your attempt at an insult is as good as your object recognition

technically that’s a self-propelled artillery piece :)

Is your definition of success the establishment of a socialist state? Because anarchists are never going to do that.

My definition is the ability to defend the revolution and prevent a counter revolution. Marxists have been able to do this, but Anarchists have not. Incidentally, Zapatistas have actually started creating more central system now as well. Anarchists are free to demonstrate a working alternative to that though.

You don’t actually believe that basically nothing has changed since before the industrial revolution, do you? That seems intentionally obtuse.

You can’t actually address what I said without making a straw man can you?

Last I checked it was Ukraine that was kidnapping victims as western media openly reports. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/15/world/europe/ukraine-military-recruitment.html

Funny how you forgot about the foreign legion, and all the other military support that’s given. Very wow. Such powerful. NATO da best!

Sure, propaganda works as long as it has some material basis behind it. Whose propaganda it is has no impact on that.

yup https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/05/world/ukraine-money-military-aid-intl-dg

DPRK had more impact on the war than all of NATO combined. 🤣

👆 this is what happens when you uncritically guzzle propaganda for three years straight folks

All effective propaganda is based on truth.

this one I think https://www.dafont.com/bradley-hand.font

it’s an authentic reenactment it turns out

To date, nobody has shown a more effective approach to organizing that I’m aware of. All the successful movements follow roughly the same formula. The nature of society has not fundamentally changed in a century, so there’s no reason to think that methods of organization need to drastically change as well. Just look at MAS in Bolivia as a very recent example.

I’m not sure who these MLs are that you’re referring to, but the whole point of ML approach is to do all these things you’re talking about and couple that with education that provides a clear theoretical understanding of what the problems are, and what the solutions need to be. The whole contribution of Lenin to Marxism was to provide the structure for organizing a revolutionary movement.

Sure, in initial stages you’ll have many different orgs. This was the case during Russian revolution as well. However, eventually a single unified vanguard emerges and people get on the same page regarding how to move forward. There is no mechanism for creating a unified vanguard under anarchist approach where there is no central authority by design.

But anarchists tend to be materialists, and praxis often takes priority over just theory.

Are you implying this is somehow different from Marxists?

I generally agree that there’s no one size fits all approach. However, any effective organization needs to be grounded in material reality. Discussing concrete examples of organization like Zapatistas is useful because they are achieving something tangible, but saying that people dreamed up plenty of ways to organize society is not very useful of itself.

The fact that anarchists can’t agree on a unified course of action is a big part of the reason why all these different ways of running society that people have dreamed up remain firmly in the realm of fantasy.

because DPRK is an existing socialist state

It’s an ideological competition between different ways of organizing society. We have a western model of capitalist organization and the socialist model advanced by China. The western model is visibly failing in every regard right now, so there is every reason to expect that more and more countries will look to Chinese model as a result.

A socialist revolution cannot magically abolish relations that have been internalized by a society born out of capitalism. The notion that you can just flip a switch and transition from one type of society to another is precisely what underpins anarchist achievements to date.