how could the anarcho-communist ever deal with this situation?!

inb4 'other people will risk their personal wellbeing for me' lmao

With a gun or twelve

I will not answer any other way.


anarcho-communists would bend over

Is it an anarcho-communist society?

Tell me how Chief Longcock dealt with his desire to conquer and buttfuck. If the answer is 'training people in combat and maintaining an arsenal,' then that's also the solution to the problem of Chief Longcocks.


with a tec 9.

addendum, he is in fact a foreign leader with a primitive statelead army that he's bringing with him to enforce his aquisition of your lands/property/etc

they're even easier to kill

They don't make leaders like that

The more I read about Anarcho-Communism the more I see it is rooted in babby tier idealism and actually is pretty masturbatory over liberalism.

I think Tankies are shit-tier for outright dismissing everything in the liberal tradition (free speech, assembly, etc.) because they view Marxism as a clear break from Liberalism, which, in my mind, is clearly untrue.

On the other hand, Anarchists take it way too far. They subordinate everything to the naive belief that modern liberal values will give way both to equality and freedom. You see this in Kropotkin where he's going on about how the historical trajectory is toward demoralization and equality which, taken to its supposed logical conclusion, will result in a stateless, communist society. It really sounds like he's making a lot of assumptions about liberal democracies that don't hold up in reality. Primarily the belief that liberalism is a global trend that brings freedoms to all. Totally neglects to think about the ways in which liberal democracies act like authoritarian regimes abroad, that the ideology has contradictions in terms of class etc.

That being said.

Anarcho-Communists > Tankies

alright lets take it a step further and say it's a total extermination level event as he's in charge of a lot more people who are veterans, 10 to 1 or a 100 to 1

would the plan be to die, or is it something else?

Then they would be on our side.

You don't get, how a pol pot starts, do you

you couldn't have thought of a better example than pol pot?

So what if over 75% of the population decided to become capitalists and also there was no defense structure at all? Checkmate ancoms.

In this example, there isn't a better example than pol pot

The point is that resistance to reactionaries comes in different flavors.

If they want to lock down, we tend to lock down ten times harder and double down on everything and don't give people a choice not to die.

this isn't really a capitalist vs communist thing i'm proposing, i'm questioning the ability of a (large and functioning) anarcho-anything to defend itself from foreign states with expansionalist tendancies.

it takes authoritarian figures to run a real military

That doesn't mean a state. All revolutions are stateless.

alright last try with this, i'm proposing that even if total anarchy was accomplished, people would eventual default to societal structures based on the application of the use of violence and the people who are most capable of it. meaning eventually governance would return.

unless the entire idea was a total reset, in which case why?

Big Chief Longcock did nothing wrong.

(and by governmence i mean early tribes, monarchies, empires and all the things before there were even isms)

Then big chief long cock would do nothing wrong and would be on our side.

there's no actual longterm plan is there?

What matters isn't chief long cock's long term plan as much as your own.

He exists as a stereotype you just made up. What we criticize is solid, concrete, it's real. It's material. It's Capital and State.

Am I supposed to take this serious?

Because apparently I know the ideology better than the tools in this thread, I'll tell you OP: worker's militias and/or a Makhno-style black army. Seriously, how does nobody know this? Oh wait a sec, I think I know.

i was poking fun but he's a placeholder for violent expansionalist tendancies. imagine you're in tibet's place.

the anarchy part only makes large organised military movements harder which means you're at a disadvantage unless there's some bulletproof military doctrine i'm not aware of.

No, the problem was that Longcock trained his hypothetical armed strongmen.

The solution is to use your own armed strongmen to kill him the minute he shows his intentions.

i'll actually look at those now, thanks

By rallying the MIGHTY armies of AZEROTH against the ORCISH HORDE, of course.

Have you ever even heard about Rojava? The people driving ISIS out of Kurd lands?



The fuck are you implying? A warlord attempting to conquer territory fucking affects everyone in that territory, faggot. What makes you think acoms don't support people's militias?

See what I mean, you people are retarded, you have no theory or imagination. It's a wonder you can even get out of bed in the morning without someone telling you to.

he's right you just need to believe and anything is possible!

It's pretty obvious there will still be guns and armed citizens, the fact that you couldn't come to this conclusion on your own proves just how retarded you are.

Anarcho-communists are also the most likely to be delusional 14 year old faggots

most hilarious meme anarkiddies have ever spouted

They have in the past, there's no reason to think they won't in the future. But then again, look who I'm talking to.

lel, like what? A county in spain that existed in a power vacuum for all of a quarter of a decade? Some innavigable shithole without enough infrastructure to make any kind of central governance feasible in the first place?

Like, woah, dude, though. Imagine, no religion. Woooooaaaaaaaah.

The fact that they rounded together to defend themselves proves you're wrong, saying they lost is you moving the goalposts (as usual)

lel nazibols


Oh no, disproven! SNAP! Salon headline: Watch this nazbol get DESTROYED on a brazilian wheelchair forum! I guess I moved the goalposts because I didn't specify that I didn't mean literally nobody even tried.

Time and time again anarkiddies fail to mount any meaningful defense. Fuck, an entire continent of anarchist societies was steamrolled by the state because they each failed time and time again to confederate, even when they had a legendary politician and military commander at the helm.

reminds me of rome vs the gaelic tribes lmao

except the gaelic tribes weren't anarchists

Meanwhile in history…

That post didn't make any sense…

Please stop, you're embarrassing yourself.

The CNT-FAI had 2 million members. You dolt.