/lit/ - Literature

The Marx Destroyer has entered the chat

>predicts the outcome of socialist and communist societies
Nothin' personnel, kiddo.

After careful consideration, it's probably him.

>>19152934
>>19152934 (OP)
>It’s quite interesting that modern intellectuals have moved into one or the other of those directions overwhelmingly. Bakunin predicted this in the late 19th century. It’s a prediction of the social sciences that has become so dramatically true that it’s one of the best ever.

>He was arguing with Marx, and it was well before Leninism. He predicted very presciently that the rising class of intellectuals, who were just becoming identified as a class in modern industrial society, would essentially go in one of two directions.

>Some intellectuals would believe that the struggles of the working class would offer them an opportunity to rise and take state power into their own hands. And at that point, he said, they would become the red bureaucracy who would create the worst tyranny the world had ever known, of course all in the interests of the workers. That’s one direction.

>The other intellectuals would realize that you’re never going to get power that way. Therefore, the way to get power would be to associate yourself with what we would nowadays call state capitalism and just become a servant of its ruling class. Then you become one of the managers or an ideologue and so on for the state capitalist system.

>And as he put it, those people will “beat the people with the people’s stick.” In other words, they’ll talk about democracy, but they’ll really be beating people with the stick of democracy, which they’ll turn into a mechanism of coercion.

>So there are some intellectuals who think you can get power by exploiting popular struggles and others who thing you’re going to get power by associating yourself with the people who already have economic power.

Holy cow, a leftist I like. In one essay, this dude made excellent points about the fatal flaws of the state, the negative aspects of patriotism, the immorality of state actors, etc. Just look at these quotes:

>The modern State, as we have said, has freed itself from the yoke of the Church and consequently has shaken off the yoke of universal or cosmopolitan morality of the Christian religion, but it has not yet become permeated with the humanitarian idea or ethics - which it cannot do without destroying itself, for in its detached existence and isolated concentration the State is much too narrow to embrace, to contain the interests and consequently the morality of, humanity as a whole.
>The existence of a single limited State necessarily presupposed the existence, and if necessary provokes the formation of several States, it being quite natural that the individuals who find themselves outside of this State and who are menaced by it in their existence and liberty, should in turn league themselves against it. Here we have humanity broken up into an indefinite number of States which are foreign, hostile, and menacing toward one another.
>Every State, whether it is of a federative or a non-federative character, must seek, under the penalty of utter ruin, to become the most powerful of States. It has to devour others in order not to be devoured in turn, to conquer in order not to be conquered, to enslave in order not to be enslaved - for two similar and at the same time alien powers, cannot co-exist without destroying each other.
>he state then is the most flagrant negation, the most cynical and complete negation of humanity. It rends apart the universal solidarity of all men upon earth, and it unites some of them only in order to destroy, conquer, and enslave all the rest.

Imagine a line, right? On one end you have China and the USSR, and then say you have Sweden, then America, then Saudi Arabia, etc, until you reach Nazi Germany on the other end. That's the traditional "left-to-right" line. And each country on that line is flawed, each country has inflicted and inflicts horrific misery on people. Bakunin seems like he's offering us an escape from the line entirely. I have skimmed some of the rest of his writings, and I plan on reading them all. This is a hidden gem of a philosophy, it's a really nice breath of fresh air.

Move aside.

>>18944864
>How about you grow up and become a Marxist at least.

Cringe.

What books should I read to understand anarchism that is not poisoned by marxist schizos?

Where do I start with Babukhon?

Why is he so angry all the time calling out commies and capital cucks but he never name the jews, was he controlled opposition?

“Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are every where: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press — they have taken possession of all the newspapers — and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of blooksuckers, a single gluttonnous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion — this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.
This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralization in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which. speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail ....

I was a Marxist in my teens, got redpilled, but fell for the libertarian meme. I now realize that capitalism is the problem and Marxism was a Jewish pervertion of the worker's movements. Now want to reacess socialism from a more elevated standpoint.

Give me a basic reader on Non-Marxist, non Jewish socialism. Should I start with this guy or Proudhon?

>"If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." For, you understand, "the people must have a religion." That is the safety-valve.
>A jealous lover of human liberty, and deeming it the absolute condition of all that we admire and respect in humanity, I reverse the phrase of Voltaire, and say that, if God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish him.

>I like STEM

>he fell for the Marx meme

Fucking finish your works and develop your theory, you fat, crypto-tankie piece of shit

I see Bakunin cited all the time as a sort of father of Anarchism but I rarely ever see his ideas being talked about why is that
Is he a serious part of Anarchist canon or is he just a meme figure since Anarchists wanted their own brand of a fat bearded 19th century man to stand behind?

>>5273703
>Socialists and reactionaries cool
Bakunin wrecks them all.
>Taking Marx seriously
>any year