The kind that thinks communism is the same as nazism and thinks communism is when the government does things.
I hate liberal brain worms.
They seriously do as much damage to the left as fascists by punching to the left and spreading capitalist anti-left propaganda. They overall weaken leftism and help fascism.
We need more left unity, folks. Fash ain't gonna bash themselves. 
Isn't it always funny that even the most ardent left-unity people only exclusively expect the anarchists to compromise?
Means cannot be disentangled from ends.
I don't think asking leftists to not punch left is asking for much of a compromise
Removed by mod
i'm no ML but anarchists should read the jakarta method.
anarchists should be able to see that cuba, china, vietnam, laos, and north korea are far preferable to american hegemony despite all their flaws, and that contextually an anarchist uprising in cuba would immediately cause the island to fall to imperialists. You don't have to like states to understand that you kinda need one when the dominant mode of geopolitics is relations between states.
i'm here for anarchism when the bigger threat of capitalism is gone or if anarchists can get something going in the imperial core but i don't see any examples of successful movement building comparable to the BPP.
You are asking me to accept that a state is necessary - i.e you are asking me to stop being an anarchist. Once again, the only one that has to compromise in this "left unity" is me, and the compromise is so big I have to completely stop being myself. On your end though, there is nothing. This is exactly what I'm pointing out. You're just saying it in nicer words.
Funnily enough it is the statists that most often kill the anti-statists "in real life" but okay, you do you buddy.
This is only the second time in my life I've engaged with someone who used the word "statist". The first guy was a libertarian, and the second is you, an anarcho-natoist. I guess the implication is that a state is inherently bad. What the state is used for is inconsequential. Funnily enough, in the real world we evaluate what's goid and bad based on material consequences, not baseless ideals pulled out of your ass. This has the same rigor as liberalism.
This is the usual tactic of attacking your use of specific words instead of the essence of what you're actually saying. Use inspect element and replace "statist" with the word you'd like me to use instead. I'm not gonna do that for you.
Anarchism isn't baseless or pulled out of anyone's ass. You can disagree with it, but to claim literally no material analysis of the state and/or its consequences, or the relations and dynamics of power and hierarchy exists, is just plain ignorance, no different from a conservative feeling the authority to look down on marxists when they have only skimmed the communist manifesto. If you are interested I can link you to some things, if you are not, just own up to it and say so.
LMAO fucking LARPer complaining about "Statists murder anarchists!" do you have any other state department talking points you'd like to walk us through?
What are you on? Revolutionary states killing anarchists is just an objective historical fact. I'm not even talking about the common stories brought up about Makhnovshchina or Kronstadt, every single revolutionary state has done it. You can look it up. Is part of the "left unity compromise" to blind yourself to actual things that happened?
that's not what i said at all. i said you need a state to play the game of states that the external hostile states force you into, that's not needing a state full stop.
what's the anarchist solution to contemporary geopolitics? i'm genuinely unaware and happy to change my line if you have something more successful than rojava to offer.
That's a more fair claim, excuse me for misunderstanding.
Can you elaborate a bit more on what specifically are you asking about? Do you mean how to resist agression from states? How to avoid being co-opted or hijacked?
nation states don't recognize or respect non-state organizations of people (well. corporations, which are surely worse than liberal states) and if you don't have a formal structure for them to recognize they will simply trample over you, would they not?
perhaps it's my own ignorance but i'm aware of zero modern anarchist anti-imperial projects at the level of viet nam, dprk, laos, or cuba. You don't have to like everything they do (or china or the ussr) but it should be really obvious that those states are less of an enemy of the people than
and i would think they are therefore deserving of critical support in the face of western imperialism.
it's a priority thing. i think anarchism has a shot in the US because of how fucked our culture is, and i would support any movement regardless of tendency that got anything going, but the most successful leftist project here in a century was the black panthers. Anarchist thought needs to explain how an anarchist society would survive the onslaught of capitalist imperialism right now and if you want more credit from fence-sitters there needs to be something durable and independent that's bigger than food not bombs.
if there's an anarchist project doing for its people what the cuban revolution did with literacy and hospitals and... please tell me about it i would love to move there.
your political ideology is just a consumer identity. you are not a real anarchist.
