Stop calling each other anarchists and replace it permanently with the term Libertarian Communists?

To do something like this would be to back down on principle. Anarchism is anarchism, direct opposition to any outside authority. It's a spineless thing to do, in my opinion. Beside that, not all Anarchists would consider themselves to be Libertarian Communists. A quote:

"There is only one kind of anarchist. Not two. Just one. An anarchist, the only kind,as defined by the long tradition and literature of the position itself, is a person on opposition to authority imposed through the hierarchical power of the state. The only expansion of this that seems to me reasonable is to say that an anarchist stands in opposition to any imposed authority. An anarchist is a voluntarist. Now, beyond that, anarchists also are people and, as such, contain the billion faceted varieties of human reference. Some are anarchists who march, voluntarily,to the Cross of Christ. Some are anarchists who flock, voluntarily, to the communes of beloved, inspirational father figures. Some are anarchists who seek to establish the syndics of voluntary industrial production. Some are anarchists who voluntarily seek to establish the rural production of the kibbutzim. Some are anarchists who,voluntarily, seek to disestablish everything including their own association with other people; the hermits. Some are anarchists who will deal, voluntarily, only in gold, will never co-operate, and swirl their capes. Some are anarchists who, voluntarily,worship the sun and its energy, build domes, eat only vegetables, and play the dulcimer. Some are anarchists who worship the power of algorithms, play strange games, and infiltrate strange temples. Some are anarchists who see only the stars. Some are anarchists who see only the mud. They spring from a single seed, no matter the flowering of their ideas."

- Karl Hess

Quite ironic that Karl Hess was a fruitloop, not an anarchist (although in America, the line is fairly indistinguishable).

Let's hear YOUR definition of anarchism since you seem to be so in the know. Am I calling myself a Hessist? No, I just thought that he summed it up well in that instance. Explain to me in detail how this definition is wrong please.

merriam-webster

Main Entry: an·ar·chism
Pronunciation: \ˈa-nər-ˌki-zəm, -ˌnär-\
Function: noun
Date: 1642

1 : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups
2 : the advocacy or practice of anarchistic principles

American Heritage Dictionary

an·ar·chism (nr-kzm)
n.
1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
2. Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority: "He was inclined to anarchism; he hated system and organization and uniformity" (Bertrand Russell).

Colins English Dictionary

anarchism [ˈænəˌkɪzəm]
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) Political theory a doctrine advocating the abolition of government
2. the principles or practice of anarchists

Kropotkin wrote the first adept encyclopedia definition of anarchism in the eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica in 1910. His definition was fifteen pages long. He started the definition by introducing the word anarchism as:

the name given to a principle of theory of life and conduct under which society is conceived without government - harmony in such a society being obtained, not by submission to law, or by obedience to any authority, but by free agreements concluded between various groups, territorial and professional, freely constituted for the sake of production and consumption, as also for the satisfaction of the infinite variety of the needs and aspirations of a civilized being, In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state of its functions.

Emma Goldman's life long comrade, Alexander Berkman, played a major part in helping to define the word anarchism. He wrote a book called ABC of Anarchism which defined and describes anarchism and is still read today. Berkman wrote, "Anarchism means you should be free; that no one should enslave you, boss you, rob you, or impose upon you. It means you should be free to do the things you want to do; and that you should not be compelled to do what you do not want to do."

The word anarchism is taken from the word anarchy which is drawn from dual sources in the Greek language. It is made up of the Greek words av (meaning: absence of [and pronounced "an"] and apxn (meaning: authority or government [and pronounced "arkhe"]).

Well, Hess seemed to be pretty well right on according to everyone other than you. Please, go on.

I'm not very familiar with Karl Hess, the man, if you could elaborate on this for me, in your own words, that would be great.

(some parts of this post borrowed from http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/defanar.html)

PS WTF does Ron Paul have to do with this? You might as well have mentioned Martha Stewart for all it's relevance.

Is it a habit of yours to ignore all of a post other than the specific part you think you can refute? The dictionary definitions comprised a TINY part of the total post. Anarchism IS anarchism, weather you agree with it or not or weather you would take it seriously or not is immaterial. Anarchism simply means rejection of outside authority, self governing by the people without any sort of authority forcing it's will upon the people, free association and voluntary cooperation. Anything beyond that has been added by people with their own specific views on the best way to reform society. I've said it before and I'll reiterate here that I personally favor communism but that does not mean that anarcho-communism is the only valid form of anarchism as it appears that you believe.

unlike, say, john bowden
whoops, sorry for getting upset, i guess i lost my head there

you understand the difference between argument and assertion right? you're saying nobody can define what anarchism is or isn't, then offering a (meaningless, tautological) definition of your own. in any case, even if you're correct it's irrelevant. this isn't a website for self-defined anarchists but for libertarian communists and pissed off workers. lots, infact most 'anarchists' have politics incompatble with those of the site (eg supporting nationalism, paedophilia, small businesses etc), and i see no benefit in seeking an abstract, false unity with such people.

there are loads of them believe it or not. a few of the soft-nationalist types hang out here on occasion.

Most of the posters here are from the UK so you will probably see words you are unfamiliar with.

I think a lot of the frustration you're seeing on the last couple of posts stems from the fact this very subject has been explained to you several times in a comradely fashion, but you keep coming back with the same assertions about big-tent anarchism. The point is this site as JK said is for libertarian communists and pissed off workers. You don't have to agree with us, but once it's been explained to you please don't come back with the same assertions.

Oh no! We're the herd! We're so like conformist and shit, man!

Your problem starts with the nonsense that quoted "well known anarchists". You quoted Hess. The guy barely manages a wikipedia page, let alone well known familiarity. He's not an anarchist either. Twat is the adjective I'd apply.

"A form of communism"...hmm. Libcom, what's that all about?

Mentalness isn't a word? Er, mentalness simply means being mental. Mentalness IS mentalness weather you agree with it or not.

Why is it so hard for people to do a tiny bit of reading and understand what a site's about before they start posting on it?

Lots of anarchists support nationalism in Palestine, Northern Ireland, the Basque Country, Mexico and so on.

A tiny minority of mental supposed-anarchists support abolishing bourgeois sexual morality, ie - riding kids. As do some Trots. They should be shot on sight.

To be fair, there's a difference between wanting to abolish bourgeois sexual morality and advocating rape.

~J.