Who is worse: anarchists or leftcoms?

OK I made one that's kinder to you

T-thanks

from Bat'ko

It's just the pendulum swinging back from all of the reddit shitposting over the past week. unfortunately this place will go back to being anarcho-kiddie central next week.

Both are worse

they're trying to divide us.We can disagree with states til the end of time,but that's not the main issue right now,capitalism is

Anarchists are worse. At least leftcoms keep to their theory rather than just shitting on trashcans which only serves to fire up the right even more.

Anarchists because of their faux anti-statism.

They literally obsess over "destroying the state" and insist that their whole plan after the revolution is "not a state" even though, by the Marxist definition, it's basically a fucking dictatorship of the proletariat.

It's either Marxists backstabbing us as always or a coordinated false flag.

Marxists and anarchists have never liked eachother. We've tolerated eachother and have allied at times to have that break down into open hostility. Most of the arguing on here though is just LARPing and shitposting including my shitty posts.

Also wanna add that anarchists are delusional with their claims of "anti-authoritarianism". It's a whole smoke screen for their own authoritarianism, that is, the incessant upholding of informal hierarchies, as if the lack of formal structures is somehow "better."

It's evident in their dogmatic worship of "horizontalism," which in all cases throughout history has no better track record of achieving communism than those states that enforced a strict hierarchy.

To me, it's all about accountability of those assuming leadership. However, anarchists take such an absolutist stance on this, that the only option for social organization is "decentralized assemblies" or some other vague idea.

The longer you here them expound on this, the more it becomes apparent that they've given zero or little thought to how we'd feed and clothe 7 billion people while still ensuring the revolution doesn't turn to fascism.

Being an anarchist, I respectfully disagree. Destroying the state isn't all about smashing shit and acting like a pack of retards from black bloc or anti-fa.

There is a way of being organised, and decentralising power and implementing direct democracy.

youtube.com/watch?v=0RwlaNva_4g

MFW

Tankies.

Thanks for responding. I'll watch that video later. I gotta say I was being a bit of an ass in that post.

I think anarchists and Marxists should work together, that's all. I hate these anarchists that dogmatically reject good advice when its put in front of their face by Marxists, that's all. Sometimes its like they'd rather uphold their ideals of "autonomy" and hypocritically ally with liberals, all the while insisting its those damn Reds that are the "real enemy."

I'm strictly talking about North American "anarchists," though, too, so this probably has a lot to do w/ it.

...

Aren't the Rojavans libertarian socialist though? Most of their economy comes from workers-cops.

I agree. There is stuff that anarchists and marxists can learn, which I why I also support Democratic confederalism, as it is in my opinion a blend of anarchism and marxism mixed perfectly. It's mostly libertarian socialism so I'm all in favour of that.

Well there's your problem there m8.

I must ask, what kind of Marxist are you?

It's obviously leftcoms

The point is to say that it isn't "anarchist," but anarchists insist Rojava is a purely anarchist project. They take credit for Rojava and conveniently ignore the many ML's that have gone over there and fought just as hard. To deny the strong Marxist elements at play here is to be downright dishonest.

As for your second question, I honestly don't know man, I'm open to many positions I'm not some kind of dogmatist. I went through a long anarchist phase. I'm a burger, and anarchists here are completely useless IMHO, seeing the endless lifestylism and single issue campaigns has got me burnt the fuck out on them. Antifa here is incoherently liberal to me now, too. I still support well principled anti-fascism, but right now, I wouldn't call anti-Trump protestors "principled anti-fascists." There's a lot of liberal butthurt here over Trump, and playing up the protests as "leftist" is so wrong on so many levels.

Some I would wager are more willing to ally with liberals more than Marxists, and for that, I can say they can surely fuck themselves as long as they keep doing this. A lot of them play the role of revolutionary as a way to deny their middle class upbringing, too.

To me, I think this is a stupid way to go about spreading class consciousness. I'd rather acknowledge that yeah, I'm a middle class white kid with a job and education, so fucking what?

I'd rather use this status and wealth toward fomenting class consciousness than just withdraw from society like some kind of Ted K type.

With American "anarchists," I get the feeling that I'd immediately be judged for not wanting to "drop out" and become some kind of crusty punk / boxcar child. In some circles, there's these very culty vibes that have nothing to do with destroying capitalism at all, in the grand scheme of things. They really seem to attack the symptoms and not the root and I find it incredibly bothersome. Not to mention, the security culture in the US is pretty bad as well. The whole middle class pseudo-revolutionary talk I find worrisome, too. Lots of macho kids in the "movement" that want to "prove" themselves as some kind of victor that has solidified their place in history and don't want to STFU and let someone give them some good advice every once in a while.

Idk, its fucked and I know its rooted in being a spoiled middle class shit head.

I still have to work, I still have to deal with capitalists outsourcing my labor, etc.,… there's plenty of commonality to focus on and I feel like anarchists have become so atomized that they open themselves up to identity politics a bit too much.

In terms of ideology, I'd probably say I agree with Marx, and think Leninists get a bad rap. As an American I too often feel like I have to defend Cuba, USSR, etc., against bourgeois opportunists, who all too often end up being the same anarchists I was bitching about earlier. So sometimes I feel like I align quite heavily with ML, but at the same time I acknowledge that I have a pretty strong libertarian streak in me as well.

