Anarchists are extremely critical of the concept of ‘the State’ itself, tend to want to either totally abolish it, or at least strip it down so much or break it apart that it essentially isn’t a ‘State’ any more.
Tankies embrace, and essentially worship the State.
… Also, in basically every single recorded instance of a succesful or attempted leftist revolution in modern human history, tankies ally with anarchists to overthrow the existing State, and then murder all of them after they’ve established themselves as the new State or proto-State.
One could argue that it seems to be in the material interest of authoritarian statists to extend false allyship to ‘fellow leftists’, and then betray them as quickly as they abandon their ideal of a ‘classless society’ and begin to assert themselves as the new ruling class.
There’s a 101 level answer for your ‘why so antagonistic’ question.
Tankies historically cry ‘Unity! Unity!’ and do exactly what you are doing, trying to shame those who are skeptical… and then the rhetoric flips on a dime and the cry switches to ‘Purity! Faith!’
…
Also worth noting is your framing of this as antagonistic in the first place.
I guess you find the evidence of history thus far to largely be antagonistic to your worldview?
I don’t know, I wouldn’t want to put words in your mouth, but that is my assumption.
I am not aware of any anarchists that even predict that some kind of anarchist revolution is any kind of inevitable.
And if there were some, I would disagree with them.
I am not purpoting to have some kind of perfect plan to ‘achieve anarchism’.
I don’t need to.
It’s ya’ll that tend to have a dogmatic, ideological faith in a perfect way to do things, that things should be done, that things inevitably will be done.
…
Anyway, the evidence of history I am referring to is that basically all self described ‘Communist’ states/societies haven’t ever really come close to Marx’s utopian conception of a classless society at the proverbial ‘end’ of Communism…
They mostly either reform or transform themselves into a highly state-managed form of capitalism, or into something with less overt direct state control over a hybrid state/capitalist economy, allowing private businesses and capitalists to operate under fairly significant levels of regulation…
Both of those will almost always only ever allow a single political party, clamp down on freedom of political association/expression, speech, etc… these societies very much still do have significant wealth disparity, ergo, social classes.
…
And those’re pretty much the best case scenarios.
They can also just collapse into… well basically, roughly fascism; a totalitarian, nationalistic, jingoistic central state that works with, grants favors to various capitalist oligarchs, corporations, as opposed to directly managing them or heavily regulating them…
In these societies, wealth disparity and thus class disparity tends to be even more significant… and they tend to put on a show of pretending to be liberal and democratic, though the extent of that effort ebbs and flows back toward social and governmental illiberalism over time.
It can get worse than that, but then we tend to get into ‘thats not real communism’ or basically just meme/schrodinger’s irony level argument territory, at least in my prior experience or discussions with tankies.
…
I don’t have a problem admitting that no anarchist revolution has succeeded in making a stable anarchist society at the scope and scale of a nation-state, with some kind of … assumed authoritative forceful control over a defined physical region.
Partially because… that isn’t really what at least I personally view as any kind of useful goal of my idea of anarchism.
…
If you doubt the history of tankies back stabbing anarchists… hold please, will update with source.
This person’s works also include Burn the Bread Book, an anti-Anarcho-Communist screed in which they advocate for the end of civilization, and return to each person producing all their own food, an idea that is openly ecofascist and would kill billions, first and foremost a large number of disabled and chronically ill people.
I think you should carefully consider where your ideas are coming from.
… You don’t get it?
This is an Anarchist instance.
Anarchists are extremely critical of the concept of ‘the State’ itself, tend to want to either totally abolish it, or at least strip it down so much or break it apart that it essentially isn’t a ‘State’ any more.
Tankies embrace, and essentially worship the State.
… Also, in basically every single recorded instance of a succesful or attempted leftist revolution in modern human history, tankies ally with anarchists to overthrow the existing State, and then murder all of them after they’ve established themselves as the new State or proto-State.