If an anarchist is entirely willing to drop the anti-statism why should they even call themselves anarchist? This isn't some obscure niche issue, this is literally the entire core of the philosophy. Would you call a marxist entirely willing to drop the call for a DotP or materialism a marxist?
The fact you have no self-awareness of how ridiculous this makes you sound, again reveals you have no idea what anarchism entails or what the class conception of the state is, you don't know the history, you can't define the terms, and you can't even articulate a remotely accurate description of marxism
Lets me guess, your definition of "state" is when "govment does stuff" isn't it? lmao you're not an anarchist, you're a confused liberal who likes to larp as a radical
If you truly believe anarchism is not against the state, I genuinely have no idea what to tell you. I seriously hope this is a conscious attempt at gaslighting and you're not THAT confidently incorrect.
In the remote case you are actually interested in anarchism, I'll leave something here for you.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-state-its-historic-role
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/mikhail-bakunin-what-is-authority
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anark-the-state-is-counter-revolutionary
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-an-anarchist-programme
You should, if you intend to keep thinking yourself an authority on anarchism to actual anarchists while also keeping any sense of integrity, at the very least, read this one, it's only 50 pages.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-anarchy
In my experience, those who claim to be both anti-tankie and anti-statist tend to really fucking hate AES states but not mind the US or the west that much. They don't apply their anti-statism equally.
"Both 'anti-tankie' and anti-statist" is redundant. You cannot be anti-statist and not "anti-tankie", because "anti-tankie" is opposing socialist states. Anarchists only criticise socialist states more often when they're talking with people who defend and excuse them, which is why you see the assymetry. In a regular anarchist community of mostly anarchists, both online and especially in real life orgs, it's actually quite the opposite.
My brother in Christ I have loudly posted pretty much the entirety of Kropotkins Mutual Aid and no one has ever told me to shut up.
Removed by mod
I was talking about the Reddit style libs that call themselves leftists and then proceed to call actual leftists evil authoritarian commie tankies, I've seen both anarchists and MLs be called tankies here by libs that stumble in.
Anarchists are not allowed to shit on MLs here just as ML are not allowed to shit on anarchists. No one here is going to dogpile you or ban you for not wanting a state unless you shit in MLs in the process. Just as MLs are allowed to want a state as long as they don't shit on anarchists.
Just read yourself. "No one is going to be mad at you for not wanting a state, unless you criticize those who want a state in the process". Even in your own words, it's exactly how I said. "You can believe in your little anarchisms, but shut the fuck up".
your desperate desire to be "oppressed" online is embarrassing.
I never spoke about opression. I spoke about the dynamics of these kinds of spaces and what an ML that believes in "left unity" actually wants in practice, even if they're sincere and even if they're vehement about their beliefs in it.
99% of the people who use the term "tankie" are NOT anarchists
Principled and theoretical anarchists who organize get my respect, Social liberals with delusions of spontaneity get my scorn, just like any patsoc liberal who pretends to be a "communist"
You don't get to define what is a "true anarchist" and what isn't, much less exclusively based off of if they use a word you don't like or not. I don't care about your respect, I am merely pointing out a dynamic that constantly happens in this community and those similar to it.
I mean I can literally define what an anarchist is because there's a historical and theoretical structure to anarchism and if it isn't followed you're simply not an anarchist
Anarchism isn't an ethnic group, it's a economic sociopolitical philosophy someone follows and 99% of people who use terms like "tankie" do not follow it
Fair enough, that's true.
Regardless, saying "tankie" indicates nothing of your understanding of anarchist philosophy. You have to actually look at what the person is saying. Some definitely are simply larping (like vaushites and such), some have been committed anarchists for decades. I'm not sure if you're so enthusiastic about left unity you want to believe "anti-tankie" anarchists are "just not the true real and good ones", or if you just want to discredit anyone that uses the word, but regardless it's just a blind blanket statement.
