Fuck the Poor...

[scspkr99]

The state is the self-enforcing monopoly of guns, of course.

But the argument you're implying doesn't hold up since it poses that its a struggle created by different "economic status", but if you were to remove the state, then the class struggle as you are trying to frame it would go away. I.e, in my anarcho-capitalist wetdream society, the class struggle would not exist, but people would still be "economically unequal";. so then calling it the class struggle would be a misnomer.

Take the question at face value without considering the question you think I'm implying because in this instance I'm not. I'm genuinely interested in a clear understanding of who you think the state represents. I suspect I've been quick to criticise your position previously and I think I'd rather understand it better. If it's not acting in the interests of wealth and it's not acting in the interests of those workers it misleads whose interests is it acting in? I don't think it's sufficient to say its own.

I'm not really framing a class struggle either at this point I think it's largely a myth, it may be useful to talk of a struggle of interests but I don't consider it ever likely realised.

[faultier]

The state is the self-enforcing monopoly of guns, of course.

But the argument you're implying doesn't hold up since it poses that its a struggle created by different "economic status", but if you were to remove the state, then the class struggle as you are trying to frame it would go away. I.e, in my anarcho-capitalist wetdream society, the class struggle would not exist, but people would still be "economically unequal";. so then calling it the class struggle would be a misnomer.

If it's not acting in the interests of wealth and it's not acting in the interests of those workers it misleads whose interests is it acting in? I don't think it's sufficient to say its own.

I'm not really framing a class struggle either at this point I think it's largely a myth, it may be useful to talk of a struggle of interests but I don't consider it ever likely realised.

@Gene, it seems to me you're trying to frame the anti-state views you expressed several times here in the context of a debate on "class struggle" (for the record, i don't like that term either, but for lack of a better word...). as scspkr99 asks (big up the unspellable name crew), if not the super wealthy, who do you think benefits the state's confiscation of power, monopoly of violence, etc? who is "the state" in practice?

edit: to clarify, regardless of theoretical debate on statism/anarchism, wouldn't you agree that one of the reason the "state" as its been implemented in modern times is so dysfunctional, is because it's been implemented as a tool for the wealthy to maintain their domination after they realised the feudal system that preceded wouldn't fly anymore?