I’m an anarchist at heart, but I just don’t think it’s feasible to go from this capitalist system to an anarchist one, so an ml in reality. Apart from that I don’t really think about specificities about how society should be structured in the grand scale after a revolution.
Maybe the immideate material conditions means your structure makes more sense, maybe it doesn’t, it’s not really worth fussing about to me
I’d argue Spain showcases a pretty good path towards a Mutualist economy with the way their laws are set up that incentivized worker cooperatives to form and become a major part of their economy compared to “traditional” corporations. I tend more economicly Anarchist compared to a full dismantle of the state in the sense that I would be mostly fine with everything pretty much the same, but with economic law set up to incentivize cooperatives and make it illegal to sell another’s labor.
I’d argue Spain wasn’t a good example, since it fell to the forces of reaction.
I know I’m being reductive and I appreciate your input, but I’m just trying to say that while there are many ways to approach the question of how society should be economically structured, it must be anchored in the material reality of what threatens your society, what opportunities and weaknesses and opportunities it has. I also gotta be honest that it is not a discussion that really interests me, as it is quite far from ever being relevant to me.
The discussion is interesting to me only insofar as to understand why the existing socialist countries are structured as they are. If you haven’t already seen it I’d like to refer you to this short excerpt from one of Michael Parents Talks https://youtu.be/uThpIDlfcBQ?si=OHOPASxctMMemkNG
I’m an anarchist at heart, but I just don’t think it’s feasible to go from this capitalist system to an anarchist one, so an ml in reality. Apart from that I don’t really think about specificities about how society should be structured in the grand scale after a revolution.
Maybe the immideate material conditions means your structure makes more sense, maybe it doesn’t, it’s not really worth fussing about to me
I’d argue Spain showcases a pretty good path towards a Mutualist economy with the way their laws are set up that incentivized worker cooperatives to form and become a major part of their economy compared to “traditional” corporations. I tend more economicly Anarchist compared to a full dismantle of the state in the sense that I would be mostly fine with everything pretty much the same, but with economic law set up to incentivize cooperatives and make it illegal to sell another’s labor.
I’d argue Spain wasn’t a good example, since it fell to the forces of reaction.
I know I’m being reductive and I appreciate your input, but I’m just trying to say that while there are many ways to approach the question of how society should be economically structured, it must be anchored in the material reality of what threatens your society, what opportunities and weaknesses and opportunities it has. I also gotta be honest that it is not a discussion that really interests me, as it is quite far from ever being relevant to me.
The discussion is interesting to me only insofar as to understand why the existing socialist countries are structured as they are. If you haven’t already seen it I’d like to refer you to this short excerpt from one of Michael Parents Talks https://youtu.be/uThpIDlfcBQ?si=OHOPASxctMMemkNG
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/uThpIDlfcBQ?si=OHOPASxctMMemkNG
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.