These things are central to what I consider authority. You may have a different definition but then I guess we’re discussing different things. “Proletarian authority” makes zero sense in the vocabulary of anarchism, it only works with Engels’ definition that conflates authority with power. But I don’t think arguing about the meaning of words is a good pastime.
It sounds like you are in favor of Mao letting people choose their own generals rather than being appointed centrally. Why? Are you some sort of anti-authoritarian?
These things are central to what I consider authority.
That’s fine if you want to define it differently according to your own standards, and think that if proletarians make laws and rules, being forced to obey them isn’t authoritarian (although you would be going against most of your anarchist comrades with that definition, who consider any affront to personal liberty, “authoritarian”).
Why? Are you some sort of anti-authoritarian?
Mao and every other ML are defining authority in the same way; all consider the dictatorship of the proletariat to be equivalent to working-class democracy, and democratic centralizsm. “Anti-authoritarians” staunchly oppose Mao and the DOTP, so you’d be in a tiny minority of anarchists if you actually support the CPC.
Hm I thought we were going somewhere. Whether or not I support Mao is besides the point. The point is that we both seem to think it’s good that in that system, people could choose their own generals. Not to mention you’ve poured your heart and soul into developing an incredible federated software that defies central control. I know why I like that, but I’m confused as to why you would.
I’m not some pure-blooded anarchist. I don’t strictly adhere to one ideology. I don’t think anyone should.
These things are central to what I consider authority. You may have a different definition but then I guess we’re discussing different things. “Proletarian authority” makes zero sense in the vocabulary of anarchism, it only works with Engels’ definition that conflates authority with power. But I don’t think arguing about the meaning of words is a good pastime.
It sounds like you are in favor of Mao letting people choose their own generals rather than being appointed centrally. Why? Are you some sort of anti-authoritarian?
That’s fine if you want to define it differently according to your own standards, and think that if proletarians make laws and rules, being forced to obey them isn’t authoritarian (although you would be going against most of your anarchist comrades with that definition, who consider any affront to personal liberty, “authoritarian”).
Mao and every other ML are defining authority in the same way; all consider the dictatorship of the proletariat to be equivalent to working-class democracy, and democratic centralizsm. “Anti-authoritarians” staunchly oppose Mao and the DOTP, so you’d be in a tiny minority of anarchists if you actually support the CPC.
Hm I thought we were going somewhere. Whether or not I support Mao is besides the point. The point is that we both seem to think it’s good that in that system, people could choose their own generals. Not to mention you’ve poured your heart and soul into developing an incredible federated software that defies central control. I know why I like that, but I’m confused as to why you would.
I’m not some pure-blooded anarchist. I don’t strictly adhere to one ideology. I don’t think anyone should.