Comments by "No One" (@NoOne-go3ml) on "Ryan Chapman" channel.

@crescendo5594 Starvation halved and life expectancy improved because of our advancements in technology and medicine. This was happening even before capitalism where we steadily improved agriculture and medicine and not as a result of capitalism. Furthermore such advancements are attributed to the evolutionary concept of mutual aid since scientific and technological efforts are a social effort. We dont just invent and improve things in individual bubbles. If you want evidence to this there is Zapatista Chiapas for example which despite being anticapitalist also saw reductions in the birth death rate, improvements in infrastructure, and in education. So we know for a fact its not an exclusive thing that can be attributed to modern capitalism.
1
@crescendo5594 You do realize blindly providing statistics from states isnt an argument for capitalism? You are trying to justify capitalism correct? I already agree and aknowledge that state services have helped show improvements such as in crime rate and health. Though if you looked into the sources I gave youd know these exact same services are more than possible within anarchist societies. These are not improvements as a result of capitalism but improvements in spite of capitalism. Furthermore how does this justify keeping around hierarchical institutions if we know that we can exist without them? If you understand we can improve our present situation then why the strong opposition to actually improving our situation further and make an inherently centralizing and corrupting institution such as the state less crucial in day to day lives?
1
@crescendo5594 I never said cooperation and individualism are competiting concepts. The whole point of anarchism is that cooperation allows for individualism. Also the Soviet Union has nothing to do with anarchism. Though I would like to point out that the USSR experienced economic growth and the swap to industrialism under Stalin's collectivization and industrialization policies. So idunno what you are getting at here. Economic growth doesnt necessarily equate to individual wellbeing either. Idunno how you think this relates to anarchism or capitalism for that matter.
1
@crescendo5594 Capitalism isnt when factories exist to manufacture stuff. Also in terms of anarchist economists there is Pierre Joseph Proudhon, Alan Pengam, Michael Albert, and Robin Hahnel to name a few. Also if an anarchist nation was a nation then it wouldnt be anarchist. Though the examples I gave and listed are bigger than various nations technically in area and population.
1
@crescendo5594 Your first point on industrialism requiring private ownership and capital is contradicted by your example in the USSR where they engaged in industrialization directly alongside forced collectivization. Your second point on nations and areas is addressed by the several lists I gave of anarchist regions in action. Which if you want to go further there are various studies done on them such as health studies on places such as Zapatista Chiapas. Adding onto your second point, you claim it's not an accident that we are experiencing global capitalism. That's no different than someone in the middle ages claiming that the rule of kings is the only system for us to experience since there are kings everywhere. Just because capitalism and hierarchy exists doesnt justify its existence especially when we know there are alternatives that help improve individual freedoms, worker conditions, ecological sustainability, and public health.
1
They were backed by the Nazis and fascist Italians. The Falangists played a key role in aiding the nationalists. They were also not just attacking the Bolsheviks but also the anarchists and peasants in general. In fact the white terror of Spain was known to be much more brutal and even engaged in hunting peasants for sport.
1
@vascoespañol highest estimate from the Franco government themselves on the red terror was 61,000 people killed. This is also including the fact that these were not ordered killings but in fact deaths often due to uncontrollable mob violence. The lowest estimate for the white terror of the franco government is 160,000 deaths. So just by numbers alone the White terror was much more brutal. Then you have the fact the Francoist regime first and foremost was protecting the interests of the rich business owners which is why they targeted and decimated the trade unions.
1
The video left out the part where Orwell wrote an entire book titled Homage to Catalonia which further discussed his involvement in Spain and how he grew sympathetic of the anarchist revolution there. Anarchism advocates stateless socialism and have shown it is a possible means of achieving a society even more free than one restricted by the free market which inevitably centralizes wealth and influence into the hands of a smaller owner class at the expense of the working class.
1
@jameseverett4976 1. Something being undemocratic doesn't mean anti authoritarian. Democracy itself is a form of justifying authoritarian actions through a selected majority over a minority. 2. Capitalism is not democratic either. Both communism and capitalism are modes of production and not forms of government. To further add on to this, anarchism is a form of communism because the goal is not government control but a stateless classless society. We have had anarchism in practice before and in fact it reduced the amount of forced labor on people such as with syndicalist Catalonia where workers took over and decided their own hours instead of being forced.
1
Books being considered a "luxury" under capitalism is precisely one of the many things wrong with capitalist society. Orwell was sympathetic to anarchism in particular such as with his writings of Homage to Catalonia. Anarchists are socialists who critique capitalism on the basis that it is in itself authoritarian. It centralizes wealth and influence into the hands of a smaller owner class at the expense of the worker class. In modern times the average voting individual does not compare to the political power of capitalists lobbying the state and funding their preferred politicians.
