cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/8181688
undefined
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
260 points (82.8% liked)
Anarchism
1389 readers
80 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not convinced.
Every single anarchist community singularly dedicated to anarchism off reddit has waned over the years. Hexbear has retained anarchists better than Raddle for example which has about 20 users left over.
Anarchists seem content to exist in spaces that aren't dedicated to anarchism, as offshoot spaces on the side of other content that latches onto them. This is a problem honestly because those spaces are almost always controlled by bougies rather than proles, if/when the left becomes a real threat those spaces will be shut down just like the marxist ones have been getting shut down on reddit lately. Antiwork got kneecapped by wreckers and bankers for a reason for example.
I don't believe this. I continue to believe that we want the same thing and disagree on the method of reaching it. I actually think we both fundamentally have the same criticisms of the socialist state even, there's a reason communists want a stateless society, we know states aren't good.
It's also my observation that most dedicated anarchist spaces seem gratuitously anti-ML in a way that Hexbear, at least, is not gratuitously anti-Anarchist. Granted, there are also places where MLs are needlessly anti-Anarchist and I'm sure there are anarchist spaces out there who are not as hostile to MLs, but if the comparison is Hexbear specifically then Hexbear is more neutral ground than most other leftist spaces.
That is very strongly evidenced by the OP itself, which only exists so anarcho-bidenists can fear monger to their fellow rubes about how the tankies want to shoot them, which there would be no impetus for if not for MLs in some spaces visibly calling for left unity.
The obvious explanation for this is just the more general observation that most anarchists in the real world despise Marxists. In anarchist circles in private the discourse than ML's are a bunch of homophobic, transphobic, sex-worker-phobic, misogynistic red fash is very, very present, and honestly pretending otherwise is simply ignoring the obvious truth that becomes evident if you actually spend much time in read-world anarchist and Marxist circles, simply for the sake of preserving the appearance of an artificial, digital 'left unity' which neither has any bearing on actual organization nor does it provide a serious basis for any actual platform of organized socialist activity. We can get together for the same marches, social movements, or for forms of local mutual aid and aid for the homeless or refugees, but this does not ever really extend beyond that in my experience, and the reason is that anarchists have a fundamentally different conception of politics and organization to Marxists, and especially to MLs.
Anarchist presence on Mastodon has been fine. Raddle has the issue of Ziq being shitty to people and fostering a space only really welcoming to a specific brand of post-leftist, and so far the fact that Lemmy has been made by ML's has stifled interedt in a specifically anarchist Lemmy instance. Though even then Raddle still has more visibly active anarchists than Hexbear, and if you go by specifically anarchist discussions the anarchism community on Hexbear has always been anemic.
Having been here from the start and watched people leave, it's always been the overt sectarianism that gets cited. Hexbear is not a revolutionary movement, it is an internet forum, and while it started out as a space that wanted to specifically be an actual social space for leftists in general it has absolutely become an ML centric soace to the exclusion of pretty much any other tendency. And for all some might say they think we have shared goals, it tends to not mean much when there has always been a contingent that has viewed driving off other tendencies as praxis.
I would agree that it would be better to have an actual anarchist presence on kbin/lemmy and that the objection to using the software is silly, but a lot of anarchist reddit spaces have dealt with specifically ML wreckers trying to to gain control of subreddits for shits and giggles, so I don't think I can convince anyone this wouldn't be more of the same.
Mastodon is the kind of place I referred to in my previous comment.
I don't know who you're talking about but Hexbear is more active today than it has ever been.
It used to have a bigger problem with anti-trot sectarianism, far more than anarchism. Anti anarchist sentiment was always explicitly stamped on whereas anti-trot stuff was encouraged, we even have emotes left over from this time like
. This changed however at some point and some of the only times I've been moderated is because I still make trot jokes. We have trots on the site now too so I'm not really being good to them when I do.
Which ones?
It's instinctive I swear. It's really hard to stop.
