Edit for clarity: I'm not asking why the Tankie/Anarchist grudge exist. I'm curious about what information sources - mentors, friends, books, TV, cultural osmosis, conveys that information to people. Where do individuals encounter this information and how does it become important to them. It's an anthropology question about a contemporary culture rather than a question about the history of leftism.
I've been thinking about this a bit lately. Newly minted Anarchists have to learn to hate Lenin and Stalin and whoever else they have a grudge against. They have to encounter some materials or teacher who teaches them "Yeah these guys, you have to hate these guys and it has to be super-personal like they kicked your dog. You have to be extremely angry about it and treat anyone who doesn't disavow them as though they're literally going to kill you."
Like there's some process of enculturation there, of being brought in to the culture of anarchism, and there's a process where anarchists learn this thing that all (most?) anarchists know and agree on.
Idk, just anthropology brain anthropologying. Cause like if someone or something didn't teach you this why would you care so much?
Yeah the bad blood is real, but also almost entirely vibes based. Like for most people, the worst red-black conflict they've faced is probably a shitty roommate or someone they hated at an org.
That's why I'm so curious. Somehow both tendencies have carried this grudge for well over a century across cultures, languages, economic systems, technological paradigms. That is soem fascinating culture.
Hexbear probably wasn't the right place to ask bc I think it's a pretty solidly ml stronghold at this point despite a nominal anti-sectarian rule. Like trots and leftcoms aren't going to have a good time and, ask we've seen in the thread, there's a lot of bad blood with anarchists. Which sucks. Someone else was saying we need a red/black synthesis and I agree. Excluding the hyper-individualists who I wouldn't even consider political due to their extremist anti-community stance, i think we reallty, really need each other very badly right now and this cultural baggage of animosity that isn't really materialist anymore is an obstacle.
I'm thinking some of the animosity may be that online anarchists may not represent tendencies on the ground. Like I see a lot of hyper-individualists who call themselves anarchists but really seem to be anti-culture, anti-community extremists, but I don't see a lot of the food not bombs, community defenders, kitchen witch, or community garden anarchists i've met out in the streets. The difference is striking. Idk if it's just me and whom I'm encountering or if it's a bigger thing, but my experience with anarchists out doing stuff is very different from my experience with reddit, twitter, or bsky anarchists.
I'm very mistrusting of anyone online that calls them self an anarchist. I spent some time on some anarchist subreddits some time ago. They were pretty toxic and would throw out reasonable opinions because they didn't align with their personal theory. The ones I've met in person are reasonable compassionate people that are more likely to take people's opinions and view them as valuable. I sometimes picture the real difference between the theories as a top down vs bottom up approach. Marxist states shouldn't exist when communism is achieved, and that's pretty anarchist. It's more about how to get there. We shouldn't be fighting about that.