Here's an insight I had

Here's an insight I had.

Our Left vs Left culture is self-destructive, this everyone knows. Not because theoretical differences should be ignored and shoved under the carpet, but because it leads to nothing. No matter how much you debate and mock Social-Democrats, Leftcoms, Identitarians, Anarchists, the Anime Marxists or Phil Greavesites, they will continue to exist and their constituency will only grow to resent you, making it even harder to bridge the gaps in moments of crisis.

So instead, you should just focus on your common enemy, and on learning how to fight him. Once you prove yourselves to be the most effective at this, these other Leftists will start seeing things you way and moving towards you.

So for examples, Identitarians have been getting rekt at virtually every debate they've had. If you actually manage to engage the racists, the sexists and the homophobes that destroy them every time in a more efficient manner than they've done, and you do so while defending Socialism and a materialist perception of identity, all these SJWs you hate will go "oh, wait, this is better than going 'lol white dudes!' on social media" and they will naturally start seeing things your way.

If you actually want to stop the reformists, stop the identitarians, stop the liberals and so on, all you have to do is learn how to fight the Right and the bourgeoisie better than they've done so far.

You are assuming that anarchists need the rest of the left.

We don't.

This really, the rest of the left is just a useful means to an end. I could give a fuck about class warfare, its all about ending hierarchy. Nothing but the total destruction of borders and the State matters.

No they won't. You have a very naive understanding of what they're all about. They're not interested in winning arguments, they're interested in feeling good about themselves and looking down at people.

Of course anarchism doesn't need the Left, the same way Posadists and Primitivists don't need the Left, or the Right, or anything. When your goals are unfeasible you can avoid practical questions altogether.

Unfortunately, that's not the case for most of the Left.

Uh huh, ok whatever you say friendo

typical anarkiddie can't even defend his ideology on its own grounds

Oh sorry, when I said anarchism I didn't meant the anarchism with private property, racial hierarchies, economic boundaries and autocracy you're suggesting. This one can totally work, we just have to wait until your autism becomes contagious and infects all humanity.

At least leftcoms know theory

you
defense: anarchism is an inevitable ontological aspect of sovereign sapient consciousness that seeks to self express, expand and be left alone by mitigating sources of control. The anarchist impulse can be found in all species on Earth and will more prominently be found in Sapient AI once it is implemented. Anarchism simply seeks to remove ficitonal entities like the State and Religious institutes along with monolithic spooks like mankind from ruling over the destinies of sovereign individual organisms.

Communism has been tried not once, not twice but half a dozen times and has never ever survived its encounters with Capitalism. Similarly anarchism has been crushed by Capitalism and Statism each time its been tried, save for ancient examples that coexisted along side the State (Greece and Israel). There is no good evidence that either ideology is successful in practice. Therefore the theories if they are to be believed to be viable, must be evaluated on the weights of their intellectual and philosophical merits and not their efficacy in the real world. This is counterintuitive from the empiricist standpoint that Capitalism and Liberalism have co-opted to self justify their existence.

The logical implications of communism are hyper violent and conflict directly with historical reactions to massive social upheaval being attempted (French Revo, Soviet Union, Cultural Revolution, Day Zero) where millions died and millions more revolted against the new rule

To state, "anarchism is unfeasible", then to have the respondent make cogent rhetorical remarks about the flaws in the communist mindset is not avoiding anything. You never attempted a good faith discussion of anarchism, you presupposed its invalidity and then ran with that as the narrative for your dismissal. Then when I responded in kind, you claimed special authority you would only be worthy of if you had carefully established the intellectual viability of communism. But you haven't, just like a neo-lib you assumed it without any proofs or arguments. Additionally, I am not in any position to argue on behalf of millions of other anarchists. My vision of anarchism does not require the total destruction of the state for an anarchist society to take form. Nor does it rely on the weak definitions of success or viability that Communists and Capitalists do as it does not define itself by the terms of production, capital, class or national identity. Finally, its absolutely absurd to think that scathing and accurate criticisms of the typical socialist/commie mindset on this board are somehow an attempt to avoid arguing for my beliefs. Its just not relevant for me to do so. You said something flippant and idiotic, I said something rhetorical and factual. That's it. There was no need to argue on behalf of anarchism. That's not what my post or the other posters post was about. We were describing why we don't care about the left at all. And i'm further describing why leftist ideology, namely socialism and communism are bat shit insane and their implications and assumptions are unrealistic/untenable or even undesirable.

TLDR: you're an idiot, you don't deserve any kind of explanation. my response was 10x more coherent and informative than your childish snipes at the monolith that is anarchism. anarchism is as successful historically as communism (which is to say, not at all). I don't have to accept terms of success that you do, as I am not a capitalist or a statist (whereas communism must kowtow to capitalist and statist perceptions of economic and social success as it only exists in opposition to capitalism and in the context of 19th and early 20th century nationalist statism). Eat shit you fucking pseud