People were finding our marxists security forces miles behind the front lines were more armed than the actual troops fighting the war

What?

I think anarchists had much less power and resources. They had to submit to Marxists at that point because they had no opportunity by themselves. In a different situation I would agree they could fight for their cause. But in this situation submission and cooperative agreement with other progressive forces would be more beneficial for everyone. Instead they fought Republican and Marxists and failed catastrophically all together as losers.

They were this armed, explicitly as a means to reverse anarchist actions

And take their arms

It was only later they started shooting everyone as the war was clearly lost

And notice "the communists" weren't turning on eachother

The marxists were purging radical popular ideologies

@Firefly#9983 They would have lost decisively if they still did cooperate, afterall, they did cooperate in the first months of the civil war, but were still beaten time and time again by franco and the falange.

They werent beaten time and time again by Franco, it took years.

@Comrade Skeltal Is that to say that communism from the soviet union WASN'T radical?

And partiality on behalf of the embarking powers

@Deleted User They did provide some resistance.

In spain, no

It wasn't radical

@Firefly#9983 Some, sure.

They literally reverse anarchist collectivization

@Comrade Skeltal What do you mean?

I'm not talking about Russia at all

Even though in Russia they did the same thing

There was a period of counter-revolutionary action

On behalf of the marxists in Spain

What?

Doing things like passing laws

Marxist communists sure as hell are radical.

That limited and reversed past actions of collectivization

Rex, hush for one moment.

Hell no, I won't.

You're not listening and arguing something entirely besides the point

Nobody cares about what you think of the marxists, I'm arguing actions in spain.

@Comrade Skeltal I am arguing because I do not agree with what you are saying, I do not give a damn whether or not you care about it.

You're being stupid, This isnt something to "agree" Or "not" agree with.

I'm arguing the policies they enacted

@Comrade Skeltal Yes, it is.

No, no it isnt

Yes, it is.

They literally sought to reverse anarchist collectivization

And break up the horizontal organizations

They also gave land back to capitalists

@Comrade Skeltal That is contradictory to anarchism however.

@Comrade Skeltal The pure purpose of anarchism is to decollectivize, and to decentralize, what you are stating, is some contradictory reverse anarchism.