There is a versus. Atleast for platformists, as they want to achieve a dominant position in their regional anarchist movement or even aim to make their organization the only anarchist organization.

I dont know in the synthesist side has similar goals

But how do you actually connect with other folks when you do not want to follow / expect any social norms at all? Maybe I am not getting your point, but why is sharing an agreement on how one wants to relate to each other as members of an organization authoritarian? Its not like you are forced to join that group.

Sorry if I totally miss your point

Many anarchist share the ideal of preconfigurative politics, as in how we organize the revolution has a big influence on the society after the recolution.

Using this ideal as a guiding post, we should look how both currents propose to organize people, ressources and people. More details on synthesis and platform can be found in the anarchisf FAQ.

For me, when just looking at those two, the synthesis approach is more to my liking as is closer to what I would like society to look like and it seems to hone skills necessary for cooperations despite disagreements way more than the platform approach with its mandatory unity.

In practice I dont know of any noteworthy and actually relevant synthesis organizations currently or in the past, even when they were/are pretty big. It also seems to be less favored in my region of the world currently, where platform (and similar, especifismo) approaches are springing up all over the place.

You might be interested in Hitler seemingly only dating underage girls, which later turn up dead:

Was Adolf Hitler a Pedophile? Breaking Down the Nazi Leader’s Perversions

Well cool. Seems like still nobody is up to the task of actually proving OPs statement correct. Which is all I ask for

Ah yeah calling people reacrionary is always how discussions end when the goal is to present as the most progressive.

I am aware. Where you not defending OPs statement?

No? I just did the same as you, I pointed to a singular data point that supported my believe even when I know it doesnt show the full picture and while I am aware there are others that could contradict my point.

Because this argument is not about facts at all, its about what you believe how 8 years of Harris would have gone, even if you do not actually know it and will never know it.

Fuck off with legal / illegal deportations. All deportations are bad, probably all include suffering and you do not really seem to be able to grasp or acknowledge that.

15 years later (the posted video seems from 2010l, sub.media themselves provided answers to the questions asked in the video:

Together with Peter Gelderloos they released a video series that highlights tactics and strategies to deal with ecologial collapse.

Its worth a watch and makes one read Gelderloos book The Solutions are Already Here: Strategies of Ecological Revolution from Below