Post AiYrJcFuKyWkenL7jM by nlupo@xno.social
(DIR) More posts by nlupo@xno.social
(DIR) Post #AiYSnYBNY0ljrGOlKC by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T15:38:05Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Anti-communist: "Marxist Communists are controlling the country and are gonna make capitalism illegal!!!!!"[Actual Communists sitting in the corner wishing what they are saying was actually true and not just fear mongering lies]
(DIR) Post #AiYTyzuqsLSL0lgrom by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T15:51:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom I prefer just to make it obsolete and irelevant.
(DIR) Post #AiYUJzxLv959DYsFTk by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T15:55:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo Make capitalism obsolete and irrelevant? Wouldn't making it illegal do that?
(DIR) Post #AiYUVoIF6qjYWKHGfQ by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T15:57:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom No. Are clay tablets illegal? No, but they are obsolete. We have paper sheets and computers.
(DIR) Post #AiYUiOt4sZf1URVhNA by overanalytcl@hachyderm.io
2024-06-03T15:59:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo murder is illegal, but certainly not irrelevant, something being irrelevant and/or obsolete is orthogonal (or parallel, rather) to its legality
(DIR) Post #AiYUmFtiFFB6lce52m by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:00:13Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@nlupo Making capitalism illegal obviously won't make it obsolete or irrelevant immediately, but it would over time. If people don't participate in something (in this case, capitalism) for long enough, it eventually becomes irrelevant and obsolete.
(DIR) Post #AiYV4NJPPu02yWIxVY by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:03:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@overanalytcl @nlupo Well murder and capitalism aren't really the same thing. Murder is an act that can be rationalized in many different contexts, so making it irrelevant would be very difficult. Capitalism is just an economic system that, if made illegal and replaced with socialism, would eventually become irrelevant. You can't do that with murder.
(DIR) Post #AiYVJEqZAklT43twYa by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:06:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom I don't think so. Legality has nothing to do with it. That can make is worse actually. More important is to build an free (as in freedom) alternatives.Baning stuff is in the state toolkit and baning other capitalists will make you the Mister Monopoly. That's what happened in Bulgaria (and probably every counry from the Eastern Bloc) after 1945.
(DIR) Post #AiYVV9JpYEgDOXGjdA by overanalytcl@hachyderm.io
2024-06-03T16:08:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo how exactly are you planning to make an economic system illegal, exactly? are we doing thought police? literal 1984, as the chuds like to say?
(DIR) Post #AiYViGG33zj0gEkh6m by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:10:44Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@nlupo Any free alternatives to capitalism won't be able to flourish or gain traction as long as capitalism exists and is allowed to function as it currently is. Capitalism has such a stronghold on the economy and culture that a free alternative won't be able to thrive, let alone challenge capitalism in any meaningful way, as long as capitalism is allowed to exist.
(DIR) Post #AiYW0nR6RiHcnFlFMO by overanalytcl@hachyderm.io
2024-06-03T16:14:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo but if you're doing a revolution (hypothetically speaking), then wouldn't you win by the fact you're now in government (ideally there wouldn't be one, but I'll entertain that idea)? I still don't get why you should make it "illegal" to be a capitalist, strictly speaking. in a communist system, it's obviously more advantageous to be a communist, you're implicitly ostracized from being a capitalist. so to speak, it loses in the marketplace of ideas (vaguely speaking).
(DIR) Post #AiYW2cDX81ZUZtHVOi by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:14:24Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@overanalytcl @nlupo Capitalism can be made illegal by the gradual transformation of capitalist economies into socialist ones through the creation of policies that would make the existence of capitalism impossible, such as nationalizing key industries, establishing workers' control of production, and the establishment of participatory planning mechanisms to gradually phase out capitalism and transition to a socialist society.
(DIR) Post #AiYW7c07MP2LM3OAWe by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:15:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom so you don't think there is no viable alternative to capitalism? I don't think so. Actually it can be better, for many reasons. Look at the continious prisoners' dillema or The Mutual Aid by Kropotkin for evidence.
(DIR) Post #AiYWIk4ZgoaVZgmTGi by overanalytcl@hachyderm.io
2024-06-03T16:17:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo that's phasing out capitalism and making it, err, "irrelevant and obsolete", not making it illegal. at most, you're heavily discouraging being a capitalist (which would happen without those policies as well because of the ideology around them), but you can't put a ban on ideology (unless you want to kill all capitalists, in which case... yeah, good luck).
