When did you start to hate Anarkids?

Ok, I really need to get this off my chest and unfortunately this seems to be an increasingly unpopular opinion here.
Why the fuck are you guys so sectarian? And before you spout some "anarchists are more sectarian" shit, 1. this is a thread about marxist hate towards anarchists and 2. I've seen more and more anarchists here with surprisingly non-sectarian takes. I will admit it personally it did surprise me.
I have a question for marxists; if you were discussing anything with a rightwinger and anarchism came up and they started shitting on it, would you defend it? Or not give a fuck? I just don't understand how in a world where socialism will become harder and harder to achieve as time passes on so many of you can be against socialist unity. Don't tell me if an anarchist revolution were to start in your country you wouldn't support it. That would be the most dogmatic thing you could possibly do and dogmatism kills socialism.
I'm a marxist myself and yeah, I'm fully aware more than a few anarchists would label me as a ☭TANKIE☭ if they heard what my stances are. But I know many also wouldn't and would be more than glad to work together. I would 100% work with anarchists if it was the only way to bring socialism to my country. And I hope all other marxists here would too.

I've gotten along with them fine on a personal level but the local ones here are toxic when in a group and extremely sectarian and crash people's events like Leeroy Jenkins so they can escalate into confrontations with the cops. If you object, they call you a cop – but the whole event wouldn't have happened in the first place if it weren't for socialists and Marxist-Leninist groups doing the actual organizing work which the anarchists proceed to disrupt, which makes what the anarchists doing "cop work" even if this behavior logically emerges from their ideology. It is worse when their actions also put members of the public in danger, children or undocumented immigrants.

Also they have no theory and it's all idealism etc. etc. which we've gone over ad nauseum.

I think its the nature of image boards and the type of people who the attract.

That's the thing, Anarchists are still on our side in the grand scheme of things. On this board especially their are some based ass Anarchists. I gladly stand with Anarchists against Capitalists and Liberalism. That said, this is a leftist imageboard and the contradictions between the ideologies will need to be addressed at one point or another. Here is as good a place as any to address this stuff I certainly wouldn't bring this up when their are Libs and Reactionaries in the room. At the end of the day we all want the same thing, obviously socialism comes first. Sadly a huge contingent of AnComs are radlibs in disguise and I think they would tear themselves apart long before porky would have to.

This is exactly what I have experienced in my area.

Fuck off armchair

Europe is under russian communism scum

Attached: fcc9b224920fd544393f3e31aed927e3d484bd0f98f11cfabc493f3c47a858c9.jpg (676x767, 119.52K)

EUROCOMM GANG

I always vote for ML parties and still support anarchist spaces and events and so on whenever I can, I believe Brezhnev was a fucking centrist and should have sent the tanks to Poland in 1980 together with the DDR, can you imagine the absolute triggering, and still I've had fun times in squats because I'm an ordinary deadbeat leftist bum, and there are millions of people like me.
And yes most people read State and Revolution and the Conquest of Bread at around the same age, and then read a shitton of things after that, because many leftists are poor people who like reading and that's a good thing.
I know the memes can be quite funny but lifestylism and illiteracy are the wounds on which sectarianism festers, and they belong to the past.
Stop thinking the internet means anything much, its purposes are documentation and agitation but most of all organisation, to help people meet and there is nothing that can replace being next to someone when he feels fucked, so if there's no party and no squat where you live just brush up on Kierkegaard and Chesterton, go to a soup kitchen or a homeless shelter and try to radicalize the fucking Catholics.
Sorry for the rant but 2 hours of cooking and 2 hours at some allotment or other look to me waaay more important than yet another interpretation of dead Russians and Germans in some blog 10 people read.

Attached: IMG-6c7428187f2ca637f3f03c424bfe2e22-V.jpg (714x698, 36.69K)

Getting serious about reading theory and seeing just how many Anarchist are just larping liberals.

Thanks, based Deadbeat Leftist Bum. Sleep good friend.

Based post.
I'm literally mentally ill and i've talked to quite a few other mentally ill people in recent months, most of which are homeless, poor, or addicted to drugs, and they share a leftist sentiment, even though they aren't as radical. The fact is that we have an obligation to go outside, get drunk on the sidewalk, and talk to bums who hate the world and radicalize them.
Never, ever criticize fellow leftists in public. Only defend them, especially when they're arguing with right-wingers. Only in worst case scenarios are you supposed to criticize them. Better yet, differentiate what you believe to what they believe, but still defend them and attack the rightist. This is solidarity.

I feel like anarchism acts as like a parasitic thing. To add to what I was saying, I saw them come out of nowhere and pop up at a demo and gradually (and very deliberately) try to escalate with the cops who were posted up nearby. They had all these methods for doing it which was interesting to watch in all honestly, but there were undocumented people with the socialists who had organized the whole thing and had done a lot of planning. Undocs are a big thing where I live and have some of the greatest potential (IMO) for developing class consciousness, but they face a lot of risks, and if they get arrested they just get deported, so of course the socialists got the fuck out of there to protect their people once the cops started bulking up their numbers to deal with the anarchists.

That would have been bad enough but the anarchists took to trying to start drama on the internet afterwards, accusing the socialists of being police collaborators and so on. Like "where's the solidarity?" But they didn't even plan the thing and nobody knew they would show up to try to start a riot. I had never really gone to left-wing demos before but I was really angered by that. Felt like a setup. If they hadn't tried to stir up drama on the internet afterwards, then the situation probably could've been patched up but they pretty much burned themselves with the rest of left here by doing that. Again it's that idealistic spontaneity.

This is nice

Yeah I feel that. I should probably shut up now

I just woke up and I'm feeling very leftist because I must go to the bank to pay shit again soon, but thanks.

I've had arguments with my own brother because Makhno was such a great guy and maybe Fanny Kaplan was best girl too, and maybe Stalin was a pizza salesman from the future, and only because he killed so many communists could the Birthmark Devil come to power, and that GOELRO was One Nation Toryism and all the worst anarkiddie shit.
But of course whenever someone mentions national heritage and shit you start singing Partisan songs and get in details about all the different labs in the closed cities in Siberia and of course Stalin didn't kill enough people have you walked through the posh parts of town recently.
Soviet power as an expression of a dictatorship of the proletariat was a necessity, even if they would have shot me on sight, maybe some drug addicts in Siberia would shelter me.
Also regarding drug addicts, I had a conversation with a recovering heroin addict at a park some years ago (he was on methadone at the time).
And we talked about the book I was reading at the time and the guy knew more about Hoffmann and the Biedermeier than most professors, and he had actually read Rosenkranz and we talked about Regine Olsen and fucking Novalis of all things and of course I bought him a beer too, he just had some things turn out wrong in his life, can happen to anyone.
I still believe all smack dealers should be summarily boiled alive even if they're not cops though, fuck heroin, it's the worst devil in the world.

Attached: cab2874a0fb75f0afe97d57a2e92e2d2.jpg (373x480, 25.74K)

I mean, fundamentally, we want the same thing, they're just wrong about how to get there. I don't see a reason why they can't be our comrades in a loose sense. It's the mid to long-term we disagree on mostly, in terms of things that immediately work to improve peoples material conditions, there's a lot of overlap.

Anarkiddieism is a very unstable set of mind. It's people who've realized the serious systemic flaws at the very base of liberal ideology, but are still unable to completely resolve their own concepts on how to resolve it because they are still fundamentally approaching their politics from a completely liberal framework of values-based thinking. They want liberal "freedom" but have no idea how to create freedom, just strive for the vague-ish concept of idea. They want to destroy the State but have a thouroughly liberal, values-based conception of what a State is. It's why they frequently have a lot of criticisms of communists but no actual solutions if you seriously push them for how it'd work out in practice to set things up "horizontally".

I think pushing things towards revolt would see a lot of them fall into real revolutionaries, some of them to fall back to liberals, none of them to stay where they are. As such I still tolerate other radlib "anarchists", and I think they're the best place to recruit from, but you need to talk to them carefully, and importantly ask them to do some self-crit and ask what they would do in certain real-world situations that have come up, and ask them to look at eg. Makhno's very harsh measures in some cases to ask if this is proper anarchism.

Also pointing out that "non-hierarchical democracy" isn't incompatible with "authoritarian rule" is a good point to start. You aren't going to be able to "change their mind" when what they're at is at an internal point of contradiction, all you can do is just keep piling on questions onto those contradictions to make them fall on one side or the other.

Vanguard Party fantasists try to take the joy of the Red Terror away from the hands of King Mob and give it to some alienating comedy of institutions that ends up with cops with red stars, and the whole Prozess of Sovier consolidation could be best described as what happens when some indigestive who tried to half remember his Chernysevsky and who learned about communism through Kautsky decides to make the Okhrana ten times stronger (and he was right on that too).
And maybe the problem wasn't the bureaucracy itself, but the fact that they could sleep at night without much fear of assassination, because gulag is stolen labour time and something only some paper pushing petty bourg NEET would like, so no not all anarchists think about the poor children.

Could you re-state that, please?

