Anarchism

yes. and no, it’s not the bare minimum. You perceive a very specific definition of anarchism

I don't, actually. I accept a wide variety of how people approach what it means to be anarchist. But a person does need to actually know what it is in order to self-label as such. Otherwise you will find yourself surrounded by status quo-reinforcing liberals, even capitalists, using the term and confusing everybody.

and act like anything that’s not exactly what you know/do is just not anarchism anymore and is just wannabe edgy liberals.

If there is no threshold then the term means nothing. Trump could not call himself an anarchist and be correct.

How can you even fence so hard a term such as anarchism? just let people be and believe what they want.

I don't think I'm being a very big stickler to say that to call yourself of an anticapitalist political tradition you need to know the basics of what it is. Of course anyone can believe and say what they want, and anyone can be wrong, and anyone can be counterproductive. It is better to become a critical participant that understands their claimed political tradition, at least at a basic level. And it can be harmful to claim to be of a political tradition and then act in full opposition to it, which is easy to do when you don't know what it is.

you’re now just this conservative guy screaming in fear because the world is not what is used to be when you were at your 20s.

I'm screaming in fear?

cool down. It’s okay to be an anarchist just online, and it’s okay to take “irl actions”, as you call it, and not see yourself above everyone else.

It is cool to be an anarchist just online, but you will find it very difficult to become one unless you know the basics of anarchism and have done practice.

This is why online "anarchists" are often counterproductive. Getting hyped for NATO. Saying that someone is a cop because they asked another person to not pick a fight with someone right this second. Going all-in on capitalist electoralism for the greatest empire on the planet. Being a billionaire grifter that sells electric cars.

Rather than assign those reactionary things to anarchist, it is more correct to understand them as not anarchist at all.

Well it's definitely just not mine.

So, we perceive, there are actual, material barriers blockading the way. These must be removed. If we could hope they would melt away, or be voted or prayed into nothingness, we would be content to wait and vote and pray. But they are like great frowning rocks towering between us and a land of freedom, while the dark chasms of a hard-fought past yawn behind us. Crumbling they may be with their own weight and the decay of time, but to quietly stand under until they fall is to be buried in the crash. There is something to be done in a case like this—the rocks must be removed. Passivity while slavery is stealing over us is a crime. For the moment we must forget that we are anarchists—when the work is accomplished we may forget that we were revolutionists—hence most anarchists believe the coming change can only come through a revolution, because the possessing class will not allow a peaceful change to take place; still we are willing to work for peace at any price, except at the price of liberty.