-
• #252
I have a question to self-confessed anarchists. What does being an anarchist actually entail? Is it just that you harbour anarchist thoughts and ideas? Or is it about protesting and sticking it to the man whenever possible? I genuinely don't know. I spent most of my teenage years hanging out in fantastic grotty pubs listening to punk rock and considering myself non-conformist and against the establishment. I still think it was a major influence for me, but now my energy is more focused on being positive about the good stuff and less down about the bad. I definitely lean toward the 'left' [no leaning! - Ed], whatever that is, but I accept that my view of the world is pretty limited and that there has to be room for others. I'm always sceptical of anarchism because it seems to offer no particular answer ultimately, beyond doing the best by yourself and those close to you (which is how I want to live anyway). As a political doctrine... well, it isn't one, is it? It's anti-political. Without a destination societally, it seems to automatically default to a loose, inward-looking personal choice which is quite the opposite of the revolutionary, subversive image that it's associated with. What do you think about this? I'm genuinely interested.
Personally I hate all the labels (anarchist, conservative, liberal, right-wing, left-wing etc etc etc) because, in my opinion, it leads to crude simplifications. I think Tynan once referred to the pope as a mammal. It's an idea, a fact even, that still makes me giggle whenever I think about. I'm happy to be a mammal; anything on top of that is a label or a way of coming to terms with myself in a simplistic, communicable way. This is handy for belonging to a group (which is what I'm starting to think it's all about), but ineffective is summarising a rather complicated assortment of emotions and opinions. I also think it's strange when people claim that they belong wholeheartedly to a specific, delineated ideology, as if human thoughts and experiences aren't littered with contradiction. Each situation has its own context, and it's satisfying to learn and try to make sound, informed decisions unburdened by dogmatic, self-conscious labelling.
-
• #253
You were Velo Libre as a teenager.
Ha ha.
-
• #254
Lol, fuck off!
-
• #255
Is "automatically default" a tautology?
-
• #256
Lol, fuck off!
Anarchism.
-
• #257
I'm happy to be a mammal
at least you won't be nibbled by any vegans
-
• #258
the internet is a bourgeois conspiracy. :p
-
• #259
TCP-IP, not TAP-IP
-
• #260
superprecise-i agree with what you say about focussing on positives etc and not labelling.
I only call myself an anarchist because it provides an umbrella of idealogies which I feel most able to identify with.
There are many and varied groups that call themselves anarchist, all with their own working methods, processes, and aims. The only principles that we all agree on are autonomy (the right to make your own decisions, hold your own opinions and act how you wish, which I think answers most of the critiscism above), solidarity with others, and action.
There is a huge amount of thought that goes into most groups that I have been involved with, and it's always a balance between theoretical debate and taking some action. Some people like to take action without thinking too much about it because they feel that something is wrong, others like to debate and write a lot about their motivations, while taking a bit less action. I think you have to find a balance between the two.I just think that anarchism is about thinking freely and critically, and defending what you care about, while proposing alternative ways of doing things (and no, that doesn't have to include living in a fucking bender)..
Most people on this forum will be feeling the effects of a government pushing through hardline austerity measures. Yet there still doesn't seem to be a general feeling of doubt about what the government is doing. Corporate tax avoidance costs the country £25bn per year. I suppose the question is really not why people choose to be anarchists, but why those who criticise them are not looking into their motivation for action. -
• #261
at least you won't be nibbled by any vegans
It's the humanitarians you've got to worry about.
-
• #262
I think the problem is that most of the people who do claim to be anarchists seem to have absolutely no idea what it actually means. This is reinforced by the laughable fact that many of them seem to have left-wing (sorry for the label) ideals when it comes to redistrubution of wealth and state, or whatever organisation control. Many even seem to support big state ideals such as the wealfare system and, even more contradictory, can be seen supporting various union rights and student demos about state sponsored fee payment. Most are basically conused socialists who like the edgy label
Modern capitalism and a large state certainly isn't free but the fact that most of the anarchists seem to miss is that true anarchy would be closer to, or quicky result in, laissez faire capitalism. Multinational companies with the power they have now would be difficult without state controled trading markets and the idea of public ownership through shares with PLC.
For the kind of organisations suggested here to last any time would be highly unlikely since one of the members would soon realise that he/she was contributing the most and would see an opportunity to get more for their families. Probably the only system that could ever work has to have a way to take advantage of the natural human trait to be concerned mainly by the safety and health of their family and immediate friends. Then you can let people act as they would naturally but take money in the form of taxes when they earn more....oh hang on...
-
• #263
-
• #264
teome
Anarcho-capitalism?
-
• #265
cliveo
Exactly. I see that as the truest way of suggesting a small state (small as poss or even no state) which could be maintained. All these other ideas of people helping eachother out community groups seem to be much closer to the kind of thinking that leads to socialism or even communism which we all know has resulted in either too much blood or terrible conditions for any of the poor people caught up in idealistic dreamers plans.
Any form of true anarchy would be extremely likely to result in anarcho-capitalism. It just isn't possible to maintain a system that is completely against human nature, eg socialism, communism, and lefty-anarchy (oxymoron)
-
• #266
In 1979, just before the election that gave us Thatcher, a slogan was painted on a wall in Grosvenor Square, Mayfair:
"Anarchists Vote Tory!"
