Anarchy isn't compatible with socialism since socialism by necessity requires redistribution of goods, often at gunpoint, and often by a body of monopolized force (ie govt). Anarchism only works within a completely free trade structure in which individuals are allowed to create and exchange without coercion from any entity.
Anarchy would allow individuals to join socialist organizations if they chose, but such organizations would be violating the spirit of anarchy if they were to coerce outsiders into joining them.
If you want to read the history of where coercive socialism made the split from cooperative communism, here it is.
Marx was a tool of the name stealers that are the banksters today.
This is why everybody thinks what happened in russia was communism, when it clearly was not.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia
The same reason you know 1984, but not The Iron Heel.
It serves the narrative of the banksters for things to be this way.
Hmmm, I'll have to check those out. Interesting to see a Jack London book "forgotten", I guess everyone has lesser known works.
Personally I prefer "We" to 1984. It's the predecessor of both Rand's "Anthem" and 1984 and imo a much better story.
Here is a way to read We for free.
It must be in demand if they won't let you have a free pdf copy.
I'll have to add it to my reading list.
Once you read the book you will see why it was left off the popularity lists.
It lays out the flaws in the math inherent to crapitalism.
Thankfully I was able to find a copy a few years ago in a used bookstore.
I will admit I'm a full ancap, having been schooled by Bastiat and Mises. But I'm always open to learning different ways of looking at the world.
Lol, ancap.
I was an ancrap, too, until I did the reading required to come closer to mastering the genre.
This book illustrated that I am a communist.
I was not prepared for that, but it explained some things I had read out of the library.
Until I read this novel I couldn't figure out why folks were so anti-crapitalism.
Now I know.
I'm always suspicious of anyone who flat out defines capitalism as "exploitive". Perhaps it's a matter of definition, an ancap would support the trade of goods and services by voluntary associations. There is no hierarchy inherent in free trade, and no coercion. Anything exploitive isn't true capitalism.
Just as a socialist says the Soviet Union wasn't really socialist, ancaps will say the current system isn't really capitalist. It's just a slapping match.
We could probably agree on one thing: real anarchy has never been tried. No matter how members of a society organize their economy, as long as power is concentrated in governments (or corporations, or in the hands of wealthy individuals) economic conditions always wind up exploitive.
Well, almost.
https://listverse.com/2016/06/29/10-instances-of-anarchist-societies-that-actually-worked/
Where it has been working, crapitalusts came and bombed the people back into submission.
Collectives and cooperatives were the way of business before the corporations moved in.
Remember the mom and pop's?
Can we agree that there are no citizens?