this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2025
4 points (62.5% liked)

Anarchism

4336 readers
2 users here now

Are you an Anarchist? The answer might surprise you!

Rules: 0. Post content that is thoughtful and relevant to social liberation from an anarchist, autonomous, antifascist perspective.

  1. Be respectful
  2. Don't be a nazi
  3. Argue about the point and not the person
  4. This is not the place to debate the merits of anarchism itself. While discussion is encouraged, getting in your “epic dunks on the anarkiddies” is not. As a result of the instance’s poor moderation policies and hostility toward anarchists by default, lemmygrad users are encouraged not to post here, though not explicitly disallowed if they aren’t just looking to start a fight.

See also:

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's tragically ironic that anarchists are so often scolded by condescending authoritarians for being "infantile," especially when we consider the historical context: no authoritarian regime has ever fostered the conditions necessary for genuine liberation. Are we really expected to believe that future authoritarian systems, following the same tired script, will succeed when every single one has historically exhibited a pattern of dismal failure and a litany of atrocities? Such a belief seems far more naive than the idealistic principles championed by anarchists.

The centralization of power in a single authority not only undermines individual autonomy but also infantilizes the very individuals it purports to protect. By relegating people to a subordinate status as dependents of the state, these systems strip them of agency and responsibility, suggesting that ordinary workers are incapable of making their own decisions. This dynamic adds another layer of irony to the common critique of anarchism, as it is the authoritarian structures that foster dependency, fear of change, and social and political immaturity. In stark contrast, the anarchist vision promotes a world grounded in self-sufficiency through mutual aid, freedom of association, and voluntary cooperation.

This section is pretty nakedly anti-Marxist, and again, I don't see why Deng is relevant here when this is against all branches of Marxism.

[–] Dirt_Possum@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't see why Deng is relevant here when this is against all branches of Marxism

They're calling us Dengists because most of us support China (even after Deng's post-Mao market reforms) as a socialist project, but since modern China is one of the Great Evil Authoritarian states by their reckoning, the term is meant as a pejorative. It's basically "tankie" but with anti-Chinese characteristics.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm sure you're right, just wanted to tease the fact that they are just being anti-communist in general out. Hiding behind being "anti-Dengist" is a pejorative of convenience for them, but all of their issues apply to Marxism broadly.

[–] ChanceHappening@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Again, you're projecting. That you see the word "authoritarian regime" and immediately feel victimized says a lot more about you than me. It's talking about all authoritarian regimes from Nazi Germany to Fascist USA to Terf Island and beyond. Anarchists saying authoritarian states haven't liberated people historically is not a personal attack on you.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's pretty clearly hinting at those who would use the state to uplift the working class, making way for the gradual withering of the state alongside class, ie Marxists. It also directly talks about centralization, ie collectivizing production in the hands of all of society, a distinctly Marxist viewpoint.

[–] ChanceHappening@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Central governments aren't the exclusive domain of Marxists. There's zero mention of using the state to uplift anyone. Holy moley the projection.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The bit about centralizing all power in a single authority is pretty much the standard punch against Marxists. Having a central government is different from centralizing all of production. Secondly, there's this part:

The centralization of power in a single authority not only undermines individual autonomy but also infantilizes the very individuals it purports to protect. By relegating people to a subordinate status as dependents of the state, these systems strip them of agency and responsibility, suggesting that ordinary workers are incapable of making their own decisions

What is this supposed to be attacking other than the notion that a proletarian state can be used to uplift the proletariat?