• Yliaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m not trying to unravel your entire outlook, just respond to your best argument. Is there one you’d put at top?

      • Yliaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        …Anarchists don’t reject historical materialism? Historical/scientific cases for anarchism exist.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Anarchists necessarily reject historical materialism. There is no basis for anarchism as it arises from capitalism, as I explained earlier. When I say scientific socialism, I do not merely mean a scientific case for socialism. That’s why I linked the articles for terms, so that I can be more clear in my point without having to explain what I mean by each line.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              Elaborate, my standpoint is generally the communist standpoint, with the communist critique. Can you refute my point?

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  You said you could, though. I explained my problems with anarchism, can you refute the concepts of historical materialism, etc. or alternatively explain how anarchism indeed does follow these concepts?

                  Either the concepts I agree with need to be refuted, or anarchism needs to justify itself as adhering to them, both are potential avenues for overcoming my strongest and simplest argument.