(DIR) Post #AiYWPU8FM5tSA7iJ1c by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:18:33Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@overanalytcl @nlupo Not making capitalism illegal would allow former capitalist and capitalism supporters to build back up their power and potentially create a counter-revolution that would destroy the entire revolution.
(DIR) Post #AiYWYEy56VP3jq8M4G by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:20:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo I never once said that there are no viable alternatives to capitalism, only that capitalism has to be made an impossibility in order for those viable alternatives to have a chance at establishing themselves.
(DIR) Post #AiYWe400naRnSMoUhE by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:21:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom that won't happen by fiat. That's one of the main pillars of capitalism and private property.
(DIR) Post #AiYWmJzhDKPrNebTHs by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:22:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@overanalytcl @nlupo It's phasing out capitalism through policies and laws, the clear implication being that capitalism and tendencies that promote capitalism would be illegal.
(DIR) Post #AiYWqv8l300TkI2ETo by overanalytcl@hachyderm.io
2024-06-03T16:23:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo which would be a sign of a weak state/community, it should be ready to defend itself. what if the revolution was carried by anarchists instead in a Stalinist state? you can use that argument to suppress anything that's not the state ideology (which is what pretty much all authoritarian states have done, historically).
(DIR) Post #AiYWrQzecNjqXK1PjU by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:23:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl And that's the issue. You will ban everyone, but yourself.
(DIR) Post #AiYX8YFyrmE3zCovz6 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:26:42Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@nlupo It will absolutely be necessary to use authoritative force to destroy capitalism. Capitalism won't allow itself to be destroyed any other way. It won't be convinced out of existence. It's an ideology of violence and force, and therefore, violence and force will be necessary to eradicate it.
(DIR) Post #AiYXFpxVRu1CuneYwS by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:28:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@overanalytcl @nlupo There's no logical reason to allow capitalism any chance to come back
(DIR) Post #AiYXMmQQz6elz2UjjM by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:29:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Capitalists and reactionaries would be banned, not everyone.
(DIR) Post #AiYXP8MEPc2saHeRRw by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:29:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl I have a question for you. Which will make capitalism more likely to never come back, to ban it or to make it ridiculous?
(DIR) Post #AiYXW2mbXLS3K1HXyi by overanalytcl@hachyderm.io
2024-06-03T16:30:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo who would stop you from considering revisionists (and anarchists) as reactionaries? are we stooping down to the "removing the undesirables" level?
(DIR) Post #AiYXZtNMSEGjIwJGJU by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:31:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl then you will become them, because that's what makes them what they are. Desire to impose their will onto others, because they think they are absolutely right all the time.
(DIR) Post #AiYXaqgtvDxJGcuCSe by rvinson@liberdon.com
2024-06-03T16:31:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo "But beware! The time for all this is not yet. For at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to everyone that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still."https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes
(DIR) Post #AiYXe47iR8eBnPyvNw by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:32:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Banning it. It won't be possible to convince every single person that capitalism is ridiculous, and if it isn't illegal, capitalism and those who don't think it's ridiculous will try to regain their power and start a counter-revolution. Making it illegal not only prevents counter-revolution, but it gives society time to convince people that capitalism is ridiculous.
(DIR) Post #AiYXrmP96ze2tcfqYy by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:34:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl I obviously disagree.
(DIR) Post #AiYXtMsH0HAqIL3UZM by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:35:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl I think you overestimate the convincing power of the government. If that was so, Putin for an example will not be that feared and hated by many Russians. I don't think that's the effect you need.
(DIR) Post #AiYY1aNkfLnCVMhJnk by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:36:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@overanalytcl @nlupo The only people who would be considered reactionaries are those who act like them and espouse reactionary beliefs.
(DIR) Post #AiYY6hQtsXfPovboDg by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:37:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl Well then, what makes them "the bad guys"?
(DIR) Post #AiYYBrQGAHIEFbloeG by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:38:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl My point still stands that not making capitalism illegal will give capitalists the chance to start a counter-revolution.
(DIR) Post #AiYYKx5sRs6kRiZVBI by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:40:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Their support of capitalism and private ownership of means of production makes them the bad guys. You comparing a capitalist state and a socialist state as equivalent just because they're both states is fallacious.
