146
manufacturing distraction (quokk.au)
submitted 4 months ago by [M] to c/mop@quokk.au
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
manufacturing distraction
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

I feel like there's a disagreement on the definition of vanguardism. I didn't know it exactly, so i looked it up on Wikipedia and AnarWiki, and i get from those that a key element of the "strict" (leninist) definition is that it applies to a whole society rather than individual cases, and that it requires a minority of educated people to guide a mass of uneducated people, implying that the uneducated masses can take no part in it.

What you describe as one on one relations would seem to fall more under general "solidarity" than vanguardism to my eyes.

Also, vanguardism is by this definition not horizontal, neither consensual.

Feel free to correct my uneducated ass, but with the knowledge i have, it seems that you are using a much wider definition of vanguardism than the original one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

    requires a minority of educated people to guide a mass of uneducated people, implying that the uneducated masses can take no part in it.

    What∗ are minors?

    vanguardism is by this definition not horizontal, neither consensual.

    How do you intersect the unable to empower themselves? Like minors?

    wider definition of vanguardism than the original one.

    I am taking indeed a holistic approach to our species vanguarding the next generation of us.
    Do you think there are more older educated people than the non-educated?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (2 children)

    How do you intersect the unable to empower themselves? Like minors?

    They are partially only unable because others treat them so. We have interacted with many many young people and we find them very capable when given the chance to be so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    we find them very capable when given the chance to be so.

    We do too, when we have seen they are responsible and accountable for their actions. There are still many people who never grow the necessary means to independize themselves, including the disabled. Vanguarding until they can do so is ML in a nutshell

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    We're anarchists, so how we treat youth is as equals for the most part. Unless they are doing something that would cause serious harm to themselves or others and then we would intervene.

    We're not really MLs, but that's interesting to know.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Oh, my bad if it felt like the case, but i'm not saying vanguardism is not a good/necessary strategy.

    I'm saying that it cannot be horizontal/consensual, but maybe things have to be not horizontal/consensual, i'm not sure about that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Just like we allow adolescents responsibilities and self-development, we strive to horizontalize and consentual relieve off duties. Like advocacy if you want, but it fits squarely in Vanguardism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •