mimichuu_

I have nothing to prove to you, and it's clear you aren't listening and just repeating all the memorized talking points ingrained inside. Believe whatever you want.

anarchism has its own history with its own principles and theoretical foundation embedded in either a historically utopian or marxian conception of capitalism

This is what I'm talking about. You don't get to say what "trve anarchism" is because you don't actually know it. Anarchism has nothing to do with Marxism, not even ancoms. They're entirely separate philosophies that view the world in different ways, both use material analysis and both stand against capitalism, but that does not mean they share a common goal, or have common ancestry. Have you actually read any anarchist theory? Or just On Authority and Anarchism or Socialism?

if a so-called anarchist advances politics that preserves capitalism

This once again proves you have no idea what you're talking about. Anti-marxist anarchists are treated as actual terrorists by the state and capitalism. They're among the most militant anti-capitalist groups on earth. The italian FAI bombs prisons while the italian ML party writes about needing critical support for ISIS in a 1998 looking ass website. Not to bring up the FARJ and the anarchists in Iran literally risking their lives as we speak. But you, from the comfort of your chair, disregard them to delude yourself into thinking what makes you comfortable.

But sure, carry on after talking to me, thinking you stand for left unity, and don't worry your pretty little head about all of these groups and people that have done more against capitalism than you or I ever have. They're not real, I assure you. They are surely just LARPing. You and the people you agree with are the one true and only based socialism bringers.

This is the usual tactic of attacking your use of specific words instead of the essence of what you're actually saying. Use inspect element and replace "statist" with the word you'd like me to use instead. I'm not gonna do that for you.

Anarchism isn't baseless or pulled out of anyone's ass. You can disagree with it, but to claim literally no material analysis of the state and/or its consequences, or the relations and dynamics of power and hierarchy exists, is just plain ignorance, no different from a conservative feeling the authority to look down on marxists when they have only skimmed the communist manifesto. If you are interested I can link you to some things, if you are not, just own up to it and say so.

it’s usage is always a signal that its user is either a delusional liberal or an online sectarian not remotely interested in real world politics

That's just what you want to believe.

The proof is in the fact plenty of ML groups successfully organize alongside street level anarchist groups all over the US, which isn’t exactly a country kind to socialists of any kind

You don't have to stop being hostile to MLism to work with MLs. If there are common short term goals, it's most often pragmatic to, especially in countries where there isn't an active leftist threat at all like the US. That does not mean the anarchists are just perfectly fine being buddies with the MLs, nor that when the collaboration is over they won't criticise and call them out again.

Using terms like tankie is a clear cut signal that person is terminally online and as a result couldn’t define anarchism to save their lives

Once again, that's just what you believe. That's nothing but a preconception. You're telling yourself that so you can give yourself a free pass to blindly disregard anyone who says a word, and not have to listen to what they have to say. I've actually organized in real life both with pluralist orgs and with directly anti-marxist groups, full of people who despise all of you. Whether the real life anarchists I've done shit with say "authoritarian" "statist" or "tankie" or just "ML" has no bearing on their understanding of philosophy. Some are very new and don't get things yet, some have been anarchists for longer than I have been alive, and have actually gone to jail for their anarchism.

You can disagree with and even condemn the actions of anti-marxist anarchist organizations just fine, but to try to say that they somehow aren't "the TRUE ones" is just delusion.

Funnily enough it is the statists that most often kill the anti-statists "in real life" but okay, you do you buddy.

I mean I can literally define what an anarchist is because there’s a historical and theoretical structure to anarchism and if it isn’t followed you’re simply not an anarchist

Fair enough, that's true.

Regardless, saying "tankie" indicates nothing of your understanding of anarchist philosophy. You have to actually look at what the person is saying. Some definitely are simply larping (like vaushites and such), some have been committed anarchists for decades. I'm not sure if you're so enthusiastic about left unity you want to believe "anti-tankie" anarchists are "just not the true real and good ones", or if you just want to discredit anyone that uses the word, but regardless it's just a blind blanket statement.

I support the people of Russia and Ukraine in their struggles with war, starvation, loss of home and general suffering caused by the Russian and Ukranian/NATO states, which I do not support because I don't support any state because I am an anarchist.

Who said anything about NATO? Do you just have an imaginary anarchist in your head to be mad about? Do you think an anarchist is someone who watches a lot of Vaush?

You don't get to define what is a "true anarchist" and what isn't, much less exclusively based off of if they use a word you don't like or not. I don't care about your respect, I am merely pointing out a dynamic that constantly happens in this community and those similar to it.

You don’t have to like states to understand that you kinda need one when the dominant mode of geopolitics is relations between states.

You are asking me to accept that a state is necessary - i.e you are asking me to stop being an anarchist. Once again, the only one that has to compromise in this "left unity" is me, and the compromise is so big I have to completely stop being myself. On your end though, there is nothing. This is exactly what I'm pointing out. You're just saying it in nicer words.

Asking anarchists to stop criticising statists and being against statism and vanguardism is big enough of a compromise that you're basically asking them to stop being anarchists.

But funnily enough, no left unity person, no matter how vehement, ever asks MLs to stop believing in or expressing their beliefs of anything. Because MLs think they are "the default leftism", and anarchism is a divergency. So then, left unity would be bringing the divergency back to line.

But even accepting that belief, that's not unity. That's assimilation. Unity would be finding a place in between the two. Which is impossible because means cannot be disentangled from ends. The "anti-sectarianism" of Hexbear is just as you show it is, "MLs, but anarchists can hang out if they shut up". They want anarchists to be useful idiots to them.

Isn't it always funny that even the most ardent left-unity people only exclusively expect the anarchists to compromise?

Means cannot be disentangled from ends.