submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

229 comments fedilink hide all child comments

edit: this is now closed future comments won't be counted

I keep seeing this instance is overrun with tankies so hey, lets do an informal survey like I've seen on hexbear

respond with YES or NO in the first line of your comment and i'll tally everything in a couple of days, lets say I'll try and collect everything on the sunday the 9th (10+gmt sorry)

not sure thisll work, be nice, have fun

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 22 points 5 months ago

Fredrich Engels, 1872: On authority

Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is. It is the act by which one part of the population imposes its will on the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannons — by the most authoritarian means possible; and the victors, if they do not want to have fought in vain, must maintain this rule by means of the terror which their arms inspire in the reactionaries. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if the communards had not used the authority of the armed people against the bourgeoisie? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach them for not having used it enough?

Therefore, we must conclude one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don’t know what they’re talking about, in which case they are only sowing confusion; or they do know, in which case they are betraying the proletarian movement. In either case, they serve reaction.

[-] friendly_ghost@beehaw.org 19 points 5 months ago

Found the tankie! ☝️

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de -4 points 5 months ago

How about, I don't know, establishing some sort of democracy? Just a crazy idea

[-] Redderthanmisty@lemmygrad.ml 22 points 5 months ago

Oh, but they did.

It just doesn't resemble the bourgeois 'democracy' we have in the west, but rather something else entirely that better fits the 'for the people, by the people, of the people" definition of democracy.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 12 points 5 months ago

Maybe capitalist states should do that, but they won’t because they’re capitalist states. They’ll form bourgeois democracies at best and fascism at worst[1][2][3].

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 5 months ago

You misunderstood me. I'm saying after the revolution. The Engels quote implies that because revolution is authoritarian, so is whatever system it implements. Which I disagree with

[-] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 5 months ago

What your genius idea is missing is that there is an already established society with a ruling class, is your plan to ask nicely? 😅

The point Engels is making is that revolution is about establishing one group authority over the already established authority. In a society where might makes right, only might can resolve it.

this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024

26 points (58.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43977 readers

764 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS