In praise of anarchism

Many MLs on this board frequently shit on anarchism. While theoretical differences are fine to have, especially online, real life antagonism to anarchism is misplaced and entirely retarded. Anarchist movements and activism have by and large been a way to cope now with the horrid reality of capitalism. It is a rejection of the promises of industrialized communism, replaced with a desperate fight for a better life now. You might think that their theory is not pure enough, but their relentless fighting, their activism, and their real effect on the material reality of the organizations they form deserve praise and respect from all types of socialists.

Noam Chomsky
Starting off with perhaps the best known anarchist in the western world, but also one of the most despised on this board, Noam Chomsky. This guy has been a loud critic against American imperialism since day one, writing long ass books which detail the crimes of the government. He has also been a member and promoter of a ton of socialist organizations, such as the IWW, socialist rifle associations and others. His success in other areas, such as analytic philosophy, linguistics, cognitive science, and computer science has made him a well known and respected figure. His influence was such that he was worthy enough to be included in Nixon's Enemy's List. He has also filmed documentaries that are easily available (to Netflix subscribers) in which he speaks about all sorts of socialist views of the world. His books on propaganda, namely Manufacturing Consent, is an easy read for liberals which instantly instills a deep distrust on American media. He frequently BTFOs people when he appears on the media and has probably converted a good number of college students.

Subcomandante Marcos and the Zapatistas
Also known as "Anarchists that spit on your post-industrialist marxist-leninist 'DiCtAtoRsHip oF LoletAriAt'". The rural Mayan people of the state of Chiapas were being replaced by capitalist privatizing their land, drug dealers running rampant, legal and illegal loggers cutting their trees, being intimidated by police and military, and generally being on the losing end of local politicans gaining power. Based Mexico City professor went into the thick Lancandon Jungle to radicalize, and more importantly, organize the rural communities. Their anarchist organization is extremely civil, and lightyears ahead than the nearby Tuxtla-Gutierrez city-folk in terms of social issues like gender equality, let alone political issues. Their periodic communications that are accessible from their website are a window into their absolutely based, red pilled, and well read indigenous community. While, rainbow-haired Democrat Cops of America members are discussing who they're gonna vote for this coming elections, the Zapatistas have been anti-electoral since fucking forever. While plebbit is stroking their dick to Acassio Cortez, the Zapatistas have been at war with the Mexican Government for 20+ years.

R*java
In a shit third world country, the Kurds faced constant harassment from the Arabic Syrian government. The government frequently denied rightful citizenship, denied permission to own land, and other dick moves to Kurds. When the Syrian civil war broke out, the Kurds, with the help of many underground dissidents that already existed, declared themselves an autonomous self-governed federation. Their politics are based on Abdullah Öcalan's writings, largely anarchist, but very progressive. He sought for a federation of communities which "united for purposes of self-defense and with shared values of environmentalism, gender equality, and ethnic, cultural, and religious pluralism" in an anti-women Muslim region. This board gave it's back to R*java when they allowed American Government forces to enter the region, and the American Government is against Assad. There were are also criticisms of R*java being an ethnostate and other shit arguments, IMO. The region is in a much better position because they self-organized with socialist ideals, without the need of a vanguard party, and it's hard to deny it. Maybe it will turn into an ethno-shithole, or an American base in Syria, who the fuck knows, but at least they're willing to risk it all to make it work. Friendly reminder that even though most socialist countries eventually betrayed the working class and it's citizens, the fight for socialism was still worth it. It is no different here. (R*java is a hot topic of which I know little about, take your hot takes to the official thread )

ITT: Anarchist movements and theory that can be equally appreciated by all socialists.

Attached: asdasdasd.jpg (464x640, 74.17K)

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=K4Tq4VE8eHQ
libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=676C6E55F8AD5850296A012F9143BCC8
libgen.io/
newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Anarchism and Marxism-Leninism should both be rejected for the precise reason that they failed.
any of the faggots who identify as either of these two things need to read a fucking book.
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm

As an ML I hold the position that the antagonism between Marxism and Anarchism is what Mao considered to be a non-antagonistic contradiction, ie one in which a negotiated, mutually beneficial settlement is possible. This is of course assuming the anarchists are reasonable and willing to compromise, not retards saying that the mere presence of the state is as bad as capitalism.

