Exploring into the Left

they are 'anarcho capitalist' but really they are usually just neo feudalists and usually pedophiles.

Have you ever played the first Bioshock? The setting for that game is essentially what would happen under and Anarcho Capitalist society

Oh god…I don't want that hell

...

Trotsky was a faggot.
There are no wages in communism, everyone draws from a common stockpile of which there is so much surplus it would be almost impossible to run out of.
Most of us are anarcho-communists

Check pic related

Comrade, you really should have this saved.

"For in the end, while vision guides analysis, analysis disciplines vision. The two cannot exist independently.”

-Anwar Shaikh

"The historical project of the world’s working classes can only succeed
if it promulgates its own political economy, its own theory of the future of
society. This new political economy must be as morally coherent as that
22
of Smith, and must lead to economically coherent policy proposals, which
if enacted would open the way to a new post-capitalist civilisation, just as
those of Smith opened the way to the post feudal civilisation.
21st century Marxism can no longer push to one side the details of how
the non-market economy of the future is to be organised. In Marx’s day
this was permissible, not now. We can not pretend that the 20th century
never happened, or that it taught us nothing about socialism. In this task
20th century Western critical Marxists like Cliff, Bettleheim or Bordiga
will only take us so far…Instead we must recover and celebrate the advances in Marxist political economy that arose from the Russian experience: the method of material
balances used in preparing the 5 year plans and systematised as InputOutput
analysis by Leontief; the method of linear programming pioneered
by Kantorovich; the time diaries of Strumlin.
..We have to treat political economy and the theory of social revolution like any other science."

-W. Paul Cockshott

Have you heard of Cybersocialism? its an alternative directly democratic type of socialism which uses computers to plan the economy. Try reading WP Cockshott & A. Cottrell's 'Towards A New Socialism' Which you can find online in pdf form free:
ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/new_socialism.pdf

This. We need to stop calling them anarchists.

Not really though, as state power isn't privatized in Bioshock. There is a highly centralized state that just allows people to do what they want on principle. I would call it more objectivist than neo-feudalist.

reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/6hxrwb/thoughts_on_feudalism/

Word to anyone with a reddit account:
Clicking a direct link to reddit and then commenting or voting will get you shadowbanned. They have bots that monitor traffic and clicking a direct link will tell the destination site where you're coming from.

Look at Holla Forums and replace "cuck" with NAP.

I still laugh about this reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/3ucp8y/i_was_beat_up_by_left_anarchists_in_greece/

Did you see Socialism or Barbarisms reading of it?

No I haven't

Nothing wrong with that. Inform. Yourself about what Stalin actually did.

clogic.eserver.org/2005/furr.html

Pssst, if you got it yet, you're the kind of person people don't want to come here for. If anything, just try being a bit more subtle with your sstalin apologism.

Trotsky was not democratic in any sense. In the civil war, he ordered several massacres (I'm not talking about Krodstandt here), some seemingly arbitrarily cruel, like the mass executions in Ukraine. He also supported forced labor (the 'labor army') and explicitly spoke out against democratic elements.

You're an Atheist/Skeptic? If yes good.
Read Max Stirner The Ego & Its Own. You will understand it 100% perfectly, 0 doubts in your mind.

Then continue with well reserched theory from Marx & the rest of the Die Freien.

lolwat, who told you that? That's not true for any socialist ideology, and it was never even put into practice in the Marxist Leninist states (that's the majority of the communist bloc, excluding Yugoslavia and a couple African nationalists seeking Soviet support)

I didn't read that part. Jesus. He really is clueless but whatever we're here to help.

Also he needs to learn that there is a lot of difference between Socialism, Communism & Sovietism or the Soviet Union in general.

Here's a general ideological rundown for you. Some, I'm obviously not knowledgeable on, and I've simplified them all, too. If anyone wants to correct me, please do.

Marxism-Leninism = Central planning and vanguard parties, think the eastern bloc, Soviet Union, Maoist China and such. Many of the ML states, contrary to popular belief, utilized production for exchange, aka, they produced goods to be sold on internal markets, rather than for the purpose of use. Generally, more hardline MLs (think Stalin supporters) will call these states revisionist for this reason.

Yugoslavia is a semi-example, though the followers of market socialism vary extremely, from mutualists (people who, to highly simplify things, want a market socialist system without absentee ownership, and a replacement of currency with socialist labor vouchers instead of regular currency) to Yugoslav model socialists, to people who are essentially lolberts and ancaps plus co-operatives. Generally, market socialists desire competing firms owned and managed by those who work in it, and an abolition of absentee ownership. However, certain market socialists (extremely rare, mind you) would rather all economic institutes cooperate.

