So, Anarchists are allowed to exist in ML societies so long as they become or pretend to be MLs. Gotcha.

No, and that's clearly a bad-faith reading. If the Anarchists refuse to work with the Marxists, to the point of directing the revolution against itself, then that's an issue.

So you join a anarchist movement which has momentum, and along with direct action, you try to set up vanguard parties and shit?

I don't see why you think Marxist analysis driving decision making requires the use of strategies like Vanguard parties. Vanguardism is a strategy, not the practice of Marxism.

Not at all. But I do think you're trying to avoid the thrust of my argument by simply restating your position as a fact and taking us 4 replies back.

I disagree.

Without common praxis, there is no unity. This is why anarchists are in unity with each other even though syndicalists do syndicalist stuff, and mutualists do mutualist stuff etc. Because our multitude of direct action complement each other in prefiguring the system. You know what doesn't complement anarchist praxis and more often than not, counters it? ML praxis!

Hexbear Anarchists would disagree, though I won't speak for them.

Because cultists prefer to not venture out of their communities, and discourage interacting with people who don't already share the same worldview.

You're guilty of the same, you've cultivated a community generally hostile towards Marxists while outwardly saying you don't have a problem with them. I think it's better to own up to your biases and how they have impacted your community, rather than try to present dbzer0 as uniquely open to discussion.

On that note, I don't think there's any real discussion to be had going forward with this convo, we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on what constitutes what type of praxis nor what left-unity looks like, and therefore I don't think it makes sense to continue wasting what I assume is a nice Sunday for the both of us.