All of these communists vs. anarchist threads always present a false dichotomy. It's either the State exists and controls everything or the State doesn't exist at all. This does not reflect reality.

I'm a libertarian socialist / anarcho-communist, if I have to adopt a label, but that doesn't mean I don't see the benefits of having a State. It's just that I approach it from a place of distrust towards the State, distrust and caution because throughout history many people suffered in defense of States and as a result of State action. I'm not saying it is only through States that evil is effected, I'm just saying that the State is inherently violent. I recommend everyone read "Capital, Coercion and European States, 1066 - 1990" by Charles Tilly. In it he shows how States, and especially nation-States, formed so that kings and princes could more effectively extract labour and resources from the population for war making. Kropotkin's "The State and its historic role" is also an interesting read, but some parts are outdated.

OP mentions State and Revolution. In it Lenin says that a socialist State will have many different permutations, much like you have different versions of capitalist States around the world. It is not crazy to imagine a socialist State where the parliament has several different socialist parties within it, including a libertarian socialist party.

My anarchist/libertarian streak informs my socialism. It is the lens I use by which to determine for myself if something should be in the remit of the State government. For example, I don't want my neighborhood baker to be getting instructions and quotas from the capital 500km away when the reach of his baked goods doesn't surpass the neighborhood. I don't want the State to be involved in marriage, but people should be free to form whatever kind of unions and relationships work for them. On the other hand, I think defense is best organised centrally, as well as large country-wide infrastructure projects.

We should be focusing on our similarities. Both communists, socialists and anarchists would prefer to live in a socialist State than a capitalist one. So why not work towards one in which all of our opinions can be heard. Liberal democracies allow "far right" and "far left" parties, yet for all their differences all the parties agree on the economic system – capitalism. So why can't we have a socialist State where we all participate in State politics but the common streak we all have is that we want production and distribution of commodities to be organised along socialist lines?

Attached: B1gWomMCYAAMVbn.jpg (500x333, 53.05K)

Murder should be conditionally legal
Fuck prisons, fuck bolshies and fuck unions more

any examples?

Also all the ML shit you've read about how the people who chased the Czar around to fling a bomb in his car were really some kind of dovey peaceniks and that we need strong bookman to make big factory is Trotsky fucking your mind through copied notes and late night discussions in some cozy place deep in Mitteleuropa while people got chased through all Russias for discussing communal land use with the peasants and really the life of ideas can be even stranger than that of people.

Pogrom or looting was pretty much instant execution, and he trusted the local groupings to deliver that.
Class based lynchings were tolerated, if not encouraged.
Lynching really is the purest form of democratic centralism, when you think about it.

So, uh, what happens when someone decides to murder outside of those conditions?

That the Ukrainian Free Territory effectively an area of almost directly military control in and of itself is already against what most anarkiddies would consider to be "anarchism."
I don't mean this as a slight against Makhno so much as it is discussing how you can't just choose how "libertarian" you want your government to turn out to be, it's going to be a product of its environment.

I'm not talking negatively of Makhno, I actually think very positively of him. The point is rather that if liberal "anarchists" want to get at least as far as he did, then they should actually look at what happened in the Free Territory.

Instant execution by whoever's available of course
In the Wehrmacht suicide was also Rassstrelyat, I'm happy to see that you don't have illusions about Makhno and the Reds are supposed to be tough people so of course instead of injection vans we get Cossack bounty hunters on Tachankas, and maybe stolen tanks later on.

I'm not sure I agree but that's an answer.
I don't mean all anarchists are like this. I'm talking about what I suspect to be a very western group of "anarchists" who only end up defending "pure" liberalism whether they mean to or not.
Where are you from, if I may ask?

Also the almost direct control you mention can be a little tricky because many times it was autonomous subunits centered around the locality they were ruling, and of course when you've got every capitalist in the world, including Lenin, against you, everybody talks but war is the main issue.
And yes, I think that in the context of complete civilisational collapse which characterized the former Russian Empire in 1918, Petlyura and Lenin are ultimately on the same side and Old Man did nothing wrong.

Greece of course, but I live in Europe now because of reasons you can probably guess.
Maybe Americans will slowly start getting radicalised too with the opioid crisis, the thing that pushed my taboo of murder away was seeing heroin needles under the slide in my neighbourhood park aged 4 or something, and yes I've discussed Hoxha with a former tank commander and despite the corruption at least smugglers and so on got the basement treatment.

But don't lose all hope, because General Electric is already dead and after the 2008 crash really hits you'll start having all those nice discussions in the West too.

And I'm sorry for being so obsessed with heroin, maybe Russians or similar will understand the absolute horror heroin was in the 90s.

