By Cake Boy

A problem with the modern leftist anarchist ‘movement’ (if you can even call it a movement) is that there is no free speech within its borders/domains.

I have always been a proponent of free speech absolutism. So when I came across the modern leftist anarchists and antifa types, this really irritated me about them.

How can you create new social/political realities if you don’t even allow people to voice their opinions on the complicated political matters? How can you defend your position if people can’t even criticize it? How can you grow without a dialogue, without debate? How can you resolve conflicts/contradictions without free speech? Once you lose free speech, your movement is dead.

I have always talked to anyone: Christians, communists, conservatives, even fascists. I ask them about their views to understand the architecture of their thought. This is what a philosopher should do. This is what Socrates did.

For example. You see how I strongly disagree with the national anarchists, but I would never use violence against them, or beat them up. You can’t destroy ideas that way. You can attack the people, but not their ideas. You have to look at these ideas, dig them out of the ground, through the Socratic dialogue. Explain to people what is wrong with it, why it doesn’t work.

I disagree with many of Nicky’s ideas on this site, but it’s very important that we let her speak.

A woke site wouldn’t let Keith talk, but Keith allows woke people to write on his site. You see, this is important.

When you look at the leftist anarchist forums, you see that a lot of comments are removed. When someone says something: queerphobic, speciesist, problematic, capitalist, homophobic, transphobic, white, ablephobic, nationalist, sexist, or racist, then the comments are removed. This is a shame, because I want to know how people react to specific topics. I want to know what people think about certain things and why they hold those thoughts. I don’t want some Stalinist censorship going on.

When a person is critical of feminism, for example, I want to know what their thoughts are, so I have a better understanding of the current culture and way of thinking. You need to possess this knowledge to navigate the world. When someone formulates a leftist program, and let’s say, ten people react to it in a very critical way, then as a leftist person, you would like to see these complaints, so you can think about them and respond to them.

I used to write on a leftist forum. Someone reacted to me, and then the forum removed this comment. This is Stalinist/fascist censorship. I want to know why a person disagrees with me.

A modern leftist anarchist wrote this about free speech.

Anarchists have always paid a lot of attention to feedback loops. Seemingly small actions, small arrangements, small evils tolerated, can rapidly or inexorably build up to systematic and seemingly omnipotent power relations.

Yes, and then this is the reason for the modern leftist anarchists to silence people. It’s the same argument the communist states made in the past. As I have said before, leftist anarchists are just masked communists.

This is the argument against free speech: when you tolerate free speech, it could undermine the socialist system/dictatorship/culture.

In a communist state, they would say: we don’t let people read texts made by John Locke, or other liberals, because this is ‘a small evil’ that will undermine our system, in the end. Modern leftist anarchists use the same reasoning. A small action, like reading a pro-capitalist thinker, could ‘spiral out of control.’

Modern anarchists say: we don’t let feminists ask questions about queer theory, because it could lead to people being critical about queer theory, and than queer theory might lose its grip over society. So, queer theory must be implemented by force.

Whether we agree with this or not, it’s the communist/Stalinist politics.

It’s also a lie that this leftist/antifa anarchist person is telling. At the beginning of the anarchist movement, free speech was an essential aspect of it. Anarchism formulated federalism, free association, dissociation, ánd free speech. In a way, you could see it as a sort of radical classical liberalism, combined with some socialist aspects. But it had nothing to do with the woke communism of the 21st century. Anarchists did not fight ‘small actions’. They did not fight thought crimes. Mhakno did not have an opinion about the (probably fairly conservative) traditions and customs of the farmers who joined the anarchist free zones.

When I read what these modern leftist people write, I can see that they never even read the theory, dug into the history. Their ‘knowledge’ comes from Contrapoints and other pseudo-intellectual ‘leftist YouTubers’. Meanwhile, they give anarchism a bad reputation.

Leftist anarchists then say: we have to defeat fascism, because it is a threat. You can’t be tolerant towards it, because it will destroy you. This, then, never goes for communism, somehow. Fascism is a problem, I agree, but Maoism isn’t? No, they will say. Maoists are about freedom, they will say. They are foolish, so they don’t know anything about the history of the Chinese Maoists.

They misuse their own reasoning. Modern antifa doesn’t mean fighting a fascist invasion; it means intimidating people who might have neoliberal or conservative ideas. They are like, if a person is a fascist, then I can attack him/her. So, if I want to attack a person, use my beloved violence, then I just call him/her ‘a fascist.’

Is there a socialist who disagrees with some of your progressive ideas? A fascist. A conservative Christian? A fascist. A feminist that has a problem with some concepts within Queer theory? A fascist. A member of your own cult that you want to get rid of? A fascist. Someone who agrees 90 percent with you, instead of 100 percent? A fascist. Someone who read Hayek? A fascist. Someone who once listened to black metal? A fascist. Someone who had a discussion with Keith Preston but disagreed with him? A fascist. A young boy who likes Jordan Peterson? A fascist. Someone who thinks capitalism works well? A fascist.

The meaning of the word fascism becomes watered down. It’s like the boy who cried wolf. Once there are real fascists in town, the people don’t recognize them anymore, because everything is fascist these days.

as antifascists, I value the work that antifa groups and organizations have long undertaken to safeguard our world from the worst possible horrors.

Antifa, in a way, created Trump and the conservative backlash. Antifa gave the left a bad name, which led to millions of people going for MAGA or libertarianism. But antifa people are often too autistic to understand this. People liked to make little videos about campus antifa kids, who got mental breakdowns, etc. This is what the left meant to a lot of people. Trump benefited from this. I would even say, if the left didn’t have such an enormous bad reputation, then MAGA wouldn’t have been as big as it is.

Modern anarchists are for free speech, but they don’t want someone to express a ‘small evil’. What, even, is a small evil, in their perception? A minor critique of a transgender activist is probably seen as ‘a small evil’ in their stupid world. A somewhat bigger critique of the transgender activist is ‘the big evil’. Reading Malatesta is a ‘good deed’. Reading Mises (to know what he was about) is ‘a sign of dangerous fascism’

As Chomsky pointed out, if you believe in free speech, only for people you agree with, then you don’t believe in it at all. A sentence from Chomsky that they never understand.

The question is. Do we find political knowledge through a process of trial and error? Through free discussion, speech, and experimentation?

Or is knowledge found in the academy, by some autistic antifa people, who will then educate the masses?

Antifa and modern leftist anarchism (masked communism) believe the second.

While original anarchism had the first in mind.

I noticed that the Democratic Socialists of America now have an anarchist wing. Perhaps they can redefine anarchism and bring it back to life. We will see. Let’s dig into it next time. Maybe they are less incompetent than the current leftist anarchists. See it as the next attempt.