Message from @Seedle
Discord ID: 330683004525608962
>no chiefs equals no leaders
wtf
early humans worked together
You keep strawmanning my point.
no I'm not
Like as if you CANT have a collective consensus on who's more qualified to make certain decisions
which isn't a state, tard.
There always has to be a leader
and an identity or whatever the fuck
like what?
yes so a collective of people with leaders, thats what we call a state
Read early human history
you want a stateless state
I do read early human history
Again
a strawman.
What's your ideology?
thats not relevant
Yes it is.
Okay which class were in charge of this state? Exactly how'd this state use violence to keep the "proletariat" down?
Or slave owners
dont strawman my arguments by using personal attacks and ad hominems
adress what im saying
I am
judge me by the content of my character
It would be an ad hominem if I was simply denouncing your argument by personally attacking you.
I'm not though.
It's relevant because Seedle for example believes in the immediate destruction of the state (I assume) And I believe that when the proletariat has taken over the state and is done with it
it'll die out
Though I'm not too sure how ancom works
but if you remove the state and still have a leadership and a clear direction, a government essentially
Sorry libcom*
how do you not have a state
In which case I'm even more confused
In terms of a political entity, a state is any politically organized community living under a single system of government.[
>how do you not have a state
Because there's no class to enforce their will on you
Yeah a state needs to force violence upon a certain class
Semi-relevant and it'll open your eyes a bit on a historical materialist approach to history and class society.