All Blog Comments

Nate - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Nate — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:37:38 +0000

SDV, what anarchists organized against workers' rights in the UK? As I tried to indicate above, I think 'anarchism' is a pretty broad term and there's a great deal of disagreement among different perspectives within anarchism. As a result, I don't find reference to "anarchism" alone without reference to particular texts or individuals or organizations very useful because for any substantive would-be-descriptive claim about anarchist political views there are probably people who don't fit the descriptive claim yet who describe themselves as anarchists. Any claims that are broad enough to include all or even most self-described anarchists are likely to express only very general truths.

sdv - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

sdv — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:45:31 +0000

AL, To some extent the differend is about what constitutes the local, what we humans are accountable for - the local for me is a sphere approx 50 K miles in diameter. It is simply not correct to think that an industrial or even a post-information society with nearly 9 bn members(est 2050 figures) can exist in discreet villages, in small communities. And it is precisely the 'trial by community' which I regard with absolute horror - there have been many societies which the model has existed in before, participatory democracy has a long history with as many dark moments as there are good ones. But in one sense I think what you say proves my central point about anarchism, left anarchism being unable to address the concerns raised - for where in your response does it demonstrate that it is anti-capitalist rather than anti-state ? In truth however I have no problems with an anarchist collective existing, as long as it exists within a worldwide system of human and non-human rights which the collective must exist within and accept. I after all do not have to surrender my freedoms and live there do I.

anodyne lite - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

anodyne lite — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:45:33 +0000

But SDV, with all due respect to the important points you raise, anarchism does not have as its goal the establishment of a "society" of the type that it seems you are describing. For example, in the case of child abuse within an anarchist collective, there would be no social imperative for martial law, or vigilante justice, but instead, the public response would more likely resemble a directly democratic "trial by community" where a punitive arrangement would be meted out, if and only if the accused was found guilty. I've noticed that it is very difficult for people to imagine a collective form of organization where communities are small enough and tight knit enough that what we think of as "policing" becomes nearly irrelevant. I know it's difficult for me, as well, but I try to widen my imagination to include these hypothetical scenarios.

sdv - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

sdv — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:44:21 +0000

"one of the key parts of anarchism is precisely to construct an anti-statist, anti-capitalist community" To be anti-state does not necessarily mean that one is anti-capitalist, we already know that these are two very different and unrelated concepts, to suggest that together these concepts can result in a ecologically sustainable society is unproven. The point is that the sustainability, (arriving at a natural contract with the local space we inhabit ) is more important than the anti-state or anti-capitalist part of the equation - it is I would suggest upto the anarchist theorists to demonstrate what anti-state might mean. It is one thing to consider the replacement of capitalism which is 400-500 or so years old with a more sustainable socio-economic system, it is entirely another thing to suggest that the State which has probably existed in some form or other since the first industrial revolution 10K years ago can be so easily supplanted. Incidentally I am not relating the the concept of the State to the European Logos, because it is after demonstratably universal, if it has to go then it must be understandable how it will go and what the consequences will be. Even great state theorists and critics such as Henri Lefebvre emphasize that the state they are writing about and against is a particular form of capitalist state, whereas to be anti-state suggests something very different. I thnk I've already said enough to explain why it is necessary that anarchists theoretically demonstrate why they are anti-capitalists. So then why is an Anarchist lifestyle, Anarchism itself a bad idea ? Because in a direct participatory democracy everybody has to be a jurist, a police person, a politician - everybody has to continuously observe their neighbour for infringements of the local code - everybody has to be an insufferable person, an informer or reporter. In an anarchist society everybody has to take on the tasks of surveillance and repression. This will be necessary because we exist in a finite world in which every single person would be accountable to ensure that 'the tragedy of the commons' is not repeated. Not just the simple cases of taking the neighbour who is abusing his daughter to the court (there are no police, no social services there is only the community) – but the serious ones of preventing the neighbour from destroying the commons. In a world with the state we are free - with the specialised police, prisons, politicians we have the ability to ignore the illicit and terrible behavior of the people next door. We can ignore our next door neighbours and get on with the serious stuff of science, engineering and philosophy. Personally I suspect that science, engineering and philosophy emerge, or at least have a strong relation to the social contract with the state, which is referenced above...

sdv - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

sdv — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 08:40:18 +0000

Kvond Because Neo-liberalism, especially in the form I used it references a specific set of liberal social and economic policies as a response and a critique of other liberal policies.

