/lit/ - Literature

>>19317947
>fail to understand the class basis of the state, and view it as a source of exploitation and domination independent of the material base,
This is true, you don't have to be an anarchist to acknowledge this. Every state is the depotism of the many; a workers' state is no more tyrannical than a liberal one because they utilize force to socially engineer individuals into being organs of their rule. Marxists are naive, and they want people to stupidly believe the state will just "wither away", when time, and time again has shown Marxists will hold onto their power, and create yet another autocracy. Marxoids simply use sophistry to conceal the fact they are just greedy, power hungry, violent, and exploitation with power just as much as their opposition could be. This is why they typically do false equilvances that downplay their mass murders and crimes against humanity to paint their tyranny in a better light.
I would say anarcho-communists and Marxists want the same thing. I would say Anarchists do not have anything in common with anarcho-communists or Marxists though because the average anarchist is a criminal, a bandit, a rebel, vagabond - they men are who are anti-normian every step of their existance, and are for the complete nullification of any social contract at will.
>(2) let the perfect become the enemy of the good, submitting to abstract principles
This is true for both Marxists and Anarchists - both reject working, compromise with the powers at bay for some strange political utopia, and never want to actually set their actions in concrete conditions. They just blabber on about their theories, and never show any ability to organize workers, they don't win elections - they just reminisce about political movements they never were a part of, but think simply because they adopt a political label from twitter they're some big shot revolutionary all of sudden - its just larp.
>Anyways, weren't some of the early fascists influenced by Proudhon?
Fascism has always had a connection with Anarchism because Bakunin's hatred of Jews, along with Proudhons, and Stirner's rejection of modernism has been a potent weapon for them. Many early anarchists were fascists like Mussolini. Not really surprising. National syndicalism, fascist violence borrow quite a bit from anarchist thought.

>>19166169
>>19166201
>" On the other hand, the piping of the Socialistic rat-catchers who wish to inspire you with foolish hopes is continually sounding in your ears: they tell you to be ready and nothing further, ready from this day to the next, so that you wait and wait for something to come from outside, though living in all other respects as you lived before—until this waiting is at length changed into hunger and thirst and fever and madness, and the clay of the bestia triumphans at last dawns in all its glory. "
>"Complaining is never any good: it stems from weakness. Whether one charges one’s misfortune to others or to oneself — the socialist does the former; the Christian, for example, the latter — really makes no difference. The common and, let us add, the unworthy thing is that it is supposed to be somebody’s fault that one is suffering; in short, that the sufferer prescribes the honey of revenge for himself against his suffering. The objects of this need for revenge, as a need for pleasure, are mere occasions: everywhere the sufferer finds occasions for satisfying his little revenge."
>"It is disgraceful on the part of socialist-theorists to argue that circumstances and social combinations could be devised which would put an end to all vice, illness, crime, prostitution, and poverty.... But that is tantamount to condemning Life ... a society is not at liberty to remain young. And even in its prime it must bring forth ordure and decaying matter. The more energetically and daringly it advances, the richer will it be in failures and in deformities, and the nearer it will be to its fall. Age is not deferred by means of institutions. Nor is illness. Nor is vice."
>"Socialism is the fantastic younger brother of
almost decrepit despotism, which it wants to succeed ; its efforts are, therefore, in the deepest
sense reactionary. For it desires such an amount
of State power as only despotism has possessed,
— indeed, it outdoes all the past.."
Even in Zarathustra Spoke - he condemns socialists as tarantulas, and idols of state power, not worthy of his project. There is nothing leftist about Nietzche.