Is this the praxis I keep hearing about?

Propagandize me bitches

Probably a lot of fake anarchists paid (or duped) to give anarchism a bad name, to give people the wrong idea about what anarchism is, to turn them away from mutual freedom for each and all, back into the arms of daddy corporatarchy government.

Like that malarch in this thread, saying they wanted to kill 37% of everybody, because anarchism. `_`

This might not be what you meant, but I've found 90+% of the 'online left' regardless of ideology to be far more ultra-left, alienated and toxic than most people on the ground, even including the drama kiddos on college campuses and split rival organizations. To everyone I highly recommend finding people in real life, if possible.

As opposed to internet communists who are well known for not being insufferable

"We should have One Big Revolution!"

"Noooo! We should have a bunch of itty bitty revolutions!"

"Okay, fine. Let's do Trotskyism as a compromise."

"Sure thing brow, just turn around real quick"

Of course it would but see only my ideology gets that!

The problem is Trotskyists and Marxist-Leninists and anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists and …

/s

The left has to rally around all sorts of nuances to reach agreement. The right basically just has one thing: fear.

Ignoring that there are many instances of MLs and anarchists getting along great, Marxists in general (including MLs, which are the most numerous among Marxists) are aligned with anarchists against capitalism and fascism, but have entirely different analysis on what to do about them. Anarchism is primarily about communalization of production and distribution, while Marxism is primarily about collectivization of production and distribution.

When I say “communalization,” I mean anarchists propose horizontalist, decentralized cells, similar to early humanity’s cooperative production but with more interconnection and modern tech. When I say collectivization, I mean the unification of all of humanity into one system, where production and distribution is planned collectively to satisfy the needs of everyone as best as possible.

For anarchists, collectivized society still seems to retain the state, as some anarchists conflate administration with the state as it represents a hierarchy. For Marxists, this focus on communalism creates inter-cell class distinctions, as each cell only truly owns their own means of production, giving rise to class distinctions and thus states in the future.

For Marxists, socialism must have a state, a state can only wither with respect to how far along it has come in collectivizing production and therefore eliminating class. All states are authoritarian, but we cannot get rid of the state without erasing the foundations of the state: class society, and to do so we must collectivize production and distribution globally. Socialist states, where the working class wields its authority against capitalists and fascists, are the means by which this collectivization can actually happen, and are fully in-line with Marx’s beliefs. Communism as a stateless, classless, moneyless society is only possible post-socialism.

Abolishing the state overnight would not create the kind of society Marxists advocate for advancing towards, and if anything, would result in the resumption of competition and the resurgance of capitalism if Marx and Engels predictions are correct.

None of this was specific to Marxism-Leninism, but Marxism in general.

This seems like the most likely scenario in the US. America is full of idiots raging for the machine