(DIR) Post #AiYYQAS2DIkjJyQG3s by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:41:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl I don't think so. They will just try to do it by violence, because they don't have another choice and that will put them in a bad position.
(DIR) Post #AiYYXSmCTlSCBPKkFM by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:42:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl And isn't private property just a side effect of the hierachical power structure and their monopoly on violence?
(DIR) Post #AiYYfHo59E8aTgwb0y by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:43:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl They'll use violence either way. At least if their activity is made illegal, there will be some measure to stop them when they inevitably try to use violence.
(DIR) Post #AiYYktCBZ4bDsvtFGC by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:44:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Yes. That's why all of it should be illegal.
(DIR) Post #AiYYnn8AZOL7wbOZzU by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:45:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl like any criminal will look at the law before whether that's illegal, before they try to do a crime.
(DIR) Post #AiYZFSiI4hFwjGU8tU by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:47:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl The law is not a magic anticrime barier.
(DIR) Post #AiYZFU50zh1my27nxA by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:50:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Making something illegal does restrict the behavior of people, which is exactly what needs to happen to capitalists to prevent a capitalist counter-revolution.
(DIR) Post #AiYZMoJEBG9hjaGZ8a by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T16:51:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl Don't tell me that you believe the law is a magical handcuffs.
(DIR) Post #AiYZkrMIUhXM8sAZQO by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T16:56:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl You're constantly choosing to use the word "magical" to try and make my position sound fanciful. You can stop doing that. I believe that law is a useful tool to repress counter-revolution.
(DIR) Post #AiYamLtMYcgl5DuYPw by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T17:07:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl no you are missing the point. One of the core definitions of anarchism is the definition of the state as monopoly on violence and that's the main criticism of it. I'm not making stuff up. All popular anarchists think so.I'm saying that it's "magical handcuffs", is because it never actually prevented any crime. The law is just words. That which gives it power is the police and the military. The issue is, that the law is for the lower class (the slaves or the proles)
(DIR) Post #AiYc0LKXXgcbLjrHKS by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T17:21:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl In a capitalist state, the law is used to suppress the lower class, but in a socialist state, the law would be used to suppress the former capitalist class from regaining their power. That is why comparing socialist states and capitalist states as if they're the same thing is fallacious.
(DIR) Post #AiYc5lqkN41t2vVkB6 by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T17:22:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl How? What you will make you different?
(DIR) Post #AiYcJkf1aYoDPdh7mC by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T17:24:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl I literally just explained the difference between a capitalist state and a socialist state. Capitalist states suppress the working class to maintain their power. Socialist states suppress the capitalist class to prevent capitalists from initiating a counter-revolution to overturn the workers' state
(DIR) Post #AiYciri2WFMYVs518q by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T17:29:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl I've never seen non-authoritarian state. To me that sounds like triangular circle. What do you think is the main reason capitalists to opress the workers? Isn't that the imbalance of power, caused by the hierarchical structure of capitalism or is it something else?
(DIR) Post #AiYdGBebO2C5vUMRcG by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T17:35:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl I don't know why you're talking about what is or isn't classified as authoritarian when my main point is that making capitalism illegal is necessary to prevent counter-revolution.
(DIR) Post #AiYdsQxMwL0qOINPXs by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T17:42:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl I guess you are not familiar with that. In layman's words authoritarianism is when someone has the power to impose their will onto others, by force. There are people, better than me who can define it better. I can give you a video if you are interested.
(DIR) Post #AiYeCMRBS3g2AOp9yi by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T17:45:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl I'm well aware of what authoritarianism is. You're shifting the topic of the conversation. We're not talking about what is or isn't authoritarianism. We're talking about the necessity of law in stopping counter-revolution.
(DIR) Post #AiYf5wO9UInxatuOg4 by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T17:55:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl If you want a revolution which leads to statelessnes you can't have a state. To make anything illegal you need a state. You can't have both. Also it's not just capitalism, monarchists and fascists are waiting on the queue. All I'm trying to say so far is, the fundamental issue of the current society is the hierarchical structure of organization. Everything else is just a symptom of that.
(DIR) Post #AiYfIs8cbOusAyoJoe by Rob600@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T17:58:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo @overanalytcl The only thing about stopping a counter revolution is you'd probally want more people to understand your motives, especially as a libertarian/anarchism communist.They would need to understand why you want a temporary state, even though your saying ultamately you wish to dismantle those. If people don't understand from top to bottom your thought process on it they'l see nothing but authoritarianism, no matter how good the propasal means for society.
