Anarchist Hate Thread

What do you hate about anarchism and anarchists in general?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ZiSM8SkE4mo
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

...

solid argument bro

Prepare for some industrial-tier tankery

I'm just waiting for the tankies and others to join us. Freedom for whom? r/anarchism?
Illiterate, easily triggered edgelords that have long winded debates on what constitutes "oppression" instead of creating a viable blueprint for an anarchist society?
Direct democracy shouldn't be used for determining how utilities will be built and operated, or transportation, building hospitals,etc.

...

While I'm no fan of anarchism I'm not a huge fan of sectarian threads and the never ending counter-sectarian threads that they inspire.

Or r/FullCommunism, r/socialism, r/gulag, r/ShitLiberalsSay.

Tankies still have their dead idols, in Lenin, Stalin, Tito, Hoxha, Mao. Rather fitting, tankies are nothing more than the rotting corpses in the cemetery of dead, failed communist projects.

If black bloc friendos are gonna steal from clothing stores cant they accessorize a bit more and get creative in their fashion? Looting with a human face fam.

It's going to be fun watching people like you get thrown to the wolves by porky when the shit hits the fan.

really low energy

next we'll hear about how anarchists are really closet authoritarians while somehow also failing because they reject revolutionary discipline again

so is this entire board just Marxists and anarchists shit talking each other? new here.

Also:
It's better to be the old hall of famer stuck in nostalgia then the guy who never accomplished anything.

bunch of porky paid thugs arent "anarchist" anymore than a bunch of happy below minimujm wage workers are "capitalist"
pic related

Occasionally a lost liberal or pol tard comes in to get their thread anchored. Also there is one socdem guy who fucks hookers on the country's dime.

wew

Well what I hate about anarchists (in my limited experience) is how they always just call Marxists 'authoritarian' or 'clinging to a dying revolution', and never make real arguments about why anarchism is the true path to freedom and not Marxism.

And more than just how any state will eventually be used by opportunists to exploit the people, and become authoritarian, even a state based on the ideology of communism, would be nice.

chanting "death to pigs" doesn't exactly win over normies
not that you're explicitly wrong

ancaps plz

yeah but we're still comrades in the end

Authoritarians, when will they ever learn?

It just seems that anarchists don't really understand why people are Marxist (often, anyway) and so their criticisms of it always fall flat. I'm sure they have some better criticisms, I just never hear them much. But for sure, anarchists are still comrades. They didn't kill Rosa Luxemburg after all.

Like most people who take to ideologies online, anarchists are generally uneducated fanboys who only strive when they've never been challenged. Then words like "cuck" or "libtard" come out. I'm an anarchist, and I think other Anarchists are some of our worst enemies.
At least when a country gets subverted after butt fucking itself with lefty politics the new oppressors take the liberals out back and shoot them first, so I'll have some small satisfaction when America's pussy finally fucks us.

Really?
What's with these religious delusions of how some mean guy on your image board will be "betrayed" by spooky "capitalist masters"?
Why would they betray allies when the government could crush you with the military?


Hahahaha
I love how extreme you lunatics are.
Tito is a "liberal" in your bat shit, deranged worldview. It's like seeing Stalinists on Reddit complain that r/socialism is too right wing for them.
Nostalgia over failure?
Over collapsed states and dead dictators?
Your analogy implies some form of victory, as if you were a baseball fan or hockey fan.

They have a lasting legacy, while Communism collapsed, leaving behind a tiny minority that still praises dictators who they have never lived under.


Is that some shit tier ancap comic?


So having no police is preferable?
That did work for the country of Georgia, whose police was so corrupt, use to the Soviet government who turned a blind eye to corruption and brutality. So when their President fired every policeman, the people enforced the laws and crime collapsed.


I think part of the problem is, can there be such a society where either direct democracy or "worker councils" be rationally used to managed a large area of land, like a countries utilities/healthcare/sewage/agriculture/education, and so on?

Ultimately, where do you draw a line from some anarchist, direct democracy/cooperative fetish and a large, multilayered, collective organization that functions like a state?

How many times do you need the revolution to create an state-capitalist, oppressive state at the best and genocides and famines at the worst for you to realize that maybe this approach doesn't work so well?

