"Revolt, oppressed brother! Rise up against all State power! Destroy the power of the bourgeoisie and do not replace it with that of the socialists and Bolshevik-communists.

Do away with all State power and drive out its champions, for you will never find friends among them.

The power of the statist socialists or communists is every bit as noxious as that of the bourgeoisie. It may even be more so, when it conducts its experiments with the blood and the lives of men. At this point, it does not take long to revert surreptitiously to the premises of bourgeois power: it no longer has any fears about having recourse to the worst of means, lying and deceiving even more than any other power.

The ideas of socialism or State communism become redundant: it no longer avails of them, laying hands instead upon any which might help it to cling to power. In the last analysis, it merely uses new means to perpetuate domination and become more cowardly than the bourgeoisie which strings the revolutionary up in public view whilst Bolshevism-communism murders and strangles on the sly."

— Nestor Makhno, The Struggle Against the State and Other Essays, 1926

“to *seize* power is to get a hold of an existing, top-down power center and the endemic structural problems that come with it, like how to *keep* that power one must pursue the strategic interests of its previous holders as well as guard against future seizures which necessitates authoritarianism.”

– ben chambers

c'mon man

"The root issue lies in the failures of the electoral democracy system itself. The feelings of betrayal and disillusionment stem from the statist left’s historical failure to challenge the spectacle of electoral politics, which serves to maintain the class system at all costs."
https://freedomnews.org.uk/2024/10/07/the-far-right-the-left-and-the-trap-of-electoral-politics/

how about breadtubers, do they count?

😄

"What does this science of Marxism teach? What does it claim? It claims to know the future. It presumes to have such deep insight into eternal laws of development and the determinant factors of human history that it knows what is to come, how history will continue and what will become of our conditions and forms of production and organization.

Never has the value and meaning of science been so ridiculously misunderstood. Never has mankind, especially the most oppressed, intellectually deprived and underdeveloped part of mankind, been so mocked with a distorted mirror-image."

— Gustav Landauer, Call to Socialism

"We do not find this Marxist notion of what anarchy is acceptable, for we do not believe that the state will naturally or inevitably die away automatically as a result of the abolition of classes. The state is more than an outcome of class divisions; it is, at one and the same time, the creator of privilege, thereby bringing about new class divisions. Marx was in error in thinking that once classes had been abolished the state would die a natural death, as if through lack of nourishment.

The state will not die away unless it is deliberately destroyed, just as capitalism will not cease to exist unless it is put to death through expropriation. Should a state be left standing, it will create a new ruling class about itself, that is, if it chooses not to make its peace with the old one. In short, class divisions will persist and classes will never be finally abolished as long as the state remains."

— Luigi Fabbri, Anarchy and "Scientific" Communism, 1922

"If one has to talk about contradiction in terms, it must be not between the term communism and the term anarchy, which are so compatible that the one is not possible in the absence of the other, but rather between communism and state.

Where there is state or government, no communism is possible."

— Luigi Fabbri

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/luigi-fabbri-anarchy-and-scientific-communism-by-luigi-fabbri

'Lenin says that the dictatorship will be “the proletariat organized as a ruling class”. But this is a contradiction in terms! If the proletariat has become a ruling class, it is no longer a proletariat, it is no longer a non-possessor. It means it has become the boss.

Furthermore, if there is a ruling class, it means that there are dominated classes; that is, classes that remained or became proletarian. The class division would continue to exist. And the only explanation for this riddle is that the ruling class will be constituted by a minority of the proletariat, which will have dispossessed and subjugated the current bourgeois minority, politically dominating and economically exploiting all the rest of the population, that is, the old dispossessed and the majority of the proletarians who will remain as such and will remain in subjection.'

— Luigi Fabbri, State and Revolution (On Lenin's Book)

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/luigi-fabbri-state-and-revolution-on-lenin-s-book

"The inherent tendency of the State is to concentrate, to narrow, and monopolize all social activities; the nature of revolution is, on the contrary, to grow, to broaden, and disseminate itself in ever-wider circles. In other words, the State is institutional and static; revolution is fluent, dynamic."

— Emma Goldman, My Disillusionment in Russia, 1923

'A revolution on a world scale will take a very long time. But it is also possible to recognize that it is already starting to happen.

The easiest way to get our minds around it is to stop thinking about revolution as a thing—“the” revolution, the great cataclysmic break—and instead ask “what is revolutionary action?”

We could then suggest: revolutionary action is any collective action which rejects, and therefore confronts, some form of power or domination and in doing so, reconstitutes social relations—even within the collectivity—in that light.

Revolutionary action does not necessarily have to aim to topple governments.

Attempts to create autonomous communities in the face of power (using Castoriadis’ definition here: ones that constitute themselves, collectively make their own rules or principles of operation, and continually reexamine them), would, for instance, be almost by definition revolutionary acts.

And history shows us that the continual accumulation of such acts can change (almost) everything.'

– david graeber, fragments of an anarchist anthropology