There are a few problems I have with this.
So if you want to abolish the state, then who is going to run the administration of the means of production? And who will run this "direct democracy"? Who will arbitrate disputes over use of the means of production?
The answer to all of these is the workers. They will collaborate and decide democratically how they want to run their own affairs.
And there are two main flaws with these "voluntary associations". The first is that you don't want a state. A state is basically just nation administration. So how will this hypothetical national administration not be a state? If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and its internal biological functions and DNA match that of a duck: it's a duck alright.
An anarchist society wouldn't have a national administration. It would be horizontally organized so that everyone is on the same playing field.
The second main problem is who decides who goes on this counsel? If it's the people then how will this democracy not become like current democracies which are in many ways just corperate oligarchies?
Because no one will have any more power than their fellow man.
And if you're talking about a set of comities working "horizontally", then how is that not just a government?
The distinction must be made here between authoritarian government and self-government. Anarchism functions on autonomy of the human being.
If it's an elected government of people who are administering the nation for everybody else, how is that not like our current representative republics?
That's not what it is.
Or if there's no governent then a government will create itself. How you might ask? Violence of course. The military or weapons manufacturers would take over. They would have to run the country, which would then be a dictatorship. Or democratic revolutionary comities would become corrupt and assume dictatorial powers as they have done in the former USSR, China, North Korea, Cambodia, ect. Not to mention that these regimes have brought upon some of the largest cases of democide in human history, although perhaps only incidentally given economic conditions.
Take a look at how anarchism functioned for three years in Spain following a revolution in 1936. People often forget these ideas work in practice. There was anarchist utopia in Spain for this entire period of time. It didn't become violent until Francisco Franco took over and imprisoned (or even killed) his political enemies. There would be no new Soviet Union. No one would take over because no one would have any desire to do so. The recurring theme here is that anarchism is an attempt to crush social hierarchy.
You might say that these are just psuedo revolutions. But then I beg the question of how do you go about having one? Trust me, I wish humans were considerate enough to be able to work together as a wholelly peaceful and cooperatve communist society, but it just isnt going to happen because humans are shit.
The notion that humans are shit only looks at humans as they behave in this current political system. They go to jobs for long hours doing their bosses' work for little pay, and come home and have the propaganda of modern media shoved down their throats. This system pits people against each other, and if we show them there's an alternative that's workable, there's no way they won't want a piece of the action.
My conclusion is that us imperfect humans need a governing body in order to operate a odern society. I'm not saying I like the fact, but thats just how it is. Either you'll have communist commities like you propose, which will then turn into regular modern governents, or you will have a power vacuu in which dictators rise to power. A legitimatly communist society will never be.
I refer you to my above answers.
I'm not trying to sound mean <3
Me neither }):({
but I find the topic interesting,
As do I.
and I am extremly skeptical and doubting of communism, anarchism, and economic libertarianism alike. They all sound either like bad ideas, over idealistic, or both to me.
Spain in 1936, friend.
I have socialist views and/or tendencies by the way.
I'd love to hear about them.