This seems the most logical place to post this. If you wish to remove it or move it elsewhere please do (it is massively off-topic, after all).
I will respond to the second one first, mostly because it is shorter and I've had a very long, very shitty day at work (as a wage slave this is something I often feel).
The basic thrust of the article, that anarchists should unite against our common enemies rather than fight between ourselves, is one that I wholeheartedly agree with... except when one faction does something that is massively detrimental to the others, or when the ideologies diverge to such a significant extent that they barely have anything in common anymore. I genuinely think that both are true of post-leftism (yes, I realize that post-leftism is a generalization and that I am attributing elements of one faction to all of them).
I cannot condone the concept of "collateral damage". I think the taking of a life should be an absolutely huge decision and should only be done in the most extreme circumstances. I cry bloody murder when states take lives, even if they executed somebody who could be conclusively proven to have committed terrible atrocities I would denounce the state's response. So how can I possibly condone the killing and maiming of wage slaves and the absolute lowest rung of the authoritarian systems we oppose? A postal worker, a campus policeman, a computer shop owner... are these really the people we should be targeting? I don't think of any of them as "legitimate targets" and I don't think many other people would. That was cold-blooded murder and it was done in the name of a system many have been living and dying to work for for over a century. That murdering bastard just set us back decades. We've got to try even harder to shrug off that image of the bomb-throwing anarchist.
I also think that post-leftism differs from anarchism in the way that anarchists are anti-hierarchy (be it the state, the corporation, the church, or whatever, except where circumstances can justify it*), while post-leftists are anti-civilization, anti-work, anti-technology, and so on. I genuinely don't see what is wrong with civilization that isn't due to other forces (yep, you guessed it, it's the state, the corporation...). They warp everything they touch, owning it, selling it, marketing it, branding it... is it any wonder civilization is shit? But take all that away, allow people to freely contribute as they wish and take as they need, and there is no reason to believe that civilization couldn't be everything we're meant to believe it already is. It could be the advancement of human knowledge, the exploration of new ideas, the constant improving of the lives of the people who build, maintain, operate, and live in that civilization.
You can call this utopian but I think it is genuinely possible. Historical incidents such as the Paris commune, the early days of the soviets, the CNT/FAI, and various other "events" (for want of a better term) have shown that people don't need to be forced to do things, they are intelligent enough to understand that things need to be done, and the fact that they are not being metaphorically (usually) whipped by a boss, and that they have a genuine say in their work they do and the conditions in which they work just makes it all the easier to convince them. As does the fact that they get to take according to their needs, not just according to whatever their boss thinks he/(she) can get away with.
Also, the fact that post-leftists spend so much time sniping socialists and activists just demoralizes and derails efforts to improve the lives of people who desperately need help. If you don't want to get involved, fine, but this is too important to fuck about with.
One last thing, it is ridiculous to think you take on the capitalist system in open combat. Have you seen how much the American government spends on it's military? Have you read enough history to know the brutality they are very prepared to show to anyone who poses a threat to their way of life? They are doing fucking fantastic from all of this and if they have to order people killed then they'll order them killed and smile the whole time. The only chance we have is through numbers, and setting off bombs is quite a shitty recruitment method.
Sorry this post has been long, rambling, irrelevant, off-topic (mostly even off the off-topic it was originally meant to be). Some of you may understand when I say that it has been a very long few weeks. I may get round to reading the other article later but right now I want to disengage for a while (more than I already have).
* This is a tricky concept to define exactly, but sometimes people can be incapable of making (reasonable) decisions for themselves (babies are an obvious example) and so it is genuinely in their own interest for one or more other people to make those decisions, until such a time as they are able to do so themselves.