Nick - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Nick — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 01:14:46 +0000

I don't quite see why you believe anarchism and zero-growth are incompatible, or why an anarchist lifestyle is a bad idea, but maybe you could say more on that? I think the example you give is only a particular example and not really representative of the anarchist movement in general (anarchism as opposed to libertarianism). From what I know, one of the key parts of anarchism is precisely to construct an anti-statist, anti-capitalist community - which is to say, a way of living together that is sustainable and not oriented towards infinite economic growth or hierarchy. Anarchist forms of community may not be able to be transplanted into a post-development society without alteration, but it certainly seems to provide a number of important principles for any such society.

Kvond - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Kvond — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:35:28 +0000

Why not just "reactionary swine"? L)

sdv - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

sdv — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:21:34 +0000

That's because it's a better descriptive term than 'Thatcherism', 'Reaganism' or 'monetarist supply-side economics' amongst many others - personally I'd have been theoretically happier if we used the more accurate term 'liberal' but for good social and historical reasons Americans find it difficult to accept this use of the term. I believe Foucault used the term in 1979 but I wasn't at the lectures and am unsure how literal Graham Burchell's translation is.

Kvond - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Kvond — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:06:22 +0000

I just did a quick search and "neo-liberal" has passed the phrases "economic crisis" and "Obama's dog" as the most used words in the blogosphere...I think we are getting somewhere.

sdv - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

sdv — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:37:44 +0000

Good grief, left-anarchism as a lifestyle choice. When anarchistlibertarians organized against unions and workers rights in the UK, supported the neo-liberal counter-reformation and helped establish the current social and economic problems. This was also a lifestyle choice ? I would not dream of arguing against the sentiments expressed earlier for we have to recognize the problem with 'economic growth' and the lack of 'democracy' but there is no justification for thinking that anarchism, anti-statism and zero-growth are necessarily compatible. Critically before they can become so it will be necessary to address the 'tragedy of the commons' and establish the limits of democracy - if limits are not established then the tragedy will be infinitely worse next time. What sort of limits ? You might start with enshrining 'wild law' into the argument.

Nick - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Nick — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:19:46 +0000

I think that's an important point, AL. It reminds me of this thing I was reading recently about the idea of 'overdevelopment' - basically the point that past a certain level, economic growth doesn't contribute to overall happiness in any significant sense. So the desire for economic growth at any cost ultimately ends up counter-productive because of the massive inequalities it creates. The alternative then is to organize society towards new ends by taking away the economy's central role (gasp!). New, sustainable lifestyles are a key part of that shift, and it'd be interesting to see what anarchism can offer for a post-development society.

Kvond - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Kvond — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:03:59 +0000

AL, This is a really good point in particular to the West where "lifestyle" becomes an intensive nexus for political/economic change. There are already existing "anarchistic" band organizational styles functioning (they are not states without a State, they are simply modes of organization). Additionally, anarchism provides a kind of personal lifestyle template, somewhat similar to "green" lifestyle thinking, which Communism simply cannot match. There is no Communist lifestyle, unless it means wearing Che shirts (a big success there), or buying old Soviet kitsch (big success there), or walking around with a philosophy book always under your arm (much less success there). It seems that the possibility of anarchist lifestyle commitments are of the kind that the political philosophy could spread, bottom up, in such society as ours, amenable to all sorts of other kind of life-style/ethical commitments.

anodyne lite - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

anodyne lite — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:32:43 +0000

The reason why I think anarchism might rise again is because unlike most existing brands of communism (though both anarchism and communism challenge our existing political-social framework), anarchism can give a coherent answer to the question of sustainability. What I suppose I could call the broadly anarchist "lifestyle" is less reliant on grotesquely out-of-hand production and consumption levels than its communist counterpart is. The goal of an anarchist collective is not to grow, or to become a "great" civilization, or to "make history", but to provide a directly democratic form of ad hoc social organization that would necessarily be founded in much smaller, more manageable 'bands' (cf tribes, states) of people.