One could argue that it seems to be in the material interest of authoritarian statists to extend false allyship to ‘fellow leftists’, and then betray them as quickly as they abandon their ideal of a ‘classless society’ and begin to assert themselves as the new ruling class.
There’s a 101 level answer for your ‘why so antagonistic’ question.
Tankies historically cry ‘Unity! Unity!’ and do exactly what you are doing, trying to shame those who are skeptical… and then the rhetoric flips on a dime and the cry switches to ‘Purity! Faith!’
…
Also worth noting is your framing of this as antagonistic in the first place.
I guess you find the evidence of history thus far to largely be antagonistic to your worldview?
I don’t know, I wouldn’t want to put words in your mouth, but that is my assumption.
I could be wrong though.
Ah yes, the evidence of history. Like all the successful anarchist revolutions?
I am not aware of any anarchists that even predict that some kind of anarchist revolution is any kind of inevitable.
And if there were some, I would disagree with them.
I am not purpoting to have some kind of perfect plan to ‘achieve anarchism’.
I don’t need to.
It’s ya’ll that tend to have a dogmatic, ideological faith in a perfect way to do things, that things should be done, that things inevitably will be done.
…
Anyway, the evidence of history I am referring to is that basically all self described ‘Communist’ states/societies haven’t ever really come close to Marx’s utopian conception of a classless society at the proverbial ‘end’ of Communism…
They mostly either reform or transform themselves into a highly state-managed form of capitalism, or into something with less overt direct state control over a hybrid state/capitalist economy, allowing private businesses and capitalists to operate under fairly significant levels of regulation…
Both of those will almost always only ever allow a single political party, clamp down on freedom of political association/expression, speech, etc… these societies very much still do have significant wealth disparity, ergo, social classes.
…
And those’re pretty much the best case scenarios.
They can also just collapse into… well basically, roughly fascism; a totalitarian, nationalistic, jingoistic central state that works with, grants favors to various capitalist oligarchs, corporations, as opposed to directly managing them or heavily regulating them…
In these societies, wealth disparity and thus class disparity tends to be even more significant… and they tend to put on a show of pretending to be liberal and democratic, though the extent of that effort ebbs and flows back toward social and governmental illiberalism over time.
It can get worse than that, but then we tend to get into ‘thats not real communism’ or basically just meme/schrodinger’s irony level argument territory, at least in my prior experience or discussions with tankies.
…
I don’t have a problem admitting that no anarchist revolution has succeeded in making a stable anarchist society at the scope and scale of a nation-state, with some kind of … assumed authoritative forceful control over a defined physical region.
Partially because… that isn’t really what at least I personally view as any kind of useful goal of my idea of anarchism.
…
If you doubt the history of tankies back stabbing anarchists… hold please, will update with source.
EDIT:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ziq-tankies-and-the-left-unity-scam
There it is!
No sense in me retyping all of this myself.
EDIT 2:
Or maybe its this one:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/various-authors-always-against-the-tanks/
This person’s works also include Burn the Bread Book, an anti-Anarcho-Communist screed in which they advocate for the end of civilization, and return to each person producing all their own food, an idea that is openly ecofascist and would kill billions, first and foremost a large number of disabled and chronically ill people.
I think you should carefully consider where your ideas are coming from.
People can can have some ideas or writings that are good, and some ideas or writings that are bad.
Other people can use their own brains to pick through those ideas on their own and formulate their own worldviews.
Which other genocidal anti-communist, anti-anarchist authors do you suggest have “some good ideas?”
imagine being a redfash and tarnishing someone else as a “genocidal anti-anarchist”
You’re just going to take what this redfash says at face value without reading the text yourself, and worse, repeat their smear?
https://raddle.me/f/TankiesGonnaTank/208810/growing-your-own-food-is-a-genocidal-screed-that-will-kill
It’s not a pro-genocide argument, it’s the direct opposite of that.