this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
21 points (100.0% liked)
Socialism
2929 readers
36 users here now
Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.
Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I understand your point.
For e.g. rural village in the past might have no contact with the outside and run like an anarchist community.
However, when we talk about modern nation state, I believe we have not seen successful implementation of anarchism yet.
One problem is that even if it works internally, what would happen when a colonial power tries to conquer it? Like how the US is now trying to claim Greenland, the Panama Canal, or even the nation of Canada?
A centralised power has more resources to mobilise and therefore potentially able to hold off foreign assault (see Vietnam, China).
Please note I am not implying that authoritarian communism is ideal. I am just pointing out the difficulties of not having a central authority.
well, anarchism is completely antithetical to modern nation states, so if you're using that as the basis for evaluation you're obviously going to be misled. it also begs the question of what a "successful implementation" of anarchism--or any form of leftist ideology in governing--actually is, because ask five leftists and they'll give you six answers to that. nonetheless, and as far as i'm aware, in spite of their massive difficulties (and despite a non-anarchist self-identification in the first case) both EZLN-held Chipas and Rojava are widely held as successful, practically applied examples of anarchist theories of practice and production. likewise, so is Revolutionary Catalonia.
i would encourage you to look to the Spanish Civil War or the EZLN occupation of Chiapas as examples, because this was simply not a problem for either of them. particularly in the former case, the Spanish anarchists acted very similarly to a "centralized" power in fighting the Francoists (until they were organized into the broader Republican military).[^1]
[^1]: and it should be noted, as an aside: what eventually undermined them and destroyed their power were not the Francoists but purges and aggression conducted by other leftists in the Spanish Popular Front against them. anarchists are, quite legitimately in my opinion, pretty aggrieved at their historical treatment by other leftist ideologies!
Thank you for the suggestion. Its good to learn something new everyday.
Going to read up on EZLN and if you have any suggested reading that would be great as well.
on Chiapas:
on Rojava:
on Revolutionary Catalonia and various aspects of the anarchism there:
most of these should be findable on Anna's Archive, or by just googling the title. if not, i can track copies down.
to add, the point of Rojavas and "centralized" military forces - this is where syndicalists tend to find their strongest justifications, in having built in systems of military federation that are demonstrably effective without making it super incentivized to do power centralization.