Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is. It is the act by which one part of the population imposes its will on the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannons — by the most authoritarian means possible; and the victors, if they do not want to have fought in vain, must maintain this rule by means of the terror which their arms inspire in the reactionaries. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if the communards had not used the authority of the armed people against the bourgeoisie? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach them for not having used it enough?

Therefore, we must conclude one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don’t know what they’re talking about, in which case they are only sowing confusion; or they do know, in which case they are betraying the proletarian movement. In either case, they serve reaction.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

People seriously still quote On Authority? 🙄

[–] highduc@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I found the quote interesting. Is the source material bad? How so?

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Engels conflates authority with basically everything: necessity, organization, processes, violence, self-defense, etc.

This video thoroughly debunks the essay

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

An anticommunist breadtuber (but I repeat myself) debunks Engels 😂 Anarchism, unlike Marxism-Leninism, has yet to succeed in the real world for more than a few months. We will welcome anarchists’ lectures once they’ve proven their theory in praxis.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Anything else than ad-hominem attacks and wishful thinking? Like actually engaging with the actual critique, tankie?

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Anarchism’s lack of success to date is historical fact, and I think that’s reason enough not to take the time to engage with some Burgerland anarchist’s video essay.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Someone's scared, I see.

What a great theorist Engels must have been, given that you must find ridiculous excuses in order to avoid engaging critically with his work. /s

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

thurston WATCH MY VIDEO YOU COWARD

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 years ago

So, tell me: in what way is necessity, the laws of physics or self-defense the same thing as a monopolization of decision making power?

[–] Donkter@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

On authority is used to justify the fact that many communist movements of the past turned into brutal dictatorships and that "it's fine actually that mao starved half of China because you can't have a revolution without being authoritarian".

The actual paper is short and kind of stupid. What Engels was arguing in that short essay with a ridiculously outsized influence was that he was technically correct (the best kind) that anarchists are silly because any type of government someone could propose inevitably involves one person imposing their will on another like your quote says.

Really what Engels (who was a prominent communist thinker) was doing was fucking up any attempts at communist organization because now 1/3 of communists think that brutal authoritarianism is based and necessary for a revolution.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

Just because you have trouble comprehending something doesn't make it stupid.