I guess I'd more aptly call myself a libertarian marxist tbh, just to indicate i'm not a fully gone 'tankie' or culty third worldist like unruhe, lol

this

people that support bootlicking are just begging to be smashed tbh

whether you want to abolish the state entirely or you think state capitalism is a joke - you still need to cut out and dismantle over half of current government structures
just putting in a populist with leftist tendencies will only make things worse because those slightly left leaning supporters you had will be satisfied

itt: alphabet soup knows anarchism is on the rise and becoming a tangible threat to capitalism and fascism, so they are trying to stop it by comparing it to their invented controlled opposition ideology

Yeah fair enough m8. That's why I'd advocate for democratic confederalism, because it's a mix of everything. Anarchists and Marxists can unite under this ideology.

My best of wishes to you, comrade.

The naxalites aren't some dream maoist society you mongoloid, and the Ocalan is inspired by bookchin.

"Anarchy" is a meme. Anarchists are alright and their theory is OK. Anarchy should be the goal of socialism. The problem is that you cannot realistically start off with anarchy. Anarchists for whatever reason refuse to acknowledge this fact.

It has always been the anarchists who end up betraying revolutionary movements. You are just mad that none have ever succeeded.

Oh I agree, I just think that nazbols have no room to talk about realistic solutions. Idpol will destroy any revolutionary movement, no matter the sort.

If your thread isnt about how Trots are worst sect then you're just obvious D&C

This. Fuck trots and fuck Trotsky.

Communalism has a pretty strong Marxist tinge, it is not "anarchist." That is the claim being made.

Also, none of these photos are to demonstrate a "dream society," quite the opposite. It's to demonstrate the relevance of Marx's writings, to stand up against the endless anarchist slander that Marxists are irrelevant when reality shows quite the opposite.

Honestly, you may be onto something here with the libsoc stuff. Maybe I've overlooked Bookchin a bit too much in this regard. Any good reads to recommend?

I reckon you can start a thread asking for pdfs from Bookchin, that'd be a start

I'm gonna go with ML's. Anarkids are a close second tho. Anarchists are a lot like well meaning-but naive libs of occupy and the Bernie campaign who try to reform the Dems. ML's are like the shady think-tank technocrats in control of the Dems who pretend to be progressive but really just feed off of power.

I don't understand.

Marxism Leninism is the absolute worst communist ideology. Leftcoms and anarchists are far far better.

I gotta agree

shoo Holla Forums divisive shill shoo

anarchists. every anarchist i've met irl is deeper in liberal idpol than liberals themselves

they don't understand dialectics

what the fuck does this even mean?

anything that is not Hoxhaism is a revisionism
kill it with fire

the main issue during revolutionary times is always people starving everywhere

I'm not an anarchist personally but I thought the idea of anarchy was to interrogate and dismantle unnecessary hierarchy. This means that if a hierarchy is found to be mutually beneficial that it would remain. For example, a boss under capitalism is an unecessary hierarchy because his existence is not beneficial for production yet he reaps all the benefit. Whereas a manager who is democratically elected as the most knowledgeable person to fill that role has a mutual benefit of organising large labour so that individual workers don't have to constantly be thinking about how to use their time at every moment. This logic applies to the state too, people don't wanna have to think about how every part of their society is managed because that would be dreadful. People just wanna do their own thing so they would democratically elect people to manage certain services. If the relationship becomes non-beneficial then the people could interrogate that hierarchy again.

What's the difference between Hoxhaism, Marxism-Leninism and Maoism?

He doesn't know what hierarchy is.

wew u ignorant

You know.
I'd never attack a truly socialist state while capitalist states still exist. At least not unless they started it.

Can Stalinists stop pretending to be Marxists? Marxists are actually really good and I respect them.

...

Not as good as Leninism.

simplified.

Nazbol is the worst. Serious anarchists have good praxis, though what you see on the media about anarchists tend to be out of context. Leftcoms, or at least the ones who aren't obsessed with Bordiga, have pretty good theory, as they can derive their positions from Marxist methodology.

Anarchism isnt leftism

They are both worse.

Reminder that anarchists and Marxists have never got along. The fact that we hang out together is more of a sad reflection of the irrelevance and weakness of both movements in the present day than anything else.

This is the dialecticaly correct position

This is just a fake alliance though. You'd be fighting together knowing full well that after you win it's going to be a contest to see who can murder the other ideology the quickest. Imagine another Russian Civil War scenario where the Marxist side is clearly far more powerful. Would the Anarchists keep honoring this alliance to the end knowing they'll just end up in a gulag after the capitalists go down?

You're an idiot.

This is probably the best text to start with.

kek

Really makes thought occur in your gray matters

Made more accurate one

Neither, Leninists are the worst

it's definitely anarchists.

some anarchist thinkers have been pretty based. but IRL anarchists are 90% edgy liftestylers who will flip to being brownshirts the moment that is a more socially acceptable way to tear shit up.

the downside of leftcoms is that they never do anything. the upside of leftcoms is that at least they never do anything.

The left should be united for a common cause. That's a good thing.