It's not a "blind blanket statement" committed anarchists engaged in on the ground organizing are simply not using internet brained terms like "tankie"
it's usage is always a signal that its user is either a delusional liberal or an online sectarian not remotely interested in real world politics
The proof is in the fact plenty of ML groups successfully organize alongside street level anarchist groups all over the US, which isn't exactly a country kind to socialists of any kind
Using terms like tankie is a clear cut signal that person is terminally online and as a result couldn't define anarchism to save their lives
That's just what you want to believe.
You don't have to stop being hostile to MLism to work with MLs. If there are common short term goals, it's most often pragmatic to, especially in countries where there isn't an active leftist threat at all like the US. That does not mean the anarchists are just perfectly fine being buddies with the MLs, nor that when the collaboration is over they won't criticise and call them out again.
Once again, that's just what you believe. That's nothing but a preconception. You're telling yourself that so you can give yourself a free pass to blindly disregard anyone who says a word, and not have to listen to what they have to say. I've actually organized in real life both with pluralist orgs and with directly anti-marxist groups, full of people who despise all of you. Whether the real life anarchists I've done shit with say "authoritarian" "statist" or "tankie" or just "ML" has no bearing on their understanding of philosophy. Some are very new and don't get things yet, some have been anarchists for longer than I have been alive, and have actually gone to jail for their anarchism.
You can disagree with and even condemn the actions of anti-marxist anarchist organizations just fine, but to try to say that they somehow aren't "the TRUE ones" is just delusion.
Again, for the second time, it's not about what I believe, anarchism has its own history with its own principles and theoretical foundation embedded in either a historically utopian or marxian conception of capitalism, even if the tactics and politics of rhetoric differ from capital M-Marxism, so if a so-called anarchist advances politics that preserves capitalism, they are not by any definition "anarchist" and that does in fact describe 99% of the people who use an online slur like "tankie"
So do you want to keep going in circles or do you just want to admit you have no idea what anarchism is
lmao sure you have liberal
This is what I'm talking about. You don't get to say what "trve anarchism" is because you don't actually know it. Anarchism has nothing to do with Marxism, not even ancoms. They're entirely separate philosophies that view the world in different ways, both use material analysis and both stand against capitalism, but that does not mean they share a common goal, or have common ancestry. Have you actually read any anarchist theory? Or just On Authority and Anarchism or Socialism?
This once again proves you have no idea what you're talking about. Anti-marxist anarchists are treated as actual terrorists by the state and capitalism. They're among the most militant anti-capitalist groups on earth. The italian FAI bombs prisons while the italian ML party writes about needing critical support for ISIS in a 1998 looking ass website. Not to bring up the FARJ and the anarchists in Iran literally risking their lives as we speak. But you, from the comfort of your chair, disregard them to delude yourself into thinking what makes you comfortable.
But sure, carry on after talking to me, thinking you stand for left unity, and don't worry your pretty little head about all of these groups and people that have done more against capitalism than you or I ever have. They're not real, I assure you. They are surely just LARPing. You and the people you agree with are the one true and only based socialism bringers.
So not only do you have no clue about the history of anarchism and how it developed, but you clearly don't know a thing about Marxism or socialism, or frankly I'm starting to suspect any -ism, you do realize you actually have to read history to be politically literate instead of working off nonsensical intuition based vibe politics
Lets see how swallow your understanding really is, provide a simple definition of marxism and socialism
Yeah no, anti-marxist groups have accomplished nothing but to solidify the control capitalist institutions have where ever they supplant a unified socialist movement, if your idea of "anarchism" is martyrdom and broken adventurism, then thanks for proving my point and revealing how swallow your understanding of history and radical politics is
So now you're asserting anarchists in Iran of all places are railing against the "taNkiEs" on the regular, lmao you dumbass
I have nothing to prove to you, and it's clear you aren't listening and just repeating all the memorized talking points ingrained inside. Believe whatever you want.
