"authoritarian" is a thought-terminating buzzword employed by spineless liberals too terrified of the idea of wielding power for good to actually do anything to help
[-]TherapyGary9 points2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)
Hi, anarchist here. What word should we use to differentiate y'all from us? Liberals use tankie to mean anyone further left than biden (and it obv has a strong negative connotation), and y'all define authoritarian and state in a way that makes those labels unhelpful. Without having to know someone's specific ideology, what word should be used if not authoritarian?
The entire "authoritarian" vs "anti-authoritarian" distinction doesn't correspond to reality, and isn't real. There is no history of any human society, that doesn't make rules, norms, and customs for their group, and enforce them.
"Authoritarianism", just like "Totalitarianism", are only used to demonize workers and working-class movements who dared to construct systems existing outside of capitalist authority. Even the historical anarchist experiments found that they needed to enforce rules if they didn't want to deconstruct within days, and were also labelled as "authoritarian" by opponents to their left and right.
Yeah, I'm familiar with this argument, I just don't agree with the way you're using the word (and tbh I don't think it's worth arguing over- I just want a better word to use to avoid having to avoid this argument)
I'm trying to find a word that I can use in contexts like, e.g., "As an anarchist, I don't agree with ____s." I can't do that with socialists and communists because I do jive with libertarian socialists and anarcho-communists. I suppose the only safe option is to just be specific and say Marxists/Maoists/etc, but I was hoping there'd be a word to describe the "archist" component of these ideologies that I don't vibe with without having to get so specific.
Can we just steal "archists" back? Lol (From Marsden, I mean)
To be fair, in common lingo, communist is pretty much 1 to 1 associated with Marxism. Socialism is more broad, and anarcho-communism is nearly always prefixed with anarcho-, due to communism being historically affixed to Marxist movements. I think if you use "archist," most won't understand what you mean.
In my eyes, the 2 most relevant umbrellas of leftist thought are Marxism and anarchism. "Libertarian socialism" is a bit of an odd one, it's closer to a non-commital anarchist than an actual coherent ideology with its own history and theory. Syndicalism is kind of its own thing, and mostly relegated to a specific historical period. Other, local ideologies like Zapatismo, or ideologies like Nkruhmahism-Touréism that are their own thing, don't quite fit in either.
So, I think the easiest answer is just "Marxist." Maoists consider themselves Marxists, Marxist-Leninists are Marxists, I think it makes the most sense that way. Crucially, what makes Marxism and anarchism the two real umbrellas is that Marxism essentially posits full collectivization of production and distribution in classless society, while anarchism posits full horizontalism and decentralized networks devoid of hierarchy within cells. These are pretty much opposite approaches, Marxism seeking liberation of the individual through liberating the collective, and anarchism seeling liberation of the collective through liberating the individual.
Hope that helps make the case for just using "Marxist." Easiest way to not be confrontational.
[-]TherapyGary5 points2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)
Idk I feel like that's not the kind of distinction I'm looking for, because I like anarcho-communism
Edit:
Re: @m532@lemmygrad.ml
If anarcho-communism isn’t communism, why is “communism” in its name?
What? I didn't say it's not communism, I'm saying that calling y'all communists isn't necessarily a distinction from anarchists, bc there's an anarchist version of communism.
"authoritarian" is a thought-terminating buzzword employed by spineless liberals too terrified of the idea of wielding power for good to actually do anything to help
Hi, anarchist here. What word should we use to differentiate y'all from us? Liberals use tankie to mean anyone further left than biden (and it obv has a strong negative connotation), and y'all define authoritarian and state in a way that makes those labels unhelpful. Without having to know someone's specific ideology, what word should be used if not authoritarian?
The entire "authoritarian" vs "anti-authoritarian" distinction doesn't correspond to reality, and isn't real. There is no history of any human society, that doesn't make rules, norms, and customs for their group, and enforce them.
"Authoritarianism", just like "Totalitarianism", are only used to demonize workers and working-class movements who dared to construct systems existing outside of capitalist authority. Even the historical anarchist experiments found that they needed to enforce rules if they didn't want to deconstruct within days, and were also labelled as "authoritarian" by opponents to their left and right.
Yeah, I'm familiar with this argument, I just don't agree with the way you're using the word (and tbh I don't think it's worth arguing over- I just want a better word to use to avoid having to avoid this argument)
You can just say socialist, communist, Marxist, etc.
I'm trying to find a word that I can use in contexts like, e.g., "As an anarchist, I don't agree with ____s." I can't do that with socialists and communists because I do jive with libertarian socialists and anarcho-communists. I suppose the only safe option is to just be specific and say Marxists/Maoists/etc, but I was hoping there'd be a word to describe the "archist" component of these ideologies that I don't vibe with without having to get so specific.
Can we just steal "archists" back? Lol (From Marsden, I mean)
To be fair, in common lingo, communist is pretty much 1 to 1 associated with Marxism. Socialism is more broad, and anarcho-communism is nearly always prefixed with anarcho-, due to communism being historically affixed to Marxist movements. I think if you use "archist," most won't understand what you mean.
In my eyes, the 2 most relevant umbrellas of leftist thought are Marxism and anarchism. "Libertarian socialism" is a bit of an odd one, it's closer to a non-commital anarchist than an actual coherent ideology with its own history and theory. Syndicalism is kind of its own thing, and mostly relegated to a specific historical period. Other, local ideologies like Zapatismo, or ideologies like Nkruhmahism-Touréism that are their own thing, don't quite fit in either.
So, I think the easiest answer is just "Marxist." Maoists consider themselves Marxists, Marxist-Leninists are Marxists, I think it makes the most sense that way. Crucially, what makes Marxism and anarchism the two real umbrellas is that Marxism essentially posits full collectivization of production and distribution in classless society, while anarchism posits full horizontalism and decentralized networks devoid of hierarchy within cells. These are pretty much opposite approaches, Marxism seeking liberation of the individual through liberating the collective, and anarchism seeling liberation of the collective through liberating the individual.
Hope that helps make the case for just using "Marxist." Easiest way to not be confrontational.
Fantastic, thanks!
No problem!
Communist
Idk I feel like that's not the kind of distinction I'm looking for, because I like anarcho-communism
Edit:
Re: @m532@lemmygrad.ml
What? I didn't say it's not communism, I'm saying that calling y'all communists isn't necessarily a distinction from anarchists, bc there's an anarchist version of communism.