Is there is a history of backstabbing in Anarchist/Communist relations?

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

In the past, Communists haven't been... unconditionally supportive of Anarchists. We've had some feuds, some rounding up of the Black-bloc occurs by the Red-bloc in Spain, Russia, other places. So, I ask people here, where the two meet, is there a history of back-stabbing in the history of Anarchist-Communist relations?

I know we're on the same side, but authoritarians and libertarians have that sort of history. Do you see what I'm talking about, historically speaking?

Also: Can we move past it, or will Anarchists always be persecuted even by Communists?

[Tjis]

Eh, many anarchists are communists too. Also there are non-anarchist communist currents that have never backstabbed an anarchist movement. So your poll is a bit badly formulated.

Leninists (both the "antirevisionists" and the "revisionists") did backstab anarchist movements yes. The spanish civil war is a famous example, but I think that the actions by Lenin and Trotsky against the makhnovists in Ukraine are a far better example of this. Mostly because this shows that They too were authoritarian bastards who only wanted a "revolution" as long as they were in charge. They waged war with them, fabricated false documents to slander them, and when they realized they couldn't do without them they made an alliance, only to end that alliance with the arrest and execution of many of the members of the movement (and also many peasants who never fought in the black army, or really just anyone they didn't like) as soon as the alliance was no longer necessary.

[F9]

Ehmm, i dont have problem with myself.Im an Anarchist and a Communist and i can assure you so far my relations with myself have been great and really cooperative.:D
Anw taking as granted that with communists you are talking about "authoritarians", it really depends.There are verious ideological tendancies that some are closer to Anarchism, some really away, which makes the chances of support more or less accordingly.
But in any way, when the time comes for the revolution things cant be preddicted, and things can get really different at time.If we have a close relationship now, there are high possibilities of them to be destroyed when the revolution bustrs or the opposite, no connections at all and connect under the revolution.
We can only make speculations, but for me, even now, there are some tendancies of communism i just say a straight no to build those connections.

Fuserg9:star:

[Jack]

Lets see:

1. Trotsky attacked Makhno in the Ukraine.

2. Lenin banned the anarchist press and criminalized anarchist groups

3. Stalin threw anarchists in the Gulag

4. Castro banned anarchist groups and publications

5. Backstabbed us in Spain

[Kukulofori]

There's been a history of backstabbing between genuine socialists and shitty pretend socialist Bolshiveks.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Yes, there has definitely been feuds between Anarchists and Communists and sadly I still see the two groups as not getting along perfectly. I may not agree with them ideologically, but I have nothing against Anarchism. I just see it as another way down the same path.

[Black Dagger]

I removed the poll because it was pointless/loaded. Also i renamed the thread, in future can you please label your threads in a more helpful manner, for your benefit as much as anyones - people may avoid threads with vague titles like 'just a poll'.

TBH i'm tempted to trash the thread. Basically you have an opinion, 'anarchists were backstabbed in history' - then you added a poll hoping that people would agree with you, then at the end of that you spun another question... sort of the first genuine question, except that is loaded too (you imply they are already being backstabbed or have been). This is not what the learning forum is really about, if you have a genuine question about the history of anarchist/marxist movements, controversies or conflicts between anarchists/marxists in the past then just ask it - otherwise i'm not really sure what learning element or question is here.


I just see it as another way down the same path.

How Zen of you :p


Eh, many anarchists are communists too. Also there are non-anarchist communist currents that have never backstabbed an anarchist movement. So your poll is a bit badly formulated.

Exactly.

[9]

You might think about changing the Learning Forum description: "A place for beginners and learners to ask their political questions about theory or specific issues. Don't worry if you think your questions are stupid or pointless, ask away. Learning is not stupid and is never pointless."

I removed the poll because it was pointless

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

I removed the poll because it was pointless/loaded. Also i renamed the thread, in future can you please label your threads in a more helpful manner, for your benefit as much as anyones - people may avoid threads with vague titles like 'just a poll'.