Not really sure how that's particularly waned, relative to anything else. Anarchist instances can be pretty large, and Mastodon (and the other twitter-like federated projects) as a whole is a much larger thing than Lemmy at present. That is where you'll find actual orgs with their "official" accounts after Twitter started banning them.
ML's on Hexbear are active, yes. I don't really see other anarchists very often, we're more often referred to than actually present. I don't really think I see much other htan ML's represented in general, which is absolutely a decline from when the website started and certainly from when the subreddit was still not banned.
The trot in question got orriginally targetted in part due to their association with anarchists, which again the phrase "anarchist cabal" will always be funny. But part of why there was resistance to that sectarianism was becuase there were anarchists present to push back on it, which over time a lot of us have burned out on the community. And so like 90% of the time it seems like posts are mostly complaining about anarchists, which I imagine is probably exhausting for whatever anarchists remain.
GenZanarchism was probably one of hte more notable ones that got cheered on, though people have been trying to fuck with r/anarchism for a while which had that space paranoid as shit. I remember on the Discord we were looking over some screenshots over some drama about needing to disassociate with a server of Reddit subredit moderators where someone told someone else to kill thesmelves, and part of those screenshots was them with a channel dedicated to fucking with anarchist subreddits.
You can just go to the dunk thread for this thread and see the upvoted replies, like those just plain stating they don't really advocate for left unity either.
Literally run by feds. Anyone fucking with that sub is wasting their time it will never fall out of their hands.
What does that even mean? It runs on elected mods, with a separate subreddit that posts notable mod actions for transparency. Do you think there's any non-fed anarchist subreddit, or are you just fedjacketing as a bit or because their opnions annoy you? Antiwork actually had Laurelai Bailey, an actual known snitch, we actually do know that there was fed shit going on there - I have never heard an actual serious accusation about r/anarchism of all places.
LIke unless your'e going to hand me actual evidence that morrigan or someone is actually a cop, this is the kind of thing that I'm talking about. That fedjacketing shit is toxic, it gets people paranoid, it's a traumatic thing to go through, so the general expectation is that you don't ever call someone a cop or a fed without actual evidence to back that up.
My bad it's completeanarchy I had in mind, anarchism is safe and in fact it's the only anarchist subreddit that has good relations with the socialist subreddits.
I'm not giving evidence you'll just have to take my word for it.
I was active during the antiwork events and we had accounts in the modteam trying to turn it around but we were fucked as soon as the admins stepped in and brought on liberal powermods. Things potentially could have gone differently if that sub hadn't spent the last 12 months prior purging "tankies", we tried to stop the wrecker pressures that were occurring in threads but were unable to muster enough people because all the purging had made it considerably harder to get people to help rescue a space they saw as one that had purged them previously. It wasn't really just "fed shit" though it was an op that involved some sort of financier cabal, we had direct evidence of canadian bankers running the spinoffs at the time but it'd take some time to dig up, the two that were caught faded into the woodwork when called on it but you can bet the power was still in their group. Whole thing was a disaster. A digital colour-revolution in action.
completeanarchy's def assholes, yes, though again I refrain from calling anything or anyone a fed because that's historically been used extremely abusively in leftist spaces. antiwork's more well known as having been fucked with, as generally when actual fed shit happens on reddit it invovles reddit admins getting directly involved.
Reddit is a fed site, completely captured in every way that matters, I honestly can't believe people still use it and expect good faith
I don't think they're mods of workreform anymore but were the creators of it and that whole op
https://i.imgur.com/HWnnWpZ.jpg
slrpnk.net is an anarchist instance, and this instance is also meant to run on anarchist principles btw. Unfortunately the /r/anarchism people were not willing to consistently push to abandon reddit, and when they did, they were promoting raddle which is very insular, so most of the people who like threaded discussions remain there.
I don't get anarchists that insists in stay on reddit.
Probably not real anarchists, or they just lack understanding (or are in-denial) about where that platform is headed and don't realize that Reddit's enshittified future doesn't include them whether they choose it or not (Anarchism isn't seen favorably by many people, execs at Reddit inc. likely feel the same way).
