• @Duplodicus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1110 months ago

    Revolutionary Catalonia existed for weeks and really shouldn’t be used as an example of proving the success of anything. It simply wasn’t around long enough for if to do much.

    While the Kurdish groups are interesting they exist within a larger state that is taking on several roles of the state, such as maintaining the larger economy, so that the Kurds do not have to do so. Thus the Kurds aren’t proving the efficacy of their system independent of a capitalist system as it is in a capitalist nation-state.

    I don’t think you have good examples here.

    • Rozaŭtuno
      link
      English
      1510 months ago

      Revolutionary Catalonia existed for weeks

      More like 2-3 years. Yes, it’s still not much, but not mere weeks either. There were also other anarchist territories at the time and they all worked under socialist principles, none of them caused famines, deportations nor genocides; they don’t exist anymore because they got betrayed and hunted down by the soviets, which were authoritarian since day 1.

      While the Kurdish groups are interesting they exist within a larger state that is taking on several roles of the state

      The Syrian state? During a civil war? Like, what roles?

      And is it actually the state taking those roles? At the end of the day, all politicians do is sign papers, the world is shaped by the workers. It’s workers that build and run hospitals, railways etc. If workers under the Syrian state can make the electricity run, why would the same workers suddenly not be able to anymore “under” the kurds?

      I don’t think you have good examples here.

      How about the Zapatistas, then? They’re around since the 90s and they’re independent from the Mexican state.