People who are familiar to anarchism will have noticed the ramblings and contradictory dividentems betwixt the two frontiers of the anti-statists.
I’d like to first ask the two communities if they are Collectivism Anarchists, allowing different districts to run in the ideas of AnCap AND AnCom, as well as any other organisational paradigm, or Individualist Anarchists, and as you can guess, this entails the denial of freedom for other districts to be organised in they way they see fit for themselves.
Neither opposition appears to see the clear contradictions in the Individualist paradigm. Anarchists, latin: No Ruler, using self-endeared power and authority to deny others their freedom to live as they choose? I feel it’s appropriate to use the wise words of Ed Lover right now:
"C’mon son! Get the fuck out here with that shit!"
If one is Anarcho-Collectivist there is no fallacy, right, or possibility for one to infringe upon anyone else’s rightful decision to live in a district that supports their ideas.
I am neither condemning nor supporting any camp of the Anarcho communes; It is brilliant beyond words that there are so many supported variants of the anarchist paradigm; what I do condemn is the notion that ‘only being our way is the right way’. Anarchism is about focusing on people’s liberties and happiness, and by denying people the decision of what type of community they wish to live in and contribute to is a direct contradiction of its’ societal movement. It will only lead to replacing the state with another state.
We, Anarchists, cannot afford to divide ourselves over something so menial. The very concept is about uniting, so let us; only then do we hold the power to liberate the world of tyranny and enslavement.