• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    What to do with the surplus, and production decisions, are determined by decision making at the collective, political-level, not at the private level.

    The party is the owner of the means of production. That’s why anachists call AES “state-capitalism”.

    • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Anarchists use the term “state-capitalism” because they don’t have a clue what they’re talking about

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Wrong again. The working class is the owner of production, and elect and delegate managers dedicated to this task.

      Name me a single grouping of any kind that doesn’t have managers, leaders, or organizers.

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        The working class is the owner of production, and elect and delegate managers dedicated to this task.

        So, can anyone be delegated to be a manager, can that mandate be recalled by the workers again, or do you need to be in the party to be eligible?

        Name me a single grouping of any kind that doesn’t have managers, leaders, or organizers.

        Straw-man. I’m not arguing against administration (nor is any collectivist anarchist).

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      24 hours ago

      The party is not the de jure nor de facto owner of the means of production, the entire working class is. This is why production in socialist economies is not run for the accumulation of capital in the hands of party members, such would make accusations of “state capitalism” hold water. Production is socialized, and the social surplus is also socialized.