@alines Anarchists are inherently communists.

Marx wasn't present during the french revolution, therefore meaning that the worker strikes were not socialist or marxist in their nature, which is what communism and anarchism is.

uh-huh.
just keep jumping to these absurd conclusions without actually analyzing the actual beliefs of anarchists and communists

@alines What? In marx's definition of communism, the state is dissolved in the end, which is what anarchists want.....

anarchists and communists have actually grown to hate each other quite a lot

Do you not know anything about marx?

we don't want the dictatorship of the proletariat, we don't want a transition, destroy the state now while you still can

@alines I bet that will turn out great, look at how pol pot and the ukranians turned out, they had to use authority to actually go to anarchism, and the efforts completely failed and left mllions dead.

pol pot was not an anarchist, you retard

And with guevera, his people actually turned on him, handed him to authorities, who then riddled him with bullets.

and by that logic, pinochet and montt were socialists because le military dictatorships = socialism lol

@alines No, he very much was, after all, why did he put so much effort into supporting it?

@alines Did I ever claim that dictatorships were inherently socialist? Or was it >LE IMPLIED?

where did you even hear that pol pot was an anarchist?
and the ukrainian anarchists were crushed by the soviets, idiot

part of the reason we hate communists

pol pot was ML, you fucking liar

https://www.google.com/amp/s/espressostalinist.com/2011/10/27/pol-pot-was-not-and-is-not-a-communist/amp/

>Supported anarchists

more like
>used anarchist talking points.
how did he suuport the anarchists?
what anarchists did he have contact with?

were there any anarchists in the country?

@alines He supported the anarchist groups in cambodia, who in return promised support to him.

NAMES

and just because he "supported" anarchists doesn't mean he let them have their way

if he really was an anarchist, he would have dissolved the state immediately and set up the platform for municipalism

Communist party of kampuchea, AKA the communist and anarchist party.

>coalition of mutual defense between anarchists and leninists equals pol pot was an anarchist

It proves very much in the end that pol pot supported and provided aid to them, meaning that he was in the end, a pro-anarchist.

okay, i need to see actual evidence that there were anarchists, in the party, reports of contact and aid, or i'm gonna mark this as a conspiracy theory, because "he decided not to target anarchists, and he used anarchist talking points, therefore pol pot was an anarchist"

i am not finding anything corroborating your lunacy

if there isn't even evidence that there were anarchists in cambodia, then i'll just discard your rants altogether

I already provided you with some, and the ultimate conclusion we arrive at, is that pol pot supported the anarchists in campodia, and provided aid to them, which ultimately resulted in the anarchists merging with the communists, and fighting for the same government, (ironic I know).

a web article saying he used anarchist lines to win support?

more than that

PROOF that he contacted the anarchists and provided them with aid

PROOF that there even was an anarchist party in cambodia at the time

that would only proove he didn't attack the anarchists, mind you, not that he was a closeted anarchist

If he DIDN'T provide support to the anarchists, then why were anarchists commonly in the government, and why did they fight side by side, even up until the guriella movement fell in the 80's?

give me ONE name

just one

Communist party of kampuchea, AKA the communist and anarchist party.

i have never heard that anywhere else