Good to know and glad we’re federated with ya!
Edit: Ahh geez this is OP didn’t realize that. this comic is really racist towards Mao :(
Communists and Anarchists are most certainly not the same. I'm not really sure how anyone can entertain this idea if they have actually spent times in active anarchist and Marxist circles, let alone engaged in militant activity with either where both the need for cooperation and the apparent inevitability of conflict and tension become obvious, and make obvious in turn that these difficulties do not just boil down interpersonal issues or grievances but are political in nature. There are profound conceptual, theoretical, ideological, practical and organization differences, as well as sociological.
It's all well and good to say that they are 'fundamentally the same' (what does 'fundamentally/essentially the same' even mean here? It seems vague, ambiguous, or if you are choosing as the criterion for that that we want the same form of society at the end of the day, this amounts actually only to a very weak form of agreement in all honestly. It's like saying that Communists are the same as Reformists Socialists because the latter also want (sometimes genuinely) a form of socialist economy and are genuinely deluded as to the means to get there (i.e. reformism). The difference is in terms of political method, and the distinction is one of revolution vs reformism. Sure, Communists share a belief in the need for revolution to get there with anarchists, but they have different different concepts, theories, practices, conceptions of organization and politics, which implies deep theoretical and practical-organizational differences.
Furthermore, Communism in this sense remains an ideal (which is fine), towards which we agree on the most general and abstract features and agree further that this is the ideal form of society which we would like, indeed must for the sake of the human species, move towards. The anarchist conception of revolution is very different from the communist conception, and what comes during the revolution, how we get there, what is necessary, how we should actually do all the actual work of organizing the working class (which marxists recognize as necessary but which anarchists have either been unwilling to do the work needed to accomplish or who they neglect as many now see focus of parties on class-based organization to be a form of class-reductionism), disagree on the fundamental questions of revolution, the state, parties, legislation, prisons, and so on.
There are also Christian Communists (non-Marxist) would also want a stateless, classless, moneyless society. I commend them for that, and they are definitely potential allies, but that doesn't mean they are going to be reliable political allies in the long-term, nor does it imply that their views are fundamentally the same as mine. The fact that they are not going to be ready to do the things necessary to actually construct socialism, let alone communism, means that realistic political unity with them is limited at best. The same goes for anarchism in the minds of Marxists, most obviously MLs.
The period of transition from capitalism to communism will likely take hundreds of years. Socialism is a centuries-long project which we have only just begun. Calling the immense, profound differences of opinion between Communists and anarchists over this historical process towards Communism something which does not amount to a fundamental difference seems not only confused, but positively idealistic to me.
Saying that the difference lies simply in the means to get there is ignoring the fact that this is a massive difference with direct implications for the feasibility of long-term, substantial, deep political cooperation. It also reflects that the routes through which Marxists and Anarchists get to the conclusion of the need for revolution for the sake of a classless, stateless, moneyless society are very different.
Just to give a revealing sense of the depth of this divide: There are people in this thread who have cited Murray Bookchin, who towards the end of his life not only explicitly stated that he would rather side with liberal governments against Communists because the former believed in 'personal freedom', but then later when on to repudiate anarchism right at the end of his life, calling modern anarchists a form of lifestyle movement with no real political potential, and it's worthwhile to note that he came to this conclusion during the 90s and 2000s, i.e. when Marxism and Communism were at their lowest ebb and the international leftist movements in the West were being dominated by anarchist and post-left lifestyle movementism, calling for distributed (non-existent) networks of supposedly distributed organization based on ridiculously minute identitarian difference (i.e. identity politics). The period since the 90s have done nothing but refute the idea that the predominance of anarchists on the western left would revitalize the prospects for revolution there. The opposite is the case. The potential for revolution has correlated inversely with anarchist predominance. Frankly this doesn't surprise me, as the anarchist circles I've encountered have almost always been far more bourgeois, less proletarian, than Marxist circles (especially if we are talking about militant circles), though I admit that this is anecdotal.