I want to kick whoever made the political compass in the balls.
I love seeing these gross misunderstandings of the communist manifesto. In the same book, Marx goes from talking about a possible end goal for socialism, then provides an argument for how to reach it. These people just see the possible end goal bit and are like “oh yes, obviously this means he was anti-authority” without later reading the bit where he’s somewhat directly talking about the need for state socialism.
Marx: “The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.”
Ancoms: "Wait a second I thought Engels was the tankie not Marx :loudly crying face: "
deleted by creator
Which comment is worse, I don’t know.
Anarcho Communist is itself redundant since Communism is essentially that stateless point which is at the moment unknown whether we will reach that point. The only difference between an AnCom and Communist is that the former believes that the transition is almost immediate whereas the Communist knows it’s a long long process. And this stuff about “market Socialism”, market Socialism is a discovery that was made by the Socialist states themselves based on their material conditions. If we could eliminate the need for a market we would do it but the conditions don’t exist for it, not yet at least.
What amazes me to this day is people who read Marx in almost dogmatic ways which is something he would’ve absolutely rejected and it’s completely unscientific. Marxism is a guide not a set of fixed rules.
