By Cake Boy

Anarchism is destroyed by leftism, according to Bob Black.

When I was in anarchist circles, there where a lot of ex communists within these circles. . The thing with Communism is that it’s an absolutist theory. They are right, and the rest of the world is wrong. There is wrong and right, and they are always right. There is the truth, and there is illusion, and they are always on the side of truth, somehow.

Leftist cultists take this with them, within their anarchism, when they join anarchist movements. They also take the vanguardism with them into anarchism. There are people who are ‘better developed’ than others, and they will lead. In Marxism, this is open; in their anarchism, it’s hidden.

The call-out culture thing is Marxist. There is a vanguard, this vanguard knows everything, so they will have to discipline other people. People who are ‘transphobic’ or ‘fatphobic’ or whatever. A hierarchy is assumed.

Classical liberalism was about finding a truth together, finding what works in dialogue. Postmodernism was about rejecting truth altogether. Marxism is about a top-down perception of truth. According to Lenin, truth is found in academia, and the masses have to learn from him.

Modern anarchism often has this Marxist framework of truth. The absolute truth is made by people who studied in academia.

Another aspect they copied from Marxism is their so-called focus on ‘the revolution’. Small leftist anarchist parties/cults think they will destroy neoliberal nation-states. A small vanguard of ‘Queers’ will bring about anarcho communism. The fact that they believe this shows you how childish they are.

Another aspect of Marxism was, in a way, its patriarchal nature. Communism/Marxism was always about ‘serious men’ who ‘knew everything’ and who would ‘save the world’. The same goes for modern leftist anarchism. Serious young men, saving the world from all kinds of evils, using scare tactics and intimidation.

I can’t talk about all the anarchism in the 19th century. But if you read Voltairine de Cleyre’s work, it’s more about finding systems that work. Voluntary organisation, experimentation, free speech, etc. This is, in a way, a more classical liberal kind of framework. Its a fluid kind of anarchism. Not an end goal, but a way to find solutions to problems, in the here and now.

I think modern anarchism is infected by both Marxism/Maoism and neoliberal academia. Maoism gave these kids their narcissism, and academia learned them everything about ‘Queer identities’.

What is the impact of modern leftist anarchism? They have sites where they write their articles; some people read them, but it has no impact. Sometimes, some ‘Queer’ kids squat a house, which they get kicked out of within hours. This is their political meaning. Squat a house, and get kicked out of it, and repeat it

When there is a nationalist/right-wing party, the anarchists protest against it. Without any success, these nationalist parties still grow and grow and grow. Everyone ignores the anarchist/Queer protests, or laughs about it

These actions don’t solve anything for anyone. Its just a performative kind of action, showing other ‘Queers’ how radical you are.

Modern leftist anarchism is a small bunch of young men who cosplay some kind of revolutionary struggle.

The age of anarchism was the 19th century. Then it was vital, breathing. Now it seems death to me. I think Keith is one of the few actually competent anarchists. Who thought about a program that could, in theory, work? A Realpolitik version of anarchism. But leftist anarchists aren’t about Realpolitik. They would rather live in their fantasy.

If I’m into politics, I would rather join movements that actually exist and play a role. I would rather join Bernie Sanders thing than join the local ‘Queer anarchist’ collective. Although there are a lot of things of Bernie Sanders i don’t agree with. I would also rather join the libertarian party, and then try to sort of push it into a more capitalist, critical/georgist direction. In these big political vehicles, my actions would actually matter. Within leftist anarchism, it’s just all a shameful waste of time.

Bob Black says, when you do anarchism, base it on the Stirnerite foundation. I think he is right that your anarchism will become more realistic than. It won’t mean you will ‘save the world’, but it will give you ways to act. I mean, within a 21st century framework, Black’s anarchism is more useful than the utopian/so-called revolutionary anarchism of leftists.

To most Western leftist people, this Stirnerite perception goes too far. Its too far away from their idealist/calvinist cultural roots.

But Black is right that it’s a more consistent anarchism (whether you like it or not).

Still, I often think that anarchism isn’t a useful word anymore. The word means: these small leftist cults, or it means some postmodernist academics, who are not understood by most people. To the general public. It’s not seen as a political force, or position, or movement. It’s not strange that people would rather join a union or a socialist party. These socialist movements are not perfect, but at least it’s something. Socialists can mobilize around a thousand people to fight for better wages or lower rents. Anarchists can mobilize ten people to fight against ‘the Terfs’ (whatever that may be).

Over time, words lose their meaning. Liberalism once was a vital, new thing. Now it’s about the power elites. Anarchism was once a serious option, now it’s a quasi-religious subculture

Do we use words when people don’t understand them anymore, when they lost their depth? Their impact? It’s a difficult question, actually. How to communicate ideas, with what kind of tools? When do these tools change all the time?

You use words to describe the political realities we live under. Anarchism no longer corresponds to these realities. It only exists as a concept, as a ‘spook’.

I saw that the leftist anarchist organisation in this country now has 5000 followers on Instagram. Still, never ever happens; they never do anything politically. The only thing they do is fight each other, even sometimes literally fight each other, over nonsense topics. This person misgendered that person, this person said this to that person, this person is a Terf, this person is a fascist.

In theory, 5000 people could organize strikes, as anarchists did in the 19th century. But they never do, because they can’t work together. They all squabble all the time, over identity issues. They aren’t even able to have a good-faith conversation. And they actually know they can’t get their so-called ‘revolution’. Somewhere in their hearts, they know they are fooling themselves, and it’s all just a big LARP event.