Hacker News Reader

Comment by turcogutierrez | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

having a hierarchy like that would make the group easier to deal with. similar groups use cell structures or leaderless approaches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaderless_resistance

That always reminds me of a graffiti I saw once, which simply commanded "Anarchy!"... the irony of which got a bit lost on the artist I think...

That doesn't seem ironic at all. It would be ironic if "Anarchy!" had an HQ.

Where's ISIS headquarters? Where's the headquarters of drug gangs?

An organization doesn't have to be centralized, just like communists weren't. This is a lazy argument.

An organization does have to have a clear set of shared plans, toward which it takes a program of coordinated action. That's what an organization is. It's about being organized. A bunch of random individuals who share some opinions, occasionally use similar tactics, may cooperate sporadically, and describe themselves using some term or gravitate toward certain symbols, is not an organization. And it's not clear that "antifa" even does most of those things.

Nor are a bunch of small groups a single "organization" if they don't have some kind of ongoing, systemematic structure for coordinating their actions.

I'm an atheist. That doesn't make atheism an organization.

What do you think _soviet_ are

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_(council)

A unit of organization that was quickly made obsolete and purely symbolic during the era of Stalinism

[flagged]

Please don't keep commenting the way you did in this thread. It's not what HN is for and it destroys what it is for. Please take a moment to read the guidelines, particularly these ones:

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It's a common point made by Marxists.

https://marxist.com/socialism-in-one-country-how-stalin-aban...

HN is not the place for debating topics in that way. The guidelines specifically ask: “Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.” Please choose a different forum if you want to engage in such discussions. You're welcome here if you earnestly intend to observe the HN guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The communists were very centralized. They held world governments. Even the American communists were centralized.

There was a national Communist Party as well as several Cominterns. Communists are pretty big on democratic centralism.

"Several cominterns" - each country had its communist party, meaning a certain level of decentralization.

"Comintern" means "Communist International"--meant to guide the various national parties.

Besides, I don’t usually think of individual national governments as the proper level at which something qualifies as decentralized.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com