At the time I thought it an example of ironic humour. Was I worng?
-
• #267
I have a question to self-confessed anarchists. What does being an anarchist actually entail?
A stateless society.
Is it just that you harbour anarchist thoughts and ideas? Or is it about protesting and sticking it to the man whenever possible?
No, nothing to do with "sticking it to the man", it's a political philosophy.
I genuinely don't know. I spent most of my teenage years hanging out in fantastic grotty pubs listening to punk rock and considering myself non-conformist and against the establishment. I still think it was a major influence for me, but now my energy is more focused on being positive about the good stuff and less down about the bad.
Not entirely sure what your misspent youth has to do with anarchism, but grotty pubs, punk rock and "the bad" play no part.
I'm always sceptical of anarchism because it seems to offer no particular answer ultimately, beyond doing the best by yourself and those close to you (which is how I want to live anyway). As a political doctrine... well, it isn't one, is it?
I am guessing at this stage you are taking the piss, or at least just playing devil's advocate ?
Are you being serious, do you actually know what anarchism is ?
Personally I hate all the labels (anarchist, conservative, liberal, right-wing, left-wing etc etc etc) because, in my opinion, it leads to crude simplifications.
Agreed, most people (or even everyone) who claims to stand squarely in one camp or another is more likely to have a range of views that cross party / ideological divides.
-
• #268
I just think that anarchism is about thinking freely and critically, and defending what you care about, while proposing alternative ways of doing things (and no, that doesn't have to include living in a fucking bender)..
I lolled ! : )
Most people associate anarchism with a gang of middle class student pricks waving an anarchism flag and chucking bricks through MacDonald's windows, this is the same thinking that considers communism to be wholly about Che Guevara t-shirts and cool berets.
-
• #269
Cliveo
Yeah you were wrong. What is ironic I that most anarchist are actually so close minded to understand or confront and accept the fact that a Tory leader was trying to reduce the size if the state. Lessen state control, lessen control of powerful union organisations, free up the economy to anyone, enable competition in business and traditionally state-owned industries and increase public ownership of properties and land. This together with lower taxes to enable people to control their own lives and make their own decisions. Objectives of anyone who is a genuine anarchist, although further change would be desired.
She was elected and given power to carry these things out but it just proved how difficult it is to carry something like those off. It went too fast and many people were badly affected. The goal was certainly libertarian which, at the extreme, goes towards anarchy. I can't imagine anyone who understands what anarchy would mean to call themselves an anarchist other than to se edgy. Libertarianism is pretty much a tamed, more realistic and acheivable form of anarchy which many people would subscribe too.
It is redicilous and sad that so many anarchist are actually quite far to the left of the political view and are much closer to communists and socialists, which has well and truly been shown to be a complete disaster every time it is attempted.
Sadly people still don't get what it was about. -
• #270
I lolled ! : )
Most people associate anarchism with a gang of middle class student pricks waving an anarchism flag and chucking bricks through MacDonald's windows, this is the same thinking that considers communism to be wholly about Che Guevara t-shirts and cool berets.
Is there a secret friendly face of capitalism we don't know about too?
-
• #271
I think the problem is that most of the people who do claim to be anarchists seem to have absolutely no idea what it actually means. This is reinforced by the laughable fact that many of them seem to have left-wing (sorry for the label) ideals when it comes to redistrubution of wealth and state, or whatever organisation control. Many even seem to support big state ideals such as the wealfare system and, even more contradictory, can be seen supporting various union rights and student demos about state sponsored fee payment. Most are basically conused socialists who like the edgy label
100% agree, it was hilarious to watch the various anarchists on the recent student fees protests, a little like seeing a group of slightly confused vegans on an EDL march.
I also agree that anarchism seems to attract edgy socialists who think anarchism is just some sort of hardcore anti-authoritarian idea that might sit well with their more radical socialist mores.
Modern capitalism and a large state certainly isn't free but the fact that most of the anarchists seem to miss is that true anarchy would be closer to, or quicky result in, laissez faire capitalism.
I would say that is exactly the aim (rather that it 'resulting' in laissez faire capitalism).
(well perhaps for anarco-primitivism, they will just end up eating each other's shit)
-
• #272
It is redicilous and sad that so many anarchist are actually quite far to the left of the political view and are much closer to communists and socialists, which has well and truly been shown to be a complete disaster every time it is attempted.
Sadly people still don't get what it was about.Much of what we call anarchism is based upon anarcho-communism. Anarcho communists played major roles in both the Russian Revolution and the Spanish Civil War. In both cases the Marxist Leninists sought to liquidate them as soon as their purpose was achieved.
Don't stamp anarcho communists with the failures of Marxist Leninism.
Good book on the subject is Emma Goldman's account of her two years in post revolutionary soviet union and her growing disillusionment with the sovirets. That and anything by Orwell concerning the Spanish Civil War.
-
• #273
I've always thought the fascists do scrub up well.
-
• #274
I've always thought the fascists do scrub up well.
Many totalitarianists use design to sell their intellectually bankrupt ideas. Much as Coca Cola and McDonalds do to sell their revolting products.
-
• #275
I've always thought the fascists do scrub up well.
I normally vote for the prettiest party
As a representative of the media I am pretty frustrated by Teleflorist's allegations. The media? Reporting lazy assumptions? Tsk.