I saw a post that talked about racism towards people and when I talked about it the response I got was very heated and a person even called lemmy.world a community of ‘hitlerites’
I have been around for a week or so and this is my first time seeing such explicit vulgar reaction towards another community, is this a one-off or should I block hexbear?
Do you think the entire production process of Fairphone is cooperative? Further, Fairphone is nowhere near on track to destabilize the larger firms like Samsung and Apple that wield immense power as owners of hundreds of billions of dollars of industrial Capital, who can always outcompete. To overthrow Capital, you need revolution.
As for Engels, I think if you’re trying to twist him into somehow being in favor of a cooperative-based economy without revolution and that you’ve successfully applied Dialectical Materialism, I encourage you to read Anti-Dühring, where Engels applies Dialectical and Historical Materialism to take down such a system as Utopian. You don’t have to agree with Engels, but to twist him into being in favor of Agorism is odd.
As for me applying Dialectical Materialism, such a system has no roots in popular trajectory of the evolution of Capitalism, which has proven the dominance of the centralizing nature of Capitalism. Better to sieze and democratize so we can produce along a common plan for the common good.
Not at all, early stages. Just don’t see any reason we couldn’t do it properly. To genuinely challenge these entrenched systems of industrial Capital, systemic revolution is essential. However, such a revolution cannot be reduced to a singular event. It is a fundamental reorganization of production, exchange, and social relations. This involves moving beyond isolated ethical consumption and instead fostering systemic alternatives that redistribute power and resources while dismantling the material basis of capitalist dominance.
Agorism engages directly with the evolution of capitalism by addressing its inherent contradictions, particularly the conflict between the centralization of capital and the decentralized potential of human agency and voluntary exchange. Dialectical materialism reveals that these contradictions drive historical change, creating the conditions for resistance and alternative systems. Agorism exploits these contradictions through counter-economic activity, building decentralized systems of exchange and production that bypass and undermine state-capitalist structures. While the centralization of capital may appear dominant, it simultaneously creates vulnerabilities and opportunities for agorism to flourish. Agorism’s focus on creating alternatives outside of centralized systems reflects the dialectical process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, where counter-economic resistance develops into a stateless, cooperative society. This prefigurative model aligns with dialectical materialism’s emphasis on transformation through the resolution of contradictions, showing that agorism is not only compatible with but also a practical application of dialectical materialist principles.
This isn’t historically accurate nor does it appear to be working. Building up dual power is a proven method of revolution, but it requires millitancy. We don’t actually have widespread examples of cooperative production outperforming organized industry, nor a reason to predict that will happen. FOSS has the foothold it does because the Capital required to build it is relatively inexpensive, but dogmatically transfering that to other industries goes against Dialectical Materialism.
Mondragon Corporation, Spanish Civil War, Syrian Revolutionary Left, and countless mutual aid initiatives illustrate that cooperative production is not only viable but can outperform centralized systems when given the opportunity to scale. The historical limitations of cooperatives were largely due to their isolation and the hostile environments in which they emerged, often as localized responses to crises. Today, however, the situation is fundamentally different. This is no longer about isolated groups trying to set up decentralized systems in panic or under siege. Instead, we are witnessing the emergence of a global network of tools, practices, and knowledge being built, shared, and iterated upon. This network allows for unprecedented collaboration and scalability, making it a unique historical development that reflects an evolutionary leap in social organization. No widespread examples because this has never happened before, and it is only going to happen once.
FOSS demonstrates how decentralized, cooperative production can scale and compete with centralized industry in a domain traditionally dominated by capital-intensive models. While the material conditions of other industries differ, the dialectical process suggests that emerging contradictions, such as the inefficiencies of centralized production and the growing accessibility of decentralized technologies, create opportunities for cooperative systems to expand. The failure to consider these material developments and their revolutionary potential itself goes against dialectical materialism, which emphasizes historical progression through contradictions and their resolution.
Agorism, by fostering decentralized, counter-economic systems, aligns with the principles of dual power and dialectical materialism. It recognizes the importance of building alternatives while confronting and undermining the dominant structures of power. This does not negate the need for militancy but broadens its scope to include economic and social resistance as critical components of systemic transformation. The present moment is not just another iteration of past efforts but the culmination of a dialectical process where global connectivity, shared knowledge, and cooperative innovation provide the material basis for a stateless, cooperative society. Far from being at odds with dialectical materialism, agorism embodies its principles by addressing contradictions in the current mode of production and building the groundwork for an unprecedented societal ®evolution.
Mondragon isn’t outscaling large manufacturing, and the Spanish and Syrian Anarchists are violent revolutionaries, not your mythical peaceful ones.
Again, there is a case to be made of cooperative production with low barriers to entry for Capital, not for large-scale manufacturing, despite your insistence otherwise.