TBH i'm tempted to trash the thread. Basically you have an opinion, 'anarchists were backstabbed in history' - then you added a poll hoping that people would agree with you, then at the end of that you spun another question... sort of the first genuine question, except that is loaded too (you imply they are already being backstabbed or have been). This is not what the learning forum is really about, if you have a genuine question about the history of anarchist/marxist movements, controversies or conflicts between anarchists/marxists in the past then just ask it - otherwise i'm not really sure what learning element or question is here.

While I admit that I did have a preconceived notion about the poll (obviously I did vote for the part I believed) I could argue that last time I checked the 'Yes' option was in the lead, so taking down the poll is kinda restrictive. I agree that I could have been a bit more specific in the title of the thread though, but since I'm new it was 'just a poll'. I plan for other

However, my question was genuine, it was about the opinions of other people in this site. As you said, we can ask about controversies, which I did. I did want to see what the people thought.

But if you could restore the poll I'm sure it won't cause a forum civil war. I was just asking a simple question about the perspective of historical relations, and included my own ideas on what happened as I have the right to do.

[Black Dagger]

You might think about changing the Learning Forum description: "A place for beginners and learners to ask their political questions about theory or specific issues. Don't worry if you think your questions are stupid or pointless, ask away. Learning is not stupid and is never pointless."

Er... learning is not stupid and is never pointless.

But fallacy, trolling etc. - yup i'm pretty sure they are. I deleted a poll because it was pointless, 'do you agree with my highly biased and fallacious framing of this issue? Yes/No?' Please elaborate, where is the point in that? I don't agree that this thread has anything to do with 'learning'.



While I admit that I did have a preconceived notion about the poll (obviously I did vote for the part I believed) I could argue that last time I checked the 'Yes' option was in the lead

Yes because a bunch of anarchists jumped onboard your anti-communist bandwagon? I'm not really sure why you think people agreeing with your opinion makes it valid? Or indeed, validates the poll? Obviously if you walk into a room full of anarchists and start shouting about the fucking leninists and how they've betrayed us over and over etc. you might get a few cheers. The learning forum is not about that, you're not asking a question because you want to learn or because you don't know the answer - you think you already know the answer! So why are you posting this in learning? Wanting to hear other people agree with you (or flame you) is not really learning. This forum is designed for people with genuine questions, who need to understand something better not loaded opinion polls.


so taking down the poll is kinda restrictive.

Actually polls are generally taboo in the learning forum, the two don't usually go together. People generally learn through discussion not by how many votes are cast in one direction or another.



I agree that I could have been a bit more specific in the title of the thread though, but since I'm new it was 'just a poll'.

It's not a big deal, i'm just saying if you want people to read your thread and respond it would make sense to have the topic title be a question that relates directly to the topic you wanna discuss. Well not necessarily a question, just something that gives an indication of what the thread is about.

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

Er... learning is not stupid and is never pointless.

But fallacy, trolling etc. - yup i'm pretty sure they are. I deleted a poll because it was pointless, 'do you agree with my highly biased and fallacious framing of this issue? Yes/No?' Please elaborate, where is the point in that?

Hm?

Yes because a bunch of anarchists jumped onboard your anti-communist bandwagon? I'm not really sure why you think people agreeing with your opinion makes it valid? Or indeed, validates the poll? Obviously if you walk into a room full of anarchists and start shouting about the fucking leninists and how they've betrayed us over and over etc. you might get a few cheers. The learning forum is not about that, you're not asking a question because you want to learn or because you don't know the answer - you think you already know the answer! So why are you posting this in learning? Wanting to hear other people agree with you (or flame you) is not really learning. This forum is designed for people with genuine questions, who need to understand something better not loaded opinion polls.

Actually polls are generally taboo in the learning forum, the two don't usually go together. People generally learn through discussion not by how many votes are cast in one direction or another.