That's a rather broad assertion. Mind explaining what you mean?

I'm more sympathetic to some liberals, not the r/politics ones, the few liberals like Gore Vidal, Jerry Brown.

And as for you anarchists out there (I'm sympathetic to Stirner/Egoist anarchism. I've thought about anarcho-nihlism, yet it's useless for accomplishing anything, here's some quotes from Jerry Brown that you might like:

"The corporation is not a person; it is a legal fiction backed up by guns and police and jail cells and taxing authorities and the regulators called government.
Jerry Brown on Corporations and Jobs, We the People Radio Network archives, December 1995/January 1996.
T

The drug war isn't what purports to be. If you look at the whole operation and the tie-in between the American intelligence agencies, these so-called "assets", the spies on the payroll of the CIA, and drug dealers. Don't let members of Congress and the media get away with this complacency and distortion!
Jerry Brown on the Drug War and Government, We the People Radio Network archives, April/May 1997.
The CIA was revealed to be spying in France, not for military purposes, but for corporate purposes. So this $30 billion spook agency is now at the disposal of these oligarchic corporate structures run by the 1%.
Jerry Brown and Charles Reich Discuss 'The System', We the People Radio Network archives, May 1997.

I'd shrink government in a minute, if I could shrink GM, Bank of America, and all these immoral corporations that operate by an undemocratic code, with no soul and no conscience.
From an unspecified KPFA-FM radio show program.
Waldman, Peter (10 August 1999). "Back to Earth: Jerry Brown, the Voice of New-Age Populism, Gets Down to Business". Wall Street Journal.

The U.S. incarceration binge is not tied to crime. It's a strategy to control the surplus population in a capitalist system that is breaking down.
Waldman, Peter (10 August 1999). "Back to Earth: Jerry Brown, the Voice of New-Age Populism, Gets Down to Business". Wall Street Journal.


I'm surprised that the Left isn't using that man as a base to jump off from.

Sorry, I hate making general assumptions, and come of really up myself. Basically Marxists don't want a state (obviously lol, they want a stateless society), they just see it as necessary.

They're often former anarchists who don't think anarchism will actually achieve a classless society, and that due to internal and external pressure it will inevitably end up capitalist once more. They think what's needed is a state that works in the interest of the worker, and moves toward communism, and by nature needs to be authoritarian af. And the science of Marxism is working out how to get there, and how to stop the state…well…collapsing horribly and becoming authoritarian af and ending in state capitalism.

And they themselves criticise former communist movements potentially more than anyone else. So really, you have to convince them that the core of Marxism is flawed, and provide some better methods for achieving a classless, stateless, moneyless society through anarchism. I know there's a lot of material out there, but it really is quite disjointed and hand wavey.

Honestly I lean towards Marxism (obviously) but know just how terrible the former communist movements were. So I don't know what we do…maybe some new form of the far-left needs to rise?

*5 mins later*
Sure thing, kid: youtube.com/watch?v=ZiSM8SkE4mo

While anarchists can't blame all the problems they had in Ukraine and Spain on "authoritarians" what they can't explain is what they were doing in the rest of the world for the rest of the 20th century.

How many people lived under anarchist regimes again? By that same logic 99.9% of anarchists are people who fetish various failed experiments and idealized libertarian societies (often indigenous) that they've never lived under.

*while anarchists try to blame all the problems

Also a state is just tools of oppression. So people's interpretation of communism varies a lot, and some seek to fix the issues with direct democracy/workers' councils/cooperatives by basically having forms of governance/things that might resemble a state. Then somes interpretation would be much more similar to anarchists (but with a separation of working and resource allocation, and you work to better society - though anarchism technically can be like that too).

That's interesting you would bring this up. Corporations get their corporate status from the state itself. Abolishing the state would therefore abolish corporations, abolish limited liability status and abolish their centralized influence. This is the very root of the problem with Marxist arguments against capitalism: The inability to distinguish between chrony and open market capitalism. Sad that I have to use the term "Open" market instead of "free" because some whiny little spit fuck WILL come along and tell me there's no such thing as a "free" market, thus getting a dictionary shoved down their smart ass mouth.

