That's technically correct. However, you seem to imply that repression against « communists » is not repression against « anarchists ». It definitely is. One could argue there's repression against anarchists without repression against communists (though i would say that's wrong because many of the deported/executed « leftists » under Lenin were not anarchists) but i've never heard a single make the opposite argument.

I explicitly did not name the zapatistas. But you are correct there are different aspects to their movement, with the peasant communities being more horizontal, and the EZLN being more hierarchical.

There's certainly elements of both in the zapatista movement. But « claiming » people from one's computer would be a weird, colonial state of mind.

Not entirely correct. The zapatista movement is not an anarchist movement, nor is it a marxist movement (it's a zapatista movement). But to say they « disavow » anarchism is a stretch. See also A zapatista response to « The EZLN is not anarchist »: « There are anarchists in our midst, just as there are Catholics and Communists and followers of Santeria. We are Indians in the countryside and workers in the city. We are politicians in office and homeless children on the street. We are gay and straight, male and female, wealthy and poor. What we all have in common is a love for our families and our homelands. What we all have in common is a desire to make things better for ourselves and our country. None of this can be accomplished if we are to build walls of words and abstract ideas around ourselves. »

Still, there are a lot of anarchists in Mexico, not just Chiapas. But in Chiapas, too.

Most anarchists are not online, or at least not active online. There's an inherent defiance in anarchist circles against imperial / extractive technologies like computers, which is less common in leninist circles where cybernetics has been assimilated (eg. under Allende, or in science fiction like Asimov). To be fair, i have met quite a few leninists who were profoundly techno-critical and did not wander on online forums.

So there's already this biased sample explaining things a little. But "non existing anarchist forces" in the 3rd world is a stretch due to your information bubbles. Can't say they're exactly thriving and on the verge of destroying the State, but there's strong anarchist communities in Sudan, Chile, Syria, Chiapas, Indonesia…

I'm not demonizing anyone. China is in many regards not worse than France. You're idolizing, though, claiming it's somehow better because the marketing for their social war is different than here in the Global North. Today is may 1st, we're commemorating the anarchist martyrs of the 8 hour workday, and here you are promoting a State-capitalist nation where 996 is commonplace. Don't be a puppet, fight with the people against oppression whatever its forms and colors!

Tell that to the peasants and working class of Xiancun evicted to make way for gentrification. A State is a State. The interest of the States are rarely aligned with that of the people.

Yeah, sure. Just like Port-au-Prince is a french city, Grozny is a russian city, Standing Rock is USA land, Kobane is a syrian city, and Jerusalem is an Israeli city, right. You're just defending colonial empires. That's sickening.

The question is not what the carrot is. It's what the stick looks like if you refuse. Here in France the government is also very happy to provide you with a nice apartment when they kick you out to destroy a neighborhood. That doesn't mean there isn't going to be a violent eviction if you refuse, after many years (though not every time).

You would be surprised to learn that many people don't want to leave their house, even if on paper a newly constructed building looks better. Is it okay for the government to decide for you? In my opinion, no. And neither China nor the West is any good on that point.

OK and if you refuse to move because that place is your place, what happens? Violence happens. That's not a racist trope, that's how expropriation works in the western world, too. Does that make it OK to evict people to gentrify neighborhoods? In my opinion, no.