But "socialism" is a scary word
But "socialism" is a scary word
You're viewing part of a thread.
Whatever “ism” you use, there will always be people at the top who are exploiting people at the bottom.
communism is classless. there is no top or bottom. same with anarchism.
Communism will have administrators, planners, managers, etc so it keeps some form of authority and hierarchy, to be clear, it's just that these are a necessity for large-scale production and aren't classes.
so there is no one "at the top" "exploiting people at the bottom"
Yes, technically there is a top and a bottom, like an upper level administrator and a lower level worker, but this is not a relationship of exploitation just like it isn't your manager that exploits you under Capitalism, but the Business Owner(s).
under communism, there is no exploitation
Correct. I am a Communist, I am just offering technical clarification that hierarchy exists under Communism, but not exploitation.
Yes, and there's a reason that those can't exist in actual human communities of more than about a dozen people.
those can’t exist in actual human communities of more than about a dozen people.
this is a lie.
Ok, then disprove it. Show a counterexample.
the swamp maroons
How did that end?
seems like you're no true scotsmanning.
say what you want to say
I already said it.
exarcheia
What about it?
it's an anarchist community of 55,000
And it's not in a country?
more no true scotsmanning
K
the Paris commune
How did that end?
invaded by imperial france
After a whole 2 months. Clearly if one of your prime examples is something that couldn't even last a quarter of a year, you don't have a leg to stand on.