What would you say to that?

And if the ultimate goal of communism is to abolish the state, dosen't that mean you would be abolishing the common?

The state is an apparatus by which the common makes decisions about anything that is of importance to the common

Then why does the state enforce brutal quota's on the common?

The main difference between Marxist Leninists and Anarchists of many varieties is precisely that temporary presence of the state.

of a centralized one at that

What? Anarchists want the state completely destroyed, the marxists just want it abolished eventually.

that’s what i’m saying

What a conveluded way of saying it.

mls want a temporary state. Anarchists believe that is not needed

The anarchists were clearly foolish in their belief, as without any state whatsoever, it completely leaves things in.... ANARCHY, but not the anarchy they want.

I think it’s more of the fact that objectively some kind of authority is needed if one is making a radical change as big as abolishing Capitalism

But then again, there are edgy anarchists who just want a lawless world, but I digress.

And their experiments clearly presented institutions very similar to the state, btw.

@yung Which is the state? And what tells you that capitalism won't come back to destroy communism from the inside out? It happened with every communist nation that didn't get destroyed from war.

The fact is that capitalism is forever more subversive than that of socialism, it has been this way forever.

I can’t tell you Capitalism can’t come back. That’s why it helps for Socialism to be international, and initially militaristic for exactly that reason.

But internationalism never works.

It only leads to destruction of those trying to spread it.

so you suggest throwing the towel in like that? Just because there is imperialism?

If you attempt to spread socialism internationally and militaristically, it only ends up destroying socialism, trotsky and his schemes prove that.

Trotsky didn’t do shit tho

and the destruction of the Soviet Union as you know cane much later, when it was no longer Socialist at all.

Imperialism is long dead, it is but the corporations that run rampant now.

well yes it’s economic imperialism

same difference

Imperialism relies on a state being the direct force behind it, the direct force is only the corporations.

*Unless you count china, which just steals oil from african countries

i’m not sure I’ve read any definition of imperialism that requires the state to be the decider

@yung It relies on the country.

This isn't from a bunch of countries.

Yes it’s from a few countries

like two or three as far as I know

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/imperialism

The countries are not the ones behind it though, it is the corporations that are privately run.

Ironically, china is the only outlier in this, which claims to be anti imperialist.

Yes but corporations font go into countries, they get governments, militaries to invade these countries if invasion is even needed

No they don't.

how don’t they?

Show me an example of them doing this.

Stop trying to act like me pal.