Do they think the Catalan Anarchists had no bourgeois blood on their hands? Do they think the Makhnovites never executed counterrevolutionaries? Fucking idiots. I preferred it when anarchists actually threw pipe bombs.

  • oscardejarjayes [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Anti-communist messaging and its consequences have been a disaster for anarchists. Too many people take the label because they recognize that capitalism isn’t great, but don’t go far enough to see the propaganda the state perpetuates. I desperately wish these “anarchists” would read theory, or join a cool anarchist group, and see the error in their ways.

    • sevenapples@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s weird how people can recognize that the government and the rich control what you see, know the terrorist and propaganda pushing actions of the CIA, but will not put two and two together and realize how it follows that they’re not getting the complete story on the USSR, AES etc from them.

      I know because I was one of them and I still struggle with holding opposing opinions than what is constantly broadcasted by media and propagated by others.

  • The Free Penguin@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    “Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is!” Karl Marx’s sugar daddy Frederick Engels

    • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Doesn’t really work, Soviets of all races and ethnicities along with French and German communists are still horrifically despised. Their violence is also seen as “unjustifiable”.

  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    “Caring too much and putting in actual effort to change things is stupid, actually” combined with “no veggies at dinner, no bedtimes, don’t tell me what to doooooooo” unexamined theory-free pop-anarchism is distressingly common.

  • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    So fucking tired of this. Y’all sound just like the whiney people on 196 trying to get rid of tankies.

    " they are just a bunch of teenagers online" “I never met one in real life”

    When I am allowed to be a “real” Anarchist?

    Where’s the fucking line? When I dont critize MLs? I’m an anarchist online and in the streets. And I’m honestly so tired of having to come to the only real leftist community on Lemmy and still have to watch y’all bash anarchy with the same effort libs bash commies.

    I have problems with authority. And problems with the ideas of Marx. And the implemntation of communism throughout the life the USSR. Specifically the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the use of centralized authority.

    Im anti-capitalist, I’m anti-police and pro prison abolition. But I’m willing to work with other leftist toward the bigger issues. Like Palestine.

    When are anarchist going to be accepted in this community?

    Y’all honestly make me so sad. I go to Lemmy.world I gotta read people licking Israel boot. I come here I got to watch y’all punch down on anarchy.

    Yall are a fuckin disappointment.

    • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      The reality is there are a lot of usufferable anarchists (especially online) who refuse to engage with real theory or history. I have all respect for people like you who critically support AES but maintain a different ideology. I and some others on here do try to make clear the difference between pop anarchists who hate China because they’re told to despite “being against all authority” and your time. Yes, some here go too far with it, and I do not agree, but I see where they are coming from.

    • lil_tank@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Where’s the fucking line? When I dont critize MLs?

      Are the MLs currently undermining your commune project or your dual power building? If yes then actually yeah come criticise them that would be super interesting for us.

      • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’m aware of my own post is this some sort of got cha?

        when the weather became less fair.

        Are you talking about when y’all openly bash anarchist? Calling them libs?

        Yeah I’m not really cool with that.

        Your comment has no real critique of my ideology. Just shows that isn’t room here for anarachist of any kind.

        • diegeticscream[all]🔻@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Your comment has no real critique of my ideology. Just shows that isn’t room here for anarachist of any kind.

          You’re currently commenting in Lemmygrad, an explicitly ML instance, in the “leftist infighting” community.

          Your post above was in Hexbear, a “left unity” instance, which has rules against sectarianism.

          If you’re not interested in seeing posts critical of anarchism, it might be better to block this community, or avoid those discussions/posts in Lemmygrad.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            “Don’t critique what I believe, don’t tell me what to dooooooo” is like a fortress of rhetorical immunity for some people, as long as they complain loud enough about how everyone else is bad and that they’re “disappointed” in them.

            • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Y’all aren’t critizing idoleogy y’all are just calling me a lib or an angry teenager…

              This comment once again has no real critique. Am I not allowed to complain?

          • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            I can deal with post critizing anarchy. I’m just not seeing that. Alls I see are post calling anarchist fake. Or calling them libs. Or calling them angry teenagers.

            Soo what it sounds like is there isn’t room for anarchist on lemmygrad? Are you willing to share with me some critiques of anarchism that are not based in literal name calling?

            Cuz I will read, but I’m not gonna stick around and get called a lib over and over again.

            • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              We are calling fake anarchists fake. No one said anarchists as a whole were fake. Why are you taking this personally. All the way from the title (self styled “anarchists”) it should’ve been clear it was criticizing a specific type of person laying false claim to the ideology of anarchism, not the whole.

    • qwename@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I will paste this old comment of mine to see what real anarchists like yourself think about it, I may have conflated anarchists with anti-authoritarians, so correct me if I’m wrong:

      Anti-authoritarians have no future, one either supports an existing authority or tries to become a new authority. Everyone can have a say in a democracy, but when it comes down to decision, whether through majority vote or expert opinion or other methods, the decision then becomes authority.

      Even if someone claims to hate all forms of authority, this person will become the authority on “hating authority” if a following is gained. That’s how anarchists are doomed for failure.

      • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I will gladly comment on this.

        Anarchist are anti-hierarchy. Authority is usually hierarchically designed and implemented. And thus we as anarchists condem it.

        This statement ignores other forms of power. Like non-hierarchical power structures. Mutual aid groups and community self defense. These and many other forms of direct action do not require authority or hierarchy to be powerful.

        We can be powerful, productive and non-hierarchical. We can have groups of people working together solving problems without bosses, masters, cops etc.

        • qwename@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Are rules required for anarchism to function, and if they are, can these rules be viewed as an abstract authority commanding the anarchist community?

        • 🔻Sleepless One🔻@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          How does commumity self defense not require authority? They’re certainly imposing their authority on whatever they’re defending themselves from.

      • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Even if someone claims to hate all forms of authority

        this is not what anarchists claim

        read theory, then come back with a coherent comment

        • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          It actually is what a lot of anarchists claim, those who have not read theory at least. I will make no generalizations about all anarchists especially without reading the specific theory, but there is a certain type of the online “anarkiddie” which I’ve seen many times.

          • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            this is like judging MLs by random fascist youtube commenters who think stalin killed 100 bajillion people and that was based

            • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              More like judging all USian MLs by patsocs who are sadly way too common. Settlers don’t want to lose the land they stole even if it’s necessary like anarkiddies don’t want to give up their petty bourgeois lifestyle to do praxis. Also, similarly as these anarchists don’t question the anti-communism programmed into them, patsocs don’t question myths about “American greatness” or that fast food workers and natives are worthless.

    • ImOnADiet🇵🇸 (He/Him)@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      A collection of Marxist communities, for memes, learning, news, discussion, media, or anything you like

      From our sidebar. We arent hexbear, we dont really believe in left unity like them. You’re welcome to participate, and you won’t get dunked on as an “anarkiddy” if you make serious comments arguing for anarchism here, but yes you will see a lot of venting about anarchists, I would suggest blocking lemmygrad comms if you dont want to see that.

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      You are plainly taking this in bad faith, they don’t mean anarchists who do support revolution and they could hardly be more clear in that fact. Try rereading once before denouncing an entire instance of fellow communists.

      I am mildly curious why, if it hypothetically was attacking anarchism in general, that would be “punching down”.

      • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Maybe. But there way too much of this kind of rhetoric on the site for me to look at this and say “oh he’s not talking about me, I’m one of the good ones”

        If I felt like there was more differentiation between what was an “acceptable” anarchist and just libs with the “anarchy” label. That would be one thing. But I don’t see people saying anarchy is OK.

        Just mostly people bashing anarchists…

        • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          You have entered a Marxist community, not an anarchist community. Members of this community are expressing their frustration with the ever-growing swaths of anticommunist and antirevolutionary liberals who describe themselves as anarchists, but who have little to no actual engagement with anarchist ideology. They have expressed that this frustration is derived from these people’s refusal to read theory and to educate themselves on the history of anarchism. They are not criticising anarchist ideology, they are criticising people who claim they are anarchists but refuse to actually learn anything about anarchism.

          You are making broad, sweeping statements condemning the Marxists in this community for their beliefs, and seem to be reading their frustrations as personal attacks and attacks on anarchism. Perhaps you should re-examine your standpoint here and go read some elementary anarchist and leftist theory. Here are some recommendations:

          Anarchism and Other Essays by Emma Goldman

          Principles of Communism by Friedrich Engels

          An Anarchist Programme by Errico Malatesta

          The Conquest of Bread by Pyotr Kropotkin

          Any of Antonio Gramsci’s writings

              • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 years ago

                Damn, just agreeing with all the cringiest people. I read the section of his book (post scarcity anarchism) called “listen Marxist” and was hoping there would be something worth listening. Unfortunately, all he says is basically Marxism’s old so we should ignore it and also evil vanguardists stole credit for the revolution and did evil stuff instead of pressing the communism button. I always hope to find something interesting to think about in anti-communist arguments, but they rarely say anything new.