I take to Ron Paul's quote often, that we should not and cannot criticize capitalism because we haven't had it yet. The biggest lie in all of PC culture today is that we live in a capitalist society. We live in an extremely socialist one. I mean, is it really that hard to believe? When has a budet defeceit ever stopped these people, like they won't just put (whatever) on the fucking credit card?

At the end of the day, The term "AnCap" shows you just how uneducated the Anarchist community is. I criticize liberals because they don't even understand what they're doing or saying 90% of the time - forgive them for they know not what they do. Conservatives on the other hand don't exist. In american economics today, you're either liberal or you're a fucking radical. There is no economic grey area called fiscal conservativeism in reality. To be conservative, you would have to be a radical.

Anarchists on the other hand have been split into a fucking nightmare little cluster fuck discussion about who would do what to abolish the state, or even worse, what type of minarchist state they deem worthy. Anarcho-communism? FoH…

This has caused AnCaps to come into existance, which is literally just true anarchists separating themself from that cluster fuck discussion and saying "Hey, I'm the anarchist who believes in open markets." Which is actually just… an anarchist. However, we've been backed into a corner to accomidate for retards who have no desire to so much as read Anatomy of the State, let along some 10k page economic treatise. *Sigh*.

Again though, I just really don't get how opportunists don't ruin anarchism. Like you have one revolution, and you still have the same mindsets as before, it's not like you've killed every person that is pro-capitalist. In theory anarchism is so awesome and its simplicity is part of its beauty, I just don't get the practicality. But please try to convince me, or lead me to some good readings.

The argument against ancaps is that their ideal society will lead to some corporate feudalism, where those with the most money will control everything, as there is no state to control them, just competitors.

Tell me why you think that conservatives don't exist. When someone says they want "small government, low/no taxes, deregulation (no regulation),etc" what does that mean to you?

Why do you think that this is an "extremely socialistic" society?
Socialism for the rich? Or poor?
Why do you think that capitalism hasn't been tried yet? That's the complete opposite of communist ideology and most anarchist ideology.

Do mutualists even exist then?
Does Stirner's anarcho-egoism exist, or is it an edgy fantasy?
Does anarcho-nihlism exist?

The argument against ancaps isn't rooted in an understanding of the market's ability to self regulate. It takes problems that only occur from the presence and interference of the state and suggests they would occur under conditions of freedom to compete in the market, which is nonsense.

Small government, deregulation an low taxes is a radical request in today's government. We're experiencing the biggest Government in world history, in america.

We ARE an extremely socialist society. We have only tried crony capitalism with a shit ton of regulation later. We built the world's greatest economy through a less regulated market and threw in socialist policies, where we stand today.

Again, you're failing to distinguish between crony and true free market capitalism. True capitalism does not exist with a public sector. Even if you were to say that the entire market is a private sector, if there is a centralization of power it has already seeped into the market. It's only natural for the market to come under the influence of any state entity.

Again you're fueling the division of anarchism which fails to see what anarchism actually is. It's the disillusion of politics and politicized economics as social engineering and an inefficient, ineffective, and violent use of force that is inherently flawed.

Mutualism exists, it's like an equal pie exchange: If I go to a store and buy a carton of milk for $2, the shop keeper is saying he'd rather have my $2 than the milk and I'm saying I'd rather have the milk than the $2. Both parties walk away having gained. That is not true of taxation.

Anarchoegoism gets into property and the disillusion of property rights, contracts, etc. It's important to think consequentially. "Rights" do not exist in the way the religious prestige the state gets wants you to think. In fact, "Rights" take labor. To keep your tomatoes you put a fence around your yard. If I hop your fence and take your tomatoes in the middle of the night and run off with them, guess what good your precious rights did you then? But if you're a farmer with lots of tomatoes and you capitalize off of that and you can pay someone with a rifle to watch guard to make sure no one takes those tomatoes, NOW you have consequentially minded anarchist "rights" to those tomatoes in my presence because you have provided the LABOR to maintain that "right".

Anarcho-bullshit is typically bullshit. It's just different talking points put into suffixes to make people crazy, when really they should be discussing instead of arguing. Anarcho-nihilism? I don't even know what the fuck that means. Life doesn't matter, so abolish the state? Sounds hacky AF.

I hate how fabulous they look