Ideology huffers like that don't amount to anything. A bigger concern is an "anarchist" group overrun by fucking liberals, quoting CIA propaganda.

no

Attached: soviet mudkip.png (397x397, 100.64K)

I don’t think you know what utopian socialism is

could you say why you don't think so?

how about you strip your mind of the preconceived notions you push behind that word and read about what dialectics actually fucking are?

Nice word-salad("Words hurt my feelings")

Attached: disgust 2.png (960x540, 537.07K)

sad. you're so uneducated you can't even understand what I'm saying. absolutely depressing that people like you exist.

Why the hell was this poster banned? Jesus this board is shit

No one has mentioned the catalonian anarchists yet? This is my opinion were and are easily the most based anarchists that have existed. Durruti was a badass (albeit a bit too anti-religious for my taste but I can understand why) and Revolutionary Catalonia truly was a noble and honorable attempt at bulding state-less socialism and they also put up a noble fight against the fascist pieces of shit that unfortunately ended up winning. Regardless, they truly were people we should look up to despite the fact that the majority of us here may heavily disagree with their beliefs and/or convictions.

can we please remove this mod?

Joke ban.

It's still retarded.

As in? He only got banned for one hour or some shit like that?

He has the politics of a sheltered intellectual complete utopian

literally one big US military base in Syria

...

As in banned for 1 second

...

They don't claim to be anarchist (maybe some small factions do but by and large no), they don't organize like anarchists. What more do you need?

Chomsky is literally "red Liberal" incarnate
Other two are cool though

No longer applies, US left Syria to Turkey.


Don't play dumb, this isn't the first time US used "no fly zone to protect the Kurds" as a cover to run over the government.

They haven't pulled out yet

Anarchism and illegalism brought me into leftism. Crimethinc and crust punk radicalized me as a poor rural american teenager. I would have never read Marx if all of that edgy lifestylist stuff wasn't around.

Reminder that Chomsky thinks that the dismantlement of the USSR was a "small victory of socialism".
youtube.com/watch?v=K4Tq4VE8eHQ
Also, Inventing Reality > Manufacturing Consent
libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=676C6E55F8AD5850296A012F9143BCC8

Attached: Michael_Parenti.jpg (1080x1723 35.81 KB, 829.45K)

firefox doesn't accept that libgen.is certificate for some reason

just use a different libgen proxy, there's like five listed on wikipedia for some reason

Noam Chomsky isn't a real leftist; he's an idiotic liberal who tells people to vote for the mainstream Democrats.

Didn't Chomsky say recently he supported keeping US troops in Syria?
Also, as someone who was into Chomsky when I was younger, he's pretty much a liberal idiot, especially nowadays. If he is your shining example of Anarchism then you should reconsider how much of a leftist you actually are.
Also, the Zapatistas are explicitly not anarchist. You retards need to stop appropriating their struggle just so you can claim one ""anarchist"" struggle that wasn't crushed.
Im also not sure Roj.a.va is explicitly anarchist, but I'll let you keep that one out of the kindness of my heart.

Test

I'm pretty sure Noam was only talking about the U.S.S.R that way due to the party not allowing any freedom of dissent, and murdering millions unnecessarily (death is necessary to the revolution, and if you only found a way to only kill 3 million kulaks because you'd find them jobs and not force them to burn their own crops i'd be happy), and making any type of socialism a boogeyman tankfag.

He was doing that in a Democrat Cops of America hurr durr socialist Nato even though that should just be reffered to as The Internationale type of way.

t. somebody who's only a syndie because it's the only way we can establish socialism in the US, due to it's history and brand of Americana, even though Leninists who want freeze peach and let people keep the power are based.