                • SSFC KDT (MOVED)@mastodon.cloud
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  That being said, there’s merit to the idea that lockstep dogmatism to a 175 year old definition of a political model isn’t necessarily a successful model for any given present day era.

                  This is why I’m wary of “read theory.” Sure, read theory, but don’t treat it like a Bible. Expand, adapt, update, adjust.

                  Besides, like all science, theory should be reproducible without need for the text. Theory after all means “best guess,” and it’s supposed to be vulnerable to new realities and discoveries.

    • Grimble [he/him,they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Oh no guys, hear that? They’re packing their stuff and leaving! Fuck this is a disaster, the site’s ruined. I might as well quit too. We should’ve been nicer to hormonal 16-year-olds who scold us

      • Nematodes [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        We should’ve been nicer to hormonal 16-year-olds who scold us

        And there is it.

        You sound like the people I played halo 1 with. Lmao.

        Did you also bang my mom last night?

  • Sinister [none/use name, comrade/them]@hexbear.netB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Anarchism and social justice language have and are heavily used by the bourgeoisie to scatter and depower radical social movements.

    The eager embrace of anarchism by westerners and the cia “I am a poc with anxiety” recruiter, should be the clear indictment of the current absolute subservience of those ideas to the status qou.

  • comrade-bear@lemmygrad.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    And it kinda is, even Lenin said things along the lines that and revolution is a group forcing it’s view onto society(only those views are dope and for the good of the people), it requires authority and structure therefore anarchists are either anti revolutionary or hypocritical about their revolutionary ideals

    • EredYasibu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      No, because the overthrow of the government, which every day commits violence against the workers, is the legitimate self-defense of the people. You should read what the revolutinary anarchists wrote. And look at examples of anarchist uprisings, like the Makhnovists or Spanish anarcho-syndicalists

      • comrade-bear@lemmygrad.ml
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Still, it’s the anarchists view of a better world and of defense, which not necessarily is shared by all workers agree, many of them believe the state is something that defends them, so you are still imposing onto people your will, you can beat around the bush as much as.you want revolutions are authoritarian things, furthermore no anarchist revolutions had any lasting success which corroborates the idea that anarchy is not the most sensible platform for ending cptalism

        • EredYasibu@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          The state protects, of course, but not the majority, but the minority, which has the power. This is the very essence of the state, it was made that way on purpose, because capitalists need the power of the minority, not the majority. The goal of socialists is to give power to the majority so that people can have freedom. You can’t use a hammer to drill a hole. About failed revolutions - first of all, they took place in difficult conditions and in fact died because of the betrayals of Marxists, secondly, nevertheless, they gave experience and showed that it is quite possible to organize a society without the state and protect it, even in spite of “objective circumstances”, which are justified by the Bolsheviks to take power away from the workers. And as Marxists themselves say about socialism when arguing with the right-wingers - airplanes didn’t take off the first time either About authoritarianism - if a thief attacks you to rob you by force, and you knock him out, would that be authoritarian? No, it was the thief who behaved authoritarian, who wanted to impose his will on you, and you self-defended to preserve your freedom. I suggest you read this: https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionH.html#sech4

          • comrade-bear@lemmygrad.ml
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            The issue is not just that a society can be organized without the state but one of the main reasons for the socialist state is to prevent the outside capitalist forces from taking back control, and that could have something to do with the lack of lasting anarchist experiences, furthermore the organization of a revolutionary force has issues with some of the anarchists that say that no authority is justified, which makes any sort of army force nearly unsustainable. Furthermore the thief analogy somewhat works but the fact of the matter is that any revolutionary force will impose one view on detriment of others in an authority manner, there is no analogy that makes it less so, the state sucks but how to bring it down and what to do afterwards is a choice, that will be made by the revolutionary force, and that is the authoritatary measure, the thief did wrong I do not deny it, but you are deciding the sentence as well, and unilaterally so. And I think its an inevitable property of revolution, just one that anarchy tends to struggle with.