growth and expansion is a problem of global capital as well, not ideology

and in fact, capital which wants profit from war has created untold numbers of refugees. make the poor countries rich and no one will want to leave

africa can be developed, and the west has to help fast otherwise more shit will hit the fan

thats not feasible because their shit already is your shit

the world already is a global world

africa had a chance with a state socialism style system in the 60s and 70s--it could have worked to bring them up to speed with western capitalism, but cia and other imperialists did not let history play out

neocolonialism is a sadder history than colonialism, so many things go wrong with a too rapid development

UN has some good points but there is a danger it could become the spokeman of global capital in the future, so i cant trust its motives either

i think people exaggerate the role money played in the russian revolution

you seem to have a cabal view of history--i think the cabal view obscures the deeper systemic nature of the disease, which is the profit motive

it is documented but unless mainstream history accepts it it is conspiracy theory

history is a vexed way to approach politics anyway since facts are not facts but interpretations--always

david icke hahaha that guy is literally on another planet

conspiracy nuts have taken the juice out of radical politics and channeled into garbage

true it has gone mainstream

i heard a good explanation by the philosopher slavoj zizek for the russia thing--it was a way for the democratic party to divert attention away from the fact that Bernie Sanders garned so much support, and was the real reason the democrats lost to the republicans

they needed a good conspiracy theory to expalin to themselves why they fucked up so bad with the working class

anarcho capitalism strikes me as an odd philosophy, since it wants to hark back to an imagined time when capitalism was free

but capitalism is capitalism or it is something else

in fact the term is a vexed one--what does it refer to anyway?

@Dontkillmyvibe the coercive force of the government is decided by the social contract, that the people agreed to, so we need to find out what the people want to do with the government, and whether it is accountable

if not then change is possible, but direct democracy, ie communism, is the same goal

@gronkt that's a counterproductive argument that will land you in the gulag

you have a bleak view of humanity sire slav

@Dontkillmyvibe"Right. Government was made to directly serve UNDER the people. I feel like the system has strayed from that. My main point is using technology to put the power of the body of government DIRECTLY in the hands of all citizens. Online"

direct democracy is the goal of revolution. JOIN TODAY

insuance and lending is a scam of the rulers. moratorium on all debt and fear

What about Stalin was a counter-revolutionary