Anarchists are often presented as being combative and anti-social, while their doctrine is co-operation and sociability. Peter Kropotkin explained the split between Anarchism and Marxism of the 1870′s in terms of cultural differences between Northern Europe and Southern Europe. France, Italy and Spain were the strongest centres of Anarchism while Marxist intellectuals were strongest in England, Holland and Germany. Ireland would identify more strongly with southern Europe for several reasons one of them being a sense of passion from the heart or E.Q rather than I.Q.
The Anarchist-Marxist split runs along the lines of Anarchism essentially being the concept of most people naturally wanting to be good to others when the incentives in the current system, that encourages people to be arseholes are removed, then tradition, custom and the natural desire to be good to family, friends and neighbours will regulate society. Marxism on the other hand believes, people need to be controlled by a dictatorship of the proletariat, without which Marxists cannot visualize a society functioning or maintaining cohesion.
Anarchists could perhaps do things smarter by attraction rather than promotion. Anarchism is mostly seen in terms of smashing the state, class warfare, propaganda of deed or as Bakunin said, “The passion for destruction is a creative passion.” However this is at odds with our greatest strength, which is our community focus, instead of smashing the state, perhaps we could consider building stronger communities, which no longer need the state and that we do propaganda of deed by actually building these communities?