Albert Einstein - Bergson's Method of Intuition

Albert Einstein — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:31:21 +0000

whatever happened to my spacetime continuum?

Nick - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Nick — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:30:33 +0000

Definitely, the debate over the state as a locus of change is long and complex. I think you're mostly right, that the state tends only to play a positive role when it's pressured to by socieity. But I think, actually, the discussions around climate change are showing that it can be an independent source of change as well - I'm mostly thinking of China here, who seems to be saying all the right things about reducing carbon emissions. I'm not an expert on China, but I'd be surprised if the government was making these commitments because of popular discontent. It seems to me more that the government is recognizing the situation they face and is responding in an appropriate way (for once!) But, admittedly, I don't even have a specific conceptualization of the state in mind, so this is more ad hoc theorizing than anything else.

Nate - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Nate — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 04:56:55 +0000

hi Nick, In my view right wing anarchists aren't anarchists, just as national socialists aren't socialists, but that's mostly just me getting moralistic about terminology. Personally, I identify with people in a tradition of class struggle anarchism. As for the state as a source of change, I think that's a pretty fraught matter, real complicated with an enormous history of debate as well as examples and theoretical models to draw on, on all sides of every possible position one could take. I also think if everyone's being honest (by which I mean me too) then we have to admit that all of this is speculative and we won't know for sure what it took to get the changes we wanted until after we've succeeded in getting it. My own (admittedly speculative) view is that for the most part when the state has had a positive role in making improvements it's been in response to popular movements, giving in to or co-opting or placating them. So I think pressuring the state is clearly useful at least some of the time. I'm not convinced of the state as an autonomous source of positive change nor am I convinced of the utility of the state as something to be captured or entered into. cheers, Nate

Nick - Some Notes on Ontology and Politics

Nick — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:30:26 +0000

Hey Colin, Oddly enough, I used your book in my MA thesis! Not as a major part of it, but I really enjoyed your discussions of agency and structure in it, and thought your critique of Wendt was spot on. The type of realism I propose above tends to do away with any form of agency, but that's sort of the philosophical conundrum one's left with when we take seriously the meaning of realism. This type of realism is related to critical realism in its arguments against anthropocentrism, but whereas critical realism has been used to try and rejuvenate Marxism and has been used in all kinds of social fields (like IR), it's not clear to me - yet - how the type of philosophical realism I'm proposing relates to these phenomena.

Colin Wight - Some Notes on Ontology and Politics

Colin Wight — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:35:54 +0000

I've come to the late as I'm doing some research. No idea who you people are but you might want to look at my book, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. (Cambridge 2006)

Nick - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

Nick — Tue, 9 Jun 2009 19:57:51 +0000

You're definitely right SDV. I've been focusing implicitly on leftist anarchism, but there's a whole libertarian strain that aims at similar ideas, and from which the leftist anarchism needs to be distinguished. My focus has been on community and ways of organizing so, as you point out, the libertarian focus on individualism tends to be less useful for my own interests.

sdv - Anarchism and Prefigurative Politics

sdv — Tue, 9 Jun 2009 18:15:10 +0000

nick I think that you really need to differentiate right and left anarchism - because the right- anarchists have a strange reactionary relation to notion of rights and equality - (for example Nozick and the libertarian end of the capitalist-anarchists) but also more locally their political tendency to support pro-tory and pro neo-liberal positions. Whilst the left has an equally anti-state position they have at least tended to acknowledge issues of class and collectivity, community I suppose over issues of rights and individualism