(DIR) Post #AiYfgXTx3Idz3x4ZEW by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:02:28Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Abolishing the state immediately would result in some groups from either here or abroad taking over due to the stateless society not having the mechanisms of defense and organization that a state provides. A stateless society can't exist as long as there are other states around. All of the states in the world have to first become socialist states that are dedicated to creating communism. Only then will state abolition be possible.
(DIR) Post #AiYg6Hu1bBocGzXvSC by rvinson@liberdon.com
2024-06-03T18:07:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo @overanalytcl "…after all, when you mention the idea of anarchy to most people they will tell you what a bad idea it is because the biggest gang would just take over. Which is pretty much how I see contemporary society. We live in a badly developed anarchist situation in which the biggest gang has taken over and have declared that it is not an anarchist situation – that it is a capitalist or a communist situation."https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Moore
(DIR) Post #AiYg6lxFrkDzThHvea by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:07:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl If they don't have any. I never said, that I want an overnight change. That what you are saying, somehow implies that can't be done and you are somehow sure. I can provide you an evidence how is that not true.
(DIR) Post #AiYgIxtrHOi405VtJo by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:09:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl Then make your argument.
(DIR) Post #AiYgy6PwW5XWI28WMC by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:16:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl Makhno did not need a state in order to organize one of the most frightening armies and even to put some states on their knees. During his time people started printing funny money. This was more accepted as a joke. Second example is the Zapatistas. They don't need a state to exist in Mexico and to be successful.
(DIR) Post #AiYhrdwFaU9YBGjRDs by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:26:53Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl A state is necessary to deal with broader societal issues. Both of the examples you provided are relatively small compared to the average population of a typical country. Non-state organizations won't be sufficient in dealing with a population the size of America, for example.
(DIR) Post #AiYhzuW5pn2ruhRIAq by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:28:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl So you don't believe in statelessness or you think it's a pie in the sky?
(DIR) Post #AiYi5mkXcmsvYuzyEK by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:29:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl you don't need enormous megastructures in order to be successful.
(DIR) Post #AiYiU0ukc1VuRXKKfo by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:33:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl I think that immediate state abolition is "a pie in the sky" as you put it. A stateless society is achievable, but not through immediate state abolition.
(DIR) Post #AiYic6iiuSAklbYoca by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:35:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo @overanalytcl First off, I don't think that's particularly true. Large megastructures would be necessary for large populations. And second, I'm not even talking about large megastructures.
(DIR) Post #AiYifOc2qK2l7y0MXA by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:35:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @overanalytcl something nobody argues about.
(DIR) Post #AiYixhfqiCU3SRVvXc by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:39:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo What do you mean by "something nobody argues about?"
(DIR) Post #AiYj7Optbccjvdpw8m by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:40:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Abolishing the state imediately without any preparation.
(DIR) Post #AiYjPhsHYlviBigMwC by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:44:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupoI'm aware that anarchists believe in having preparations before state abolition. I'm saying that after the capitalist state is abolished, a socialist state will be necessary as a means of defense and organization.
(DIR) Post #AiYjgGCdhBqRHy6772 by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:47:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Transitioning to a socialist state and then abolishing it, never happened and there is a reason for that. I pointed at that several posts ago.
(DIR) Post #AiYjnxq9qpsgefFuQy by nsharma2725@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:48:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo @overanalytcl Hmmm... Maybe the issues will die out if the fuel runs out. Or maybe we just need to add fire like Linkin Park did.
(DIR) Post #AiYkE0jFjYxj8vRhOC by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T18:53:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo I already stated previously that state abolition can only happen once all countries in the world have become socialist states. Of course, it's never happened before because the conditions for state abolition have never been achieved before.
(DIR) Post #AiYkiTl0N7m5rNnGsa by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T18:58:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom if all workers organize worldly and abolish all the states, no states will be needed, but I'm more conservative and I believe that will start small and will grow until it does not take at least a big part of the world.
(DIR) Post #AiYlV6EIdS4d52gDzM by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T19:07:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo Once a movement dedicated to abolishing all states becomes large enough it'll inevitably start to be targeted by those very states that this movement wants to abolish, and this movement would need equal or superior force and organization to defend itself from these states, which, as far as I'm aware, can only come from a state structure.