1
@gregb6469 Anarchism is stateless socialism. It involves removing the concentration of power. Anarchist writers such as Mikhail Bakunin explicitly discusses how the state centralizes power.
1
@gregb6469 Stateless socialism is literally anarchism. We already have multiple examples of anarchism in action such as what George Orwell saw firsthand in Catalonia. People who decided to work for their own benefit took the logical conclusion that they should care for each other and not work under capitalists but for themselves. Capitalism by its nature makes people work to make other people rich and centralizes wealth and influence into the hands of an owner class at the expense of a worker class. Even Adam Smith admitted that capitalist professions such as landlords were parasitic practices.
1
@fernandofaria2872 The human nature argument makes no sense. If you were to accept that humans are inherently greedy thats still not a justification to continue systems that reward it. Alternatively, we have a lot more studies in regards to anthropology or from people like Peter Kropotkin that have observed one of the more defining characteristics in our evolution and survival is in fact mutual aid and cooperation with humans being inherently social creatures.
1
@fernandofaria2872 Peter Kropotkin was a scientist first and foremost with mutual aid holding up as a theory even in modern anthropology. Something being inherent doesnt mean always being that way. It means that it is an essential component. Humans are inherently social because they need to interact with other people in order to survive and ensure their wellbeing. Greed leads to a small few hoarding disproportionate resources at the expense of the rest which in turn leads to an unstable and unhealthy society.
1
@fernandofaria2872 It wasnt narcissism. Lenin thought that seizing state power was the best way to implement socialism. Anarchists such as Mikhail Bakunin and Errico Malatesta wrote prior to the revolution on how the state is prone to centralizing authority and power. It was a matter of means defining ends.
1
Must be why we are so free to choose which capitalist controls our lives and pays us a portion of our labor to survive. Or how we are free to choose which capitalist funded politician to elect. Capitalism centralizes wealth and power into the hands of the few at the expense of the rest. Read George Orwell's Homage to Catalonia.
1
Read his book Homage to Catalonia. He saw the anarchist revolution that occurred there. Anarchism is in fact stateless socialism and has seen a modern resurgence in part due to their remarkable ability to be employed with success in various ways.
1
@stefanl5183 Not him, but under Trump he was already trying to outright defend the brutality of the police and neo nazi supporters such as the ones who murdered a woman in Charlottesville 2017. He then further tried to criminalize vandalizing statues and protestors were getting abducted by vans under him. Then the fact he tried to get his supporters to stage a full blown coup. Biden is awful but Trump taking power again would mean the state would be further transformed into a totalitarian mess.
1
@stefanl5183 Trump has actively goaded on the numerous far right fascist groups that came out to restrict the free choice of a community to remove a Confederate statue. Jan 6 shows he is more than willing to encourage further violence if he feels it is opitcally viable. Also yes people shouldnt be arrested by the government for vandalizing statues. That also shouldnt be equated to people who stormed the capital at the encouragement of Donald Trump to overturn the election results and stage a coup. Trump is an authoritarian who would only further militarize the border and police when all evidence shows we need to be doing the opposite.
1
@stefanl5183 They werent vandalizing a building they were trying to overturn election results and impose their will on the rest. I could care less if they wanted to simply vandalize the capitol building the issue is that they wanted an authoritarian coup.
1
Capitalism as defined by socialists is the means of production such as a factory or farm being under the private control of a single person or group as opposed to being publically avaible. Democratic socialism advocates workers taking over their workplaces and running them democratically. Orwell however wrote more in favor of anarchism such as in his book Homage to Catalonia. The anarchists are similar in wanting the workers to take over the means of production but with no involvement from the state and addressing hierarchies wherever practical.
1
Trotsky was still pretty totalitarian and merely disagreed with who was in charge. The anarchists were the main ones actually critical of the Bolshevik revolution and Orwell's book Homage to Catalonia in part shows that his sympathies were with the anarchist revolution in Catalonia despite fighting in the POUM.
1
@Seabass-a Trotsky was in charge of the Red army which during the revolution under Lenin engaged in the forced expropriation of food and goods from the peasant population. He also led the Red army in crushing and destroying the anarchist Black army in Ukraine. His main difference with Stalin was that he wanted to continue a constant militant struggle beyond Russia while Stalin wanted to fortify within Russia. The Stalinists would do the same betrayal to the anarchists in Spain during the civil war just as Trotsky did to the anarchists in Ukraine. George Orwell wrote positively about the anarchist revolution in Spain in his book Homage to Catalonia.
1