Read The Next Revolution and Social Ecology and Communalism. They are easy reads and provide most of what you need to know. I can't summarize them for you, as I'd rather someone more knowledgeable and passionate describe it. The long and short of it is that society must be a confederal system run on a face to face and directly democratic level, by communes consisting of cooperating, democratic municipalities. Subtypes include Democratic Confederalism.

It's not an ideology, it's an umbrella term for socialists who do not favor the idea of a central governing body which dictates to society what must be done. Essentially, libertarian socialists are socialists who wish for society to be restructured from the grassroots, on a more communal and democratic level. Anarchists are libertarian socialists, but not all libertarian socialists are anarchists, for example.

There is no one single anarchist ideology. Anarchists are a very diverse bunch. I'll break down several anarchist ideologies here. The three examples of anarchism in real life I can think of are Revolutionary Catalonia and the CNT-FAI, the Ukraine Free Territory, and Anarchist Shinmin.
Anarcho-Communism
I'm sure you know what communism is, that being a classless, stateless society without cash or production for exchange. Anarcho-communists seek to immediately establish this society, with no intermediate state.
Anarcho-Syndicalism
Anarcho-syndicalists desire to use cooperating, worker controlled unions (see: industrial unionism) to forge a massive general strike and collapse the central government, from which then the local organizations formed by them (or, according to some, the unions) will take control and form a new anarchist society. Syndicalists almost always want to abolish currency. Syndicalists are a very mixed bag. You have some who wish to see a system of total free association, in which everyone is free to leave a mutual agreement as they please, and essentially operate on a free, though currency devoid, market. You have others, who desire to see all economic and political facets of society merged into one, cooperating corporate body. However, I'd classify the latter more on the DeLeonist side than the anarchist one.
Mutualism
See: Market Socialism. Mutualists are also anarchists.
Anarcho Capitalism
It's not anarchy, on the basis that it functions on a system of hierarchical ownership of the economy and politics. Essentially, it's the idea that the ills of capitalism are all caused by the nature of central government, and that if you abolish the government, everything will run smoothly.

That's the very basics of it all. A lot of it is simplified, and some of it may even be correct. It is also missing numerous fringe ideologies and left-communism, as I don't know enough about them.

Can relate to this. I remember this feeling well.

Don't you need to read and understand Hegel to really get Max Stirner?

Well for one that's not what socialism is about. According to Marxists, which is what Trotsky was, Socialism is when the means of production (factories, farms, etc.) are owned by everyone equally (which usually translates to the workers owning the workplace) instead of being in the hands of a few rich property owners and where production is done to satisfy human need rather than to make a profit. Under Capitalism, the factory makes shoes in order to make a profit, but in Socialism the factory makes shoes because people need shoes. Under Capitalism, if the factory can't turn a satisfactory profit then shoes won't be made even if there are people who need shoes, and if too many are made (overproduction) they are usually thrown out in order to drive up the price. Under Socialism, the factory produces until everyone has the shoes they need, and any overproduction would be kept in reserve.
As for paycheck, socialists aim to eventually eliminate money, and to have the goods distributed according to the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." This is what Marxists usually call the upper-stage of communism or "full communism", because society and automation has progressed to the point where people barely need to work to ensure that everyone has what they need. This is the end-goal.
Then there's what Marxists call the lower-stage of communism or just "socialism", where goods are distributed "to each according to his contribution". Basically, when you work, you are paid the full value of your labour, so if you earn your workplace, say, $500, then you get $500 (in contrast to Capitalism where you'll get $20 and your employer keeps the rest). Now, I say dollars, but Marxists don't really like money since it tends to grow and accumulate, so they usually want to replace it with stuff like labour-vouchers which is like money but it expires when you use it (kinda like food-stamps, but for more than just food).
Now, this may already seem like a lot, but I've only given you a very basic explanation of one kind of socialism. There is a huge amount of theory around Socialism and a lot of it is eye-opening, so I'd really recommend checking out the reading list if you want to know more, and make sure to read from Anarchist and other socialist authors (such as Bookchin) to get the full picture. If that sounds like a lot, lurking and posting on Holla Forums can also teach you a lot, though be aware that there is a lot of misinformation and some pleb-tier takes on Socialism as well (not everyone reads theory), but it's fun.
Also, if you start reading, don't start with Marx's Capital. It's a hugely dense book and you really need to read the lighter Marxist literature first in order to digest it.

The funny thing about it was that it went hook and sink into the whole: free market = freedumz bullshit.

This applies to Marx as well.