it still wasn't Anarchism in general that attacked Lenin, or even a group, just one Radical

No, Lenin was against anarchism on the political level. But not against them being free as long as they do not fight against the Party. They did fight.

Obviously he didn’t AGREE with anarchism, I was just saying that Lenin could with with them while Trot and Stalin couldn’t

Also my computer just had a heart attack, I’m using my phone

And if she alone made Lenin sick and useless, then how did Lenin last four years after this, AND effectively lead the Soviet Union?

Party of Fanny been a group of a lot of different people. Syndicalists, agrarians, socialists. They leaned to the anarchism.

Because the assassination was in 1918, right in the middle of the civil war

Of course it is not a direct responsibility of anarchists you are right.

But either way, I understand your point

Besides, bickering over whether it was anarchists or communists that started all the violence is rubbish

It’s what the capitalist class would want us to do

Have to go brother. My wife needs attention. See you around.

But thanks for the history, Comrade.

You too.

@Firefly#9983 you can keep talking

just ask her boyfriend to keep her company while you're on discord

owo

Wait

hecc

@☭Lil Commie☭ The hell is that?

@Firefly I swear to god, soviet politics were more chaotic than in a barbarian kingdom after the roman empire fell.

Everybody is trying to gain power somehow, and they do whatever they can to gain that power.

I understand communists and why they choose to be

economy is a deep artifical matrix

but communism has not proven to be better

i mean Russia went without a famine from Stalin until the flag was raised for the last time\

Yugoslavia was great until TIto died

In my opinion, Communism is only as effective as the guy in charge. You get somebody like Lenin, Stalin, or Mao in power things are pretty cool. Get a cuck like Gorbachev and everything sucks and we have capitalism again

I kinda disagree that Stalin and Mao were cool guys. I admire their achievements, but I hate their authoritarianism.

Stalin can't be that bad if more than 60% of russians right now still like him

>stalin and mao

>pretty cool

alright,ignore how they killed the most humans in history

I agree @Deleted User that they had some pretty bad authoritarianism, as an Anarchist I see that as pretty bad. But I think their achievenments were pretty cool, not necessarily themselves.

also @Shwiani, Stalin mainly killed Kulaks (which is good) and some anarchists (which is bad),but most humans in history? far from it. The statistic that says "Communism Killed 100 Million people" is an exaggeration from the Black Book of Communism, which concluded it was 94 million. The source itself was exaggerated too. In fact, the publishers of the Black Book of Communism went back and said that they greatly exagerrated their sources to drive up the numbers! For instance, they considered anybody arrested to be "a death under communism". Furthermore, the population of Russia actually INCREASED during stalin's reign from 1922-1952, from 120 million to 140 million. If 20 million were supposedly "killed under communism", then wouldn't that population increase in fact be a DECREASE? And on the topic of famines, the industrialization policies under Stalin and Mao actually ENDED famines in their respective countries-- famines which plagued the nations for hundreds of years.

So to say that "they killed the most humans in history" is a capitalist lie

Now do I agree with Stalin and Mao?

No, I think industrialization and re-militarization of thier nations could esaily be achieved under Anarchism, without resorting to Totalitarianism.