Attached: utlouebvbji11.png (500x382, 60.15K)

Also why don't a lot of leninist parties have a second amendement thing, where people can impeach/ overthrow the vanguard if it's being shitty?

consider 1. researching the USSR more thoroughly 2. convert to liberalism

based ancom poster

Anti-Stalinism doesn't equal anti communism but ok?
I'm off to go fuck Tony Blair, and J.K rowling now fellas

Critical support still for almost any socialist state

No one that is extremely Anti-Stalin is Anti-Stalin in a vacuum
95% of people that post memes like that welcomed the fall of the USSR in 1991

...

Duly noted, but I've seen even MLs calll anything authoritarian, fascism. So a few people controlling a countries fate is no different even if the lands publicly or privately owned. They also both act upon anything that threatens held in their power.

Unlike fags on leftpol I wouldn't still try to defend one big US military base in Syria if they annexed all of Turkey in reverse imperialism tho (Dumb legit disorganized, platformist cunts think bad opinions shouldn't be acted upon, while simultaneously supporting orgs without criticizing them .).

Rojava still controls their fate, and millitary bases don't change that, even assad has russian bases

Attached: bl3hpcufjmv01.jpg (545x530, 38.05K)

Posted from the hellscape that is reddit, but it works here none the less .

The Zapatistas has a society based on direct democracy, solidarity, and community I would consider that Anarchist. one big US military base in Syria has a similar society, but there still property among other things. Both societies are Libertarian Socialist it's up to you if you would label it Anarchist.

Most revolutionary ideas have the same goal, you can call the societies socialist, communist, libertarian etc doesn't really matter. These societies aren't explicitly Anarchist, but most Anarchist agrees with their struggle and the society they're trying to build.

We just want to skip the socialism, and military ,to create local militias,and wage a world wide Vietnam with you guys

Attached: Apo.png (1179x1126, 1.38M)

I too have read my fair share of Orwell. Being anti-Stalin doesn't make you anti-communist but as it's not a position you hold in a vacuum. Being anti-soviet definitely makes you anti-communist though whether you like it or not.

libgen.io/

Stop. Orwell is a cunt. And here's ya boi Asimov telling you why.

newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm

Attached: issac-asimov-predictions.jpg (1500x1000, 126.47K)

Anarchy and communism generally are so good that even when you do them poorly you still get pretty good results.

Might I direct you to the part of this back, and forth were i said i'd critically support them?
Leninists are also extremely based, and I have no idea where you got the idea I was anti Soviet as most unjustified behavior happened under Stalin's watch.

Based,and some great points are made, (i.e newspeak being an inappropriate metaphor that speaks to Orwell overreacting to some simplified English, and thinking it means alternative facts will somehow develop. Orwell being slightly an-prim level hater of tech while also criticizing his, they'll instantly change their minds if the party acts thing are brought up.) but the soviets doing something as based as shooting Nazis, doesn't exempt them from criticism for a dictatorship. and please don't hit me with that "Hurr durr you need the state to be firing on all cylinders, so you should centralize power to an extreme degree, Vietnamese farmers were so low on supplies they fought with rocks a lot of the time,so an incredibly large elite army isn't necessary
His opinion on Animal farm wasn't as good imo tho. He states that the book only focuses on the farms themselves being normie capitalist countries that buddy up with Stalin, when they should have a Hitler like character to make them buddy up, when that wasn't the point. He was simply trying to say rule by a political class of elites hadn't ended due to Stalin's cronyism. Also claiming that the reason the Spanish Anarchists didn't come to power in the republic due to the CP being more organized as all are is laughable

Attached: 1d1ca449dff50829d5d14455f482abdd.jpg (604x595, 61.67K)

*degree.

Holy shit, he destroyed Orwell harder than tuberculosis.

Attached: 1445714137956.gif (400x400, 1.99M)

Sounds like Asimov misinterpreted 1984 in the same way that all the other libs did. It’s more about Britain than it is about the Soviet Union, Orwell himself said that he wrote it based on his experiences as a BBC propagandist during the war.