Attached: IMG-9a59fceec2ba92bfe63eeb24fbd4a9f5-V.jpg (800x800, 38.22K)

Ngl, I don't hate ancoms, I just find them incredibly annoying.

when i read literally anything written by pic related

Attached: u4zp51KY_400x400.jpg (400x400, 44.66K)

I don't have personal experience with drugs like this but I can understand that.
I do think that Americans are getting radicalized but we're honestly too uneducated and propagandized to stop being liberals.

I really want to see what the upcoming 2019 crash brings.

For me the best possible solution is building a commune near Novosibirsk, find desperate girls there for various STEM autists who would be lost to Nick Land or gotten fooled by Neodengist kitties, try to cargo spirit the ghost of OGAS into bringing cybernetic degrowth but 'accidentally' coordinate the nerds in the dacha with the bums back in the streets to just have this fucking insurrection and maybe completely frying every computer with Windows on would be a good fucking start, and Red Hat for good measure at least, and I can be the anprim pimp to the OGAStalgic nerďs and I don't really care what happens next because 1.dialectics
2.hysteresis loops , it's 20° outside right now and that's from what we burned in the 60s

But Lain will become Marat, Nechayev and Mishima combined and there will be communes named after Perelman in other dimensions soon and capitalists still think they can stop any of this.

So even in late capitalism we can still be happy, and my favourite slogan from my Athens days was that happiness is the best form of revenge.

Attached: 1530561956793.jpg (546x896, 87.76K)

I am fully on board with building technology to force the end of capitalism, I am sorry to say. We are here where we are because our tools require us to build more, better tools, and we can not escape from them. Otherwise we die to people who do build more, better tools. There is only one way out and it is forward.
I very much like what you are thinking though, with bringing cybernetics to the bums on the streets. It does seem to me that we are going to have to work a lot with the people who are thrown out and have nothing to lose. They are mercenaries and we need manpower, and giving them technology is a good way to boost that.

Top-tier cringe post
Easy on the LARPing there, faggot

Well I agree with technology for the sake of socialism too, just that next time, the nihilist weapon stashes are right inside the Lubyanka because the whole dragnet thing has dragged on too long, if you get what I mean.
And not only is it every leftist's duty to personally install Gentoo at every dusty laptop the freaks have stolen from somewhere, he should make them part of the Makhnovist botnet from the very start.
And there are people with real jobs who also hate capitalism, it's just that they're more afraid than panicked so they do free overtime, but that will change soon.

Also there's no 'they' and 'we' and the wolf is at the door for you too, whatever your job is.
People who tried to deny this killed the IWW.

Good point. Thank you for the critique. I am not entirely sure I understand your plan here but I do hope you the best.

I haven't formulated it in full yet myself, because it's not only mine and it's at its birth, I hope you understand.
Anyway, if you're feeling alienated and let down by organisations and anything, just start screeching about FOSS and connectivity and the panopticon as hard as you can and most importantly volunteer your own time to actually get every person you can convince to at least some tolerable beginner Linux distro, maybe Arch, I don't know. And show them how VPS work and offer to pool money and install it so that people can browse in Amerikka from Dutch or w/e IPs, and really you've got your secondary contradiction there and maybe all those online courses were a train we hugely missed, but still more things will come.
A good thing would be a website offering automation solutions directly to code monkeys and demanding payment in volunteering time maybe even 1:1, and you sound like a smart person who knows that AI is the biggest Potemkin village in history, at least right now, and the enormous enormous bloat of shit software replicating itself and the existential horror of development and there are smarter people out there too, but I chose the novels XP tree at age 12 so at least I still have a job which I hate and I'm thankful that I'm not on the street yet myself.

And matrix too of course, and everything about FTP or anything else you want to talk to them about, and make libgen the start page at their new clean browser, but use this and the Telecommunist Manifesto as wedges and maybe take it from a libertarian socialist angle, really if you can convince at least 5 socdems to never watch Hollywood shit again and never let them use proprietary software and teach them to laugh at copyrights and basically take all the disaffected Pirate Party guys who became gamergate shit or w/e and give them an immanent critique of the Spectacle and talk about Marcuse like some kuudere bitch as you cure their PC of Americanism and counterrevolutionary thoughts you'll have done something more than the entire DSA, for example.

