Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, but on the other hand, socialism is when the people own the means of production, and the Haudenosaunee have/had way more of that than USSR and China.
I disagree, tribal societies could only have that kind of relation by virtue of being small. In the age of modern industry, this is no longer feasible while maintaining large-scale manufacturing.
And your source is you made it the fuck up?
I don't really know what you mean, here. Do you think we can use the same methods of small, communal tribes as organization with mass manufacturing and complex supply chains? I would argue that society changed the methods of organization to better fit the level of technological process, and not out of any individual will.
You're parroting some racist ass noble savage bullshit right now. Tribal societies weren't communist because they were too dumb to create advanced societies. They were communist because they were smart enough to pick the most efficient economic system in the harshest conditions. It wasn't an accident, it was the result of millennia of hard work and careful thought. This work is universally applicable. You just don't want to listen to brown people telling you how to run an economy.
No, that's not my point. My point is that at the level of technological development of tribal societies, they correctly picked the most efficient organizational structures for their conditions. They were not uniquely gifted nor uniquely dumb, but real humans with human organization. Societies like the Aztecs began a form of production similar to Feudalism when that became more efficient, and it is likely that when they discovered technologies like steam engines they would have transitioned towards a form of society similar to Capitalism.
Humans organize in manners most efficient for their conditions, it isn't about who discovers the best form of society but which form of society best suits the conditions of the land and level of productive forces.
That's ridiculous. Communism is way more efficient for our current level of development than capitalism, yet we're doing capitalism. I don't want to hear you argue capitalism is most efficient in the 21st century, it's not. We've got homelessness, poverty, climate change, genocide, planned obsolescence.... Capitalism stinks. Quit defending it.
Capitalism is declining, that much is obvious. You yourself said tribal societies took tens of thousands of years to find good organizational methods, whereas Capitalism has only been around for a few hundred. It is in the process of dying, and already Socialism is cropping up in other countries as a response to that decay.
Instead of fumbling around in the dark with only two centuries of failed attempts, you should learn from the millennia of success that has already been achieved.
Are you trying to revert to a hunter-gatherer society without depending on billions of people dying? I don't think that's progress, personally. I'd rather try to focus on the centuries of real success Marxists have achieved in the modern era over Capitalist systems, and progress forward. If you want Anarchism, why not look to the Zapatistas?
Why is it you think we have to abandon all our modern technology in order to invent the technology of communism?
If I told you the Romans had really good concrete and we should recreate the recipe, would you argue that we can't make Roman concrete because it would require switching our guns for gladii and our tractors for oxen? That's ridiculous.
There's a difference between tech and mass manufacturing and global supply chains. Having a microwave, full kitchen, solar panels, etc in a small commune is fine, but to make those you need those large-scale manufacturing processes and supply chains, which requires administration and coordination.
That's why I suggested looking to the Zapatistas, Anarchists in the modern day, and studying their struggles and successes. What works for them, what do they struggle with? What can we take, what should we leave? Why go back tens of thousands of years when there are Anarchist societies today to learn from?
Indigenous anarchists aren't all dead. You don't have to go back in time. You can go talk to them today. You can read modern indigenous communist theory.
Please, I am begging you to read theory. Go to Library Genesis and download Kayanerenko;wa. Its free, it's easy.
Yep, they exist in the Chiapas region too, like the Zapatistas. They have had to deal with the modern geopolitical climate and have learned a lot.