Intuition is nothing without knowledge and theory to structure it
Very funny that the post was about the "anti-tankie left" and you went "oh that's me that's me!"
"You believe in what you believe in! You are very owned."
If I didn't oppose the USSR and China, and by proxy, those who vehemently defend and excuse them, I once again, would not be an anarchist at all.
Opposing a defunct state and China? These are your priorities in a world governed by capitalism and American hegemony?
When did I ever say it was my priority? You told me I am "anti-tankie", I assumed it meant I was against those states and I said yes. An anarchist is against states, even revolutionary states. Do you expect an anarchist to abandon their anti-statism if some state challenges America? If yes then tell me, would you abandon your socialism if some fascist nation challenged America?
I never told you that you were anti-tankie, that's something that you self identified yourself as.
I support my anarchist comrades because I'm capable of understanding their position and having a principled disagreement. I would never say that I am "anti-anarchist." My disagreement with them doesn't oblige me to permanent hostility against them or their views.
Okay, you were "owning me" because you thought I self identify as "anti-tankie", everything I said still fully and completely applies.
Do you think I don't have a principled disagreement too? Or why are you bringing that up? I've never said anything against MLism per se in this thread so far. Once again I am merely pointing out the dynamic that happens in "left unity", and what people who call for it expect, aware of it or not.
Not particularly, no
That is nothing but an assumption then, given that, once again, I have never spoken about MLism in this thread.
Stop using that "totally not mad"
Reddit-tier opener. It makes your smugposting even worse.
Complaining about Reddit-type speak is the Reddit-type speak of complaining about things.
That convoluted meta-complaint is the most Reddit thing here
Yes, if you see yourself as an anarcho-natoist, we're gonna need you to compromise on some of your principles. The people of Russia, even if you don't like them, don't deserve to be pillaged again by NATO.
Who said anything about NATO? Do you just have an imaginary anarchist in your head to be mad about? Do you think an anarchist is someone who watches a lot of Vaush?
So you do support the people of Russia in their ongoing struggle against decades of NATO aggression?
I support the people of Russia and Ukraine in their struggles with war, starvation, loss of home and general suffering caused by the Russian and Ukranian/NATO states, which I do not support because I don't support any state because I am an anarchist.
If you're not supporting Russia's opposition to NATO, then you're supporting the people of Russia being destroyed by NATO again. That's some pretty shitty anarchism. Standard anarcho-natoism to pull out some ultra-left nonsense about how only a spontaneous, unorganized resistance to NATO is acceptable.
It's NATO that had designs on collapsing Russia, not the other way around. It's not Russia's fault that NATO convinced Ukraine (probably through blackmailing Zelensky with threats to prosecute financial crimes) to be the current battleground.
"Not voting for Biden is a vote for Trump!"
Are you a nationalist? Why the fuck should you even care? Two bourgeois states going to war to destroy themselves, and the only ones harmed in the process are the proletarians of both countries. You should be supporting and helping them instead of LARPing state worship on the internet. I don't condemn the Russian state resisting NATO, but I am not going to support capitalists in their shitty capitalist wars. If that makes me some buzzword you feel very angry about, you are free to call me that.
I get it. What's at stake for Russians is mass death and deprivation under NATO dominance, but I failed to consider that this is a conflict between two states, so fuck em. There's a bunch of state worshippers. Gross. People in Russia should simply use some kind of spontaneous and more effective tool.
The comparison to American electoral politics doesn't hold up. Trump, Biden, democrats and republicans are equal partners in maintaining unipolar capitalist hegemony. There's no disagreement there. Russia is capitalist, but it's not a global hegemon.
Hey folx, I have to move houses, will not have internet for a while, so I'mma disengage. Despite the usual smug and mocky tone, I thank you for actually engaging and not just banning me. I will leave with this:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-post-scarcity-anarchism-book#toc27
This chapter and the one after it are only slightly longer than On Authority. Read it if you are interested.