Also this article is easily dismissed because lets say Marxist thepries do give quite reasonable reasons to dismiss the questions brought up in this article for instance:
Why has attendance at your anarcho-communist theory discussion group meetings fallen to an all—time low?
The reason is because anarcho-communists are rare to begin with, and are dismissed as "utopian" by every other ideology, even most radical ideologies view anarcho-communism as "utopian". and for those of you who don't know what anarcho-communism is, its a communist who believes in going straight from a capitalist society to a communist, usually because their belief in that classes can be abolished right away, and the state and money can be abolished. Also another reason is that with the collapse of the USSR, many are convinced that "communsim" does not work, even though it is debatable that it was even socialist much less communist.
Why has the oppressed proletariat not come to its senses and joined you in your fight for world liberation?
This too is also easily dismissed, because one thing about societies is that they teach to follow the norms of whatever society that is, and so on and so forth. Also Marxism for example teaches that in almost every society there is a ruling class, and their ideas are supreme, example is that capitalism is usually preached as being free-market, one can easily see that this of course largely favors businessmen over everything else. Also not everyone sees it our way, there are multitudes of other ideologies and such. Also before when I stated that radicals lack unity too is also there too, because we cannot "join forces" and focus on our common enemy. Also for example, such changes have usually taken centuries, the entire world is still not capitalist, there are isolated fuedal system still operating, and some even tribal. Also there have been areas of a proletarian revolt, the only problem is that the "better" ones, which stayed more on course to radicalism usually failed from supressment of usually capitalistic states, the Paris Commune of 1871, was probably the closest ever to achieving socialism, but was bombarded by Thiers army from Versailles and then a few tens of thousands were massacred by the army, rather unfortunate. Also another path was Russia, which did stay on the path to socialism for a few years, but eventually failed with the coming of bureaucracy and dictatorship later, especially those of Stalin and the Stalinist theories and policies. Though that did have unfortunate results, it still should be considered important, because of its impact and what we could learn from it.
They must want to be ground under the heel of capitalist imperialism; otherwise, why do they show no interest in your political causes?
Easily dismissed too, propaganda has a large part to do with this. E.g. most cannot accurately define socialism or communism or Marxism, much to do with schooling still teaching that they're all one-party dictatorships where the state owns and controls everything. Which sounds to me closest to fascism.
Why haven't they joined you yet in chaining yourself to mahogany furniture, chanting slogans at carefully planned and orchestrated protests, and frequenting anarchist bookshops?
Many protests happen, though corporate media loves to downplay any radical activity.
Why haven't they sat down and learned all the terminology necessary for a genuine understanding of the complexities of Marxist economic theory?
We do, its also due to the fact that media again doesn't truely represent or listen to us.
How can we do positive things for others if we ourselves do not enjoy our own lives?
Because life is to be lived, not enjoyed.
Most of the rest of the questions were filled with too much bull to be answered at all.
