The only way to try and get everyone to follow communism is through force, which requires a state, that is true. This is why I prefer anarcho-communism, where there is no state enforcing it.
It is also true under anarchism people have the option to not cooperate peacefully. As you said, humans are still humans at the end of the day and some will take advantage of others or hoard resources.
But I don’t think that is reason enough to not at least try to get there. Because under capitalism those same issues still exist, only people are expected to be okay with losing their autonomy and giving up their resources for the sake of a wealthy ruling class.
Wonder why we cant just hammer capitalism into the socialism everyone wants with money. Just beat the shit out of it with money until its utopia. Well, i imagine thats what the neoliberals would like to do. Too bad people give more money to evil people
Regarding Communism, I mean, kinda? But at the point of Communism, where all production is owned and managed collectively along a common plan, what would you reasonably want that would cause you to want to go against the rest of Humanity?
I just can’t see how you aren’t describing feudalism once anarchist communities become large and widespread enough to create resource competition between them. Some people are just always going to accumulate some foothold of power and then it’s all downhill from there.
I want to love anarchism and communism, but I can never escape the fact that they require consistent, universal altruism in a way that just seems utopian to me. It comes across as maybe the ultimate example of perfect-is-the-enemy-of-good.
Communism doesn’t require “constant universal altruism,” the goal is a collectively owned and planned world Socialist Republic, kinda like Star Trek. There’s criticism that differences between communes in Anarchism could lead to a resurgance of competition, trade, and Capitalism eventually (which I’ll let Anarchists respond to, not me), but Communism in the Marxian understanding is the opposite of Utopian.
The only way to try and get everyone to follow communism is through force, which requires a state, that is true. This is why I prefer anarcho-communism, where there is no state enforcing it.
It is also true under anarchism people have the option to not cooperate peacefully. As you said, humans are still humans at the end of the day and some will take advantage of others or hoard resources.
But I don’t think that is reason enough to not at least try to get there. Because under capitalism those same issues still exist, only people are expected to be okay with losing their autonomy and giving up their resources for the sake of a wealthy ruling class.
Wonder why we cant just hammer capitalism into the socialism everyone wants with money. Just beat the shit out of it with money until its utopia. Well, i imagine thats what the neoliberals would like to do. Too bad people give more money to evil people
Regarding Communism, I mean, kinda? But at the point of Communism, where all production is owned and managed collectively along a common plan, what would you reasonably want that would cause you to want to go against the rest of Humanity?
I just can’t see how you aren’t describing feudalism once anarchist communities become large and widespread enough to create resource competition between them. Some people are just always going to accumulate some foothold of power and then it’s all downhill from there.
I want to love anarchism and communism, but I can never escape the fact that they require consistent, universal altruism in a way that just seems utopian to me. It comes across as maybe the ultimate example of perfect-is-the-enemy-of-good.
Communism doesn’t require “constant universal altruism,” the goal is a collectively owned and planned world Socialist Republic, kinda like Star Trek. There’s criticism that differences between communes in Anarchism could lead to a resurgance of competition, trade, and Capitalism eventually (which I’ll let Anarchists respond to, not me), but Communism in the Marxian understanding is the opposite of Utopian.