Communism does not require centralized control of the economy, as it is Stateless
You literally cannot distribute, and coordinate production of goods, to the extent Communism requires, without a centralized economy. You can have a centralized economy and no other state apparatus. I can’t imagine it succeeding, which is one of many reasons I’m not communist, but it is both necessary and theoretically possible. This is communist theory, not mine.
2: syndicalism and communism are economic theories, not systems of government. The system of government you are implying is anarchism. Anarchists are fine (if, in my view, very optimistic in their understanding of how humans work) . The system of government the vast majority of communists want is not anarchism, and I would not ban anarchists, even if they’re communists. The world will never just descend to anarchy, so it’s all a moot discussion anyway. We’ve seen countries slip into authoritarian communism in current generations.
You result to insults when it really isn’t necessary at all. Viewing this exchange, any validity you had in your arguments is strongly undermined by your character.
structures like worker councils, Authoritarianism isn’t required in the slightest.
Those worker councils, to operate with any efficiency, will need a national council. To have any success whatsoever, this national council needs the authority to dictate what is made, where it is made, how much is made when, and where goods are to be shipped.
Secondly, by your very same logical chain, Capitalism is more authoritarian, as only the state and the Bourgeoisie call the shots, rather than democratic control.
This sentence doesn’t make sense. Capitalism is an economic system. One can be capitalist and authoritarian, as is the case with fascism, or one can be totally and completely laissez-faire as a state policy in some sort of Objectivist hellstate. Liberal Democracy is what keeps those things from happening, as a competing system of government.
![[META] Never change, lemmy.ml](https://i.imgur.com/1pxAyiq.jpg){kind=link}
You literally cannot distribute, and coordinate production of goods, to the extent Communism requires, without a centralized economy. You can have a centralized economy and no other state apparatus. I can’t imagine it succeeding, which is one of many reasons I’m not communist, but it is both necessary and theoretically possible. This is communist theory, not mine.
2: syndicalism and communism are economic theories, not systems of government. The system of government you are implying is anarchism. Anarchists are fine (if, in my view, very optimistic in their understanding of how humans work) . The system of government the vast majority of communists want is not anarchism, and I would not ban anarchists, even if they’re communists. The world will never just descend to anarchy, so it’s all a moot discussion anyway. We’ve seen countries slip into authoritarian communism in current generations.
deleted by creator
You result to insults when it really isn’t necessary at all. Viewing this exchange, any validity you had in your arguments is strongly undermined by your character.
deleted by creator
Those worker councils, to operate with any efficiency, will need a national council. To have any success whatsoever, this national council needs the authority to dictate what is made, where it is made, how much is made when, and where goods are to be shipped.
That is authoritarianism.
deleted by creator
This sentence doesn’t make sense. Capitalism is an economic system. One can be capitalist and authoritarian, as is the case with fascism, or one can be totally and completely laissez-faire as a state policy in some sort of Objectivist hellstate. Liberal Democracy is what keeps those things from happening, as a competing system of government.
deleted by creator