No you didn't

I did pretty much what you did, down to a T i agree, particularly the part about not actually giving a shit about doing the hard work, basically they just want a social club (and most of them need one because normal people won't hang out with them) which is inevitably a social club for horny/actually autistic queer kids, i've nothing against them that is just invariably what it is.

however, because of this, I became a ☭TANKIE☭.. and I found… basically the same things, where the anarchists are a big gay party, ☭TANKIE☭s are the kids who got bullied in school and now want to be the bully, that or the kind of person who still gets bullied. Most ☭TANKIE☭s have not read Marx, but will call you a revisionist or whatever for any deviation from that particular groups takes. They are painfully and woefully arrogant, shitting on stupid anarchists, who are, to be fair, fucking stupid, but in its place is this other form of "holier than thou" so when you suggest any action which isn't basically "build trade unions and try to get elected" with the absolute certainty that they will fail abysmally at both and come up with mental gymnastics as to why it didn't work this time but we should continue doing the exact same shit, you are ridiculed and ostracised.

Both groups suffer hugely from a clique mentality, takes are almost uniform throughout the groups if the issues are flavour of the week.

Anarchists love doing stuff but refuse to organise doing that stuff into effective groups, ☭TANKIE☭s will do basically nothing but turn up to marches/ food drives etc other people organised, but will insist that their doing nothing is extremely organised.

When you suggest the anarchists actually do something organised you get called a ☭TANKIE☭, or some brand of privilege gets brought up, or that makes it not accessible to X social group. They will refuse to have things like basic group commitments, as that means people who have anxiety have to show up and contribute, or follow through on the shit they say they will do, for example.

when you dare critique the 4 member communist party and suggest that maybe they might not be doing things correctly given their low membership and zero sway with the working class, you will get some BS about how the conditions are not revolutionary or just autist screeching about how you are a eurocommunist or some such buzzword. They live in a world where they are the bearers of the correct theory and the working class will inevitably flock to them. They never, ever do. At least, not in the first world.

Both sides will bitch on facebook about it each other and this will literally comprise more of their time than actually organising, they all hate each other and refuse to work together because of facebook beef.

I don't know if this is common to you guys, but these are my experiences with both, I fucking hate both of them.

I'm a Maoist through and through, but god damn I hate both of them.

If they were spouting retarded arguments like hooman nature or peddling smears against historical anarchist experiments I'd defend them on these grounds, but I'm not gonna die on retarded hills like "justifiable hieraches" and whatnot.

Also, the anarchists in my city are literally waving Israel flags and harass Palestinian girls.

I meant to say this but my post was already long as fuck.

the left needs new, broad church, non leninist communist parties. Note, not anarchist collectives, but communist parties, organised, disciplined, but not fixated on le immortal science of margzism lebbidism.

I'm not saying Leninist theory isn't generally pretty good, just that the world has moved on, at the very least it needs a major update.

In purely optical terms THE WORKING CLASS DO NOT LIKE HAMMERS AND SICKLES, OR LENIN, IT IS ABJECT IDEALISM TO SUGGEST BLEETING PROPOGANDA ON YOUR SATURDAY STALL WILL CHANGE THAT

idk why that was in reply to you but it wasn't supposed to be

Oh also, Leninist generally shit on trots a lot, but then do all the same shit trots do, just with more autism and less effectively than the trots do.

Attached: 61402330_381639359113472_1587684001550696448_o.jpg (960x674 31.48 KB, 168.56K)

Anarchy has many systemic flaws.

It lacks any kind of direction beyond wanting to have a revolution. They have no plans whatsoever for the post-revolutionary period beyond some vague idea that a society without rules will be some kind of paradise rather than a 'Mad Max' style society dominated by warlords whos authority only stretches as far as the range of an AR-15 or AK-47, which is how it will probably end up due to the absence of a plan.

Secondly, anarchy is inherently an unstable transitional state, it is a power vacuum which will inevitably be filled by some kind of a system, and the nature of this system depends on who manages to survive this period of anarchy, which will mostly be up to chance.

Successful communist revolutions relied strongly upon keeping the period of anarchy to a minimum by ensuring they were extremely strong before the revolution whilst simultaneously weakening any possible rivals.

A Communist revolution is different from an Anarchist revolution. The first is a short sharp blow that delivers the intended outcome, while the latter is is a slow and torturous thing that delivers an unpredictable outcome in the end.

And now the warlords have authority the range of ICBMs and bootlickers still don't become at least Posadists.
What the fuck became of all your phallic and oedipal imagery of the space age and tsar bomba (Kuzma's mother lest we forget), I swear all that tranny shit is just glow in the dark programming to ritually circumcise the toxic slavic latino macho berniebro masculinity that gave Fidel and Cornman the balls to risk all that shit, and of course JFK was Irish so if you just say Ave Maria when you press the button everything's ok.
Really, Uncle Ted was right on oversocialization