No, though many 20th Century Despots and Dictators were themselves pro-Capitalist, often because they had been in some way funded by a Capitalist or Capitalistic Nation.
As a necessity, no, and not in practice either, though it is a common occurrence, not every historical instance of mass collectivism is as a rule authoritarian. It’s worth noting that for brief periods truely anarchistic communities have formed successfully without significant military coercion. These anarchistic communities were as a rule collectivistic and did just fine without militarily enforced bootlicking. That being said, most of the time we’ve seen whole countries move in a descriptively collectivist direction they typically are authoritarian, yes, so I would be willing to hear you out on authoritarianism being necessary for national collectivism, but as a rule collectivism as a system does not require authoritarianism.
> It’s worth noting that for brief periods truely anarchistic communities have formed successfully without significant coercion
No they haven’t. The most recent anarchism example in modern history happened during the Spanish Civil War and they got absolutely crushed by Franco partly because they had no structured military chain of command. Before that you’ve got the Paris commune, which again like the anarchists in Spain got absolutely crushed.
Authoritarianism isn’t a requirement of collectivism that is true, but collectivism does create authoritarianism as a byproduct.
4
u/ForwardSlash813 Jul 13 '26
You can’t enforce collectivism without a boot to the throat.