We are violent, we need to be. That's the whole point of the state in the Communist movement: a tool for securing political hegemony as part of revolution. When it is not needed, it must go.

Do you know what extrapolation is?

so communism is not free like you said it was

and more so it uses force

It has to *for an interim period*, but not forever.

That's the point.

You would make a great commisar or gulag officer

And you wouldn't, with your preferred hierarchies?

What happens to those who go against your desired order?

You are saying that obtaining such freedom is impossible.

no because they are all ppl in gulag, their state is dirt

gulags are for rebels

not inferiors

Rebels, yes, including those who want to change your system?

lol what are you trying to lead to with that line

Remember: Communism isn't a state of affairs to be established, but the real movement to abolish the ruling state of affairs.

its so pathetiiic '

You want a state of affairs. Rebels would be inferior too, for they would not accept your Big Brain logic, huh?

you cant remove state

So you admit that Communism, as Marx and Engels knew it, is impossible.

communism has a centralized organization

this is the state

like you dont know words, should we carry on in hebrew?

So you are not in the same tradition as Marx and Engels.

you need centralied organization

this is state

Why do you need it when people can organise themselves without it through free association?

its you again, making the non argument, but marx but engles. with out actaully oproviding a rebut or argument

What do you think that I'm arguing?

"Why do you need it when people can organise themselves without it through free association?
"

you mean like anaracish

we been over anarchism

There's two things that I'm arguing here: you're wrong, and you don't belong to the same tradition as Marx and Engels.

and this is what the wiki said

😄

No, cut the anarchism shit, I've been through why people do not need to fight each other in the ways which require a state for that sort of organisation that you're implying is necessary.

No you described what the wiki said on anarachism "Why do you need it when people can organise themselves without it through free association?"

Do you agree that the state must be used as a compromise mechanism?

"There's two things that I'm arguing here: you're wrong, and you don't belong to the same tradition as Marx and Engels."

this is not an argument

How is it not?