(DIR) Post #AiYm8gGyYsL29yo0rQ by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T19:13:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom I don't think a state is needed at all. Even more, it's a very bad idea, because it's inherently hierarchical. People can organize themselves federatively, also they don't need borders governments or other such thing. Most of the fight can be both economical and guerilla warfare.
(DIR) Post #AiYmnkv4BrCCRb8yp6 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T19:22:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo Non-state organizations do not provide the same level of assurance of organization that is necessary to deal with internal and external threats. With a state structure, you can be fairly certain that complex organization will happen. Non-state organizations would be voluntary, and therefore would not be able to guarantee the level of organization necessary for defense.
(DIR) Post #AiYnbfvR23U9R07Tai by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T19:30:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Being voluntary is essential. There is a Bulgarian saying "На сила хубост не става." literally "You can't make beauty by coercion" It means, that you can't force people to be good or to behave. That will never work, because you don't have perfect knowledge and also because something called free will.
(DIR) Post #AiYnhsdKhGlWaLbxKK by NOISEBOB@todon.nl
2024-06-03T19:31:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo @overanalytcl kill the idea of borders in your head... and also, what America are you talking about? North or South? Both? Only the U$A? U$A and so-called Canada?
(DIR) Post #AiYnyw8OvufUMnHC08 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T19:35:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo Having perfect knowledge isn't a requirement. All that is required is that the necessary amount of organization is available to have the sufficient amount of defense necessary to defend the revolution, and having a state guarantees that quota of defense is met.
(DIR) Post #AiYo5ZcP2tsMYrTSKG by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T19:36:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@NOISEBOB @nlupo @overanalytcl What America I'm talking about doesn't really matter in this case because my point is that a large organization would require a state.
(DIR) Post #AiYo700YPpTyhFRzBg by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T19:36:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom No hierarchical organization can suffice that.
(DIR) Post #AiYoShWdoVKBkFo6Qy by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T19:40:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo How so?
(DIR) Post #AiYos5KgR70EoyJmK0 by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T19:45:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Because the enormous number of issues you have to deal with. Such organization will be a management nightmare, like the most big corporations and that will give bad results. You can't just avoid Parkinson's law or diseconomies of scale.
(DIR) Post #AiYpwDjbEx57zXVZNg by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T19:57:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo States today currently organize society and have in the past, so I don't know why you assume that, for some reason, a socialist state wouldn't be able to organize society. If it's because it would be trying to organize society right after a revolution, again, states in the past have been able to organize society in the exact same conditions.
(DIR) Post #AiYqNlDOrsBleHZyK0 by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T20:02:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom I never said it can't organize a society. I mean at what cost. Better that const not be people's lifes and wellbeing. Capitalist states are bad, not because they are run by comics villains, but because how everything is structured and what sacrifices have to be made in order to keep the organization running.
(DIR) Post #AiYqq51kngG1CfdSxk by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T20:07:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo You're once again talking about the faults of capitalist states as a counterargument against socialist states when I've already explained how the two aren't the same, nor do they have the same structures or goals.
(DIR) Post #AiYrJcFuKyWkenL7jM by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T20:12:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom changing the name won't change the fact of the hierarchical structure and the coercive nature of your organization. If that was possible, don't you think the liberals could be achieving that somehow, given the fact that they also can enforce socialist policies. But I don't see any such thing.
(DIR) Post #AiYrsMim5NUGc5Pam8 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T20:19:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo You dishonestly claiming that a socialist state is just a capitalist state under a different name doesn't make it so. I've been very clear in describing the differences between a socialist state and a capitalist state. If you're just going to ignore them to maintain your narrative that all states are the same, then this conversation isn't going to be able to go anywhere.
(DIR) Post #AiYs6dukxTvHzWp9ou by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T20:21:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom No state is non-hierarchical, no state is non-coercive, no state is not monopoly on violence. If yours is not any of these things, then it is most likely not a state.
(DIR) Post #AiYsALtzrxyfHmEnZI by nlupo@xno.social
2024-06-03T20:22:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Ok, let's leave it there then.
(DIR) Post #AiYsHjkbbEbJHHMlW4 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T20:23:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nlupo What I'm advocating for is a state. That's what this whole conversation is about.
(DIR) Post #AiYto9dwxzcanrH6si by Rob600@mastodon.social
2024-06-03T20:40:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @nlupo