It's not a big deal, i'm just saying if you want people to read your thread and respond it would make sense to have the topic title be a question that relates directly to the topic you wanna discuss.

Okay, if polls aren't allowed then I'll let this slide. ;)

Anyways, what do you think Black Dagger, has there been a history of sucker-punches thrown by Communists against Anarchists who were willing to be allies against the established order?

[Black Dagger]

has there been a history of sucker-punches thrown by Communists against Anarchists who were willing to be allies against the established order?

Yes, of course. But i would say marxists, not 'communists' - since i am not alledging that it was anarchist communists who outlawed the anarchist press, jailed, exiled and executed anarchist militants across the world. In the 20thC anarchists (and later trotsykists) were the arch-enemy of a powerful international backed by an authoritarian super-power which openly boasted of how it would treat 'the anarchists' if it could get it's way (see Soviet press during Spanish civil war). It it is not even a matter of historical debate that at points, Communist states, parties and governments moved directly against anarchists, against workers to secure their own authority (though i haven't read a defence of Stalin and the 'communists' in Spain, other actions are explained away by the 'desperate times' say of the red/white war).

[9]

Er... learning is not stupid and is never pointless.

But fallacy, trolling etc. - yup i'm pretty sure they are. I deleted a poll because it was pointless, 'do you agree with my highly biased and fallacious framing of this issue? Yes/No?' Please elaborate, where is the point in that?

Well presumably most of the questions asked by anyone who is not already "learned" on a given topic will be uninformed for the simple reason that the person asking is not informed about the given topic, hence posing questions in the Learning Forum. It's a bit of a catch-22, wouldn't you say? If someone is not adequately informed about a topic, it sort of follows that their questions will also be uninformed or misinformed. I was under the impression that this Forum was for precisely those kinds of questions. And regardless of your inference that the poster had an ulterior motive for asking the question the way he/she did, he/she is clearly asking it in the Learning Forum because he/she wants to learn about it. And assuming we genuinely do want to encourage learning here, I would think a respectful refutation of any factual errors in the poster's question would be the appropriate response, as opposed to trashing the post, which seems quite blatantly counterproductive if not also reactionary in nature.

[Black Dagger]

I'm not really sure why you're continuing this?


Well presumably most of the questions asked by anyone who is not already "learned" on a given topic will be uninformed for the simple reason that the person asking is not informed about the given topic, hence posing questions in the Learning Forum. It's a bit of a catch-22, wouldn't you say? If someone is not adequately informed about a topic, it sort of follows that their questions will also be uninformed or misinformed. I was under the impression that this Forum was for precisely those kinds of questions. And regardless of your inference that the poster had an ulterior motive for asking the question the way he/she did, he/she is clearly asking it in the Learning Forum because he/she wants to learn about it. And assuming we genuinely do want to encourage learning here, I would think a respectful refutation of any factual errors in the poster's question would be the appropriate response, as opposed to trashing the post, which seems quite blatantly counterproductive if not also reactionary in nature.

You're missing my point, i don't think the OP is 'uninformed' - that's the point - otherwise i would agree with you. I was being critical because i don't think the thread is genuinely about 'learning', it's not learning when you know something already and then ask people if they agree with what you think; the thread was never framed from the POV of a 'learner' - someone unsure of something seeking information, from the get-go the question had already been answered by the topic poster. I didn't trash any posts, i removed a fallacious, loaded poll that added nothing to the thread (it was itself counter-productive). I'm not really sure why you have a problem with attempting to keep the learning forum politically balanced and about learning as opposed to political back-slapping? I'm not trying to discourage people from asking questions, but the learning forum is not designed for opinion polls. It was pretty clear to me from the OP that mmmeee0 himself already knew about the history of 'backstabbing' between marxists/anarchists - he even mentioned examples of it...

[Communist Theory]

Well if we achieve actual Communism it's pretty much Anarchy.