« Election Shaman Rolls the Bones | Main | Obama Morphs into Bush »

Saturday, May 01, 2010



Pay heed, if we continue on the path we're on, this is our future. (and this is just the start of the Euro breakdown.)


I think it'd be a good idea to clarify that these European "anarchists" are the Pierre-Joseph "property is theft" Proudhon-type anarchists--who are really socialists who just like to call themselves anarchists. Very different from the libertarianish Anarcho-capitalist types we have a lot more of in the United States (and even in the tea party movement.)


William, we were already headed there...this is the great Global Economic Collapse that pretty much makes everything else we discuss on this blog...meaningless.


William and Guard: I do not claim to know where all this will lead, but it does look like the U.S. Government is on the path to Greece. California is already there. I am not predicting global collapse. At least in the near term, the system will weather this crisis. But the weather may be very unpleasant.

twitchard: thanks for the clarification. I don't know my anarchists very well, but I think that one cannot really be a socialist and an anarchist at the same time. I suspect you are right about them, they are in fact the first but not the second.


KB, I was wrong. Things are actually going great for a change. Nothing is going to happen here. Let's continue to par-tay!!!


Anarchists have traditionally been extremely egalitarian and socially minded. Anarchists do not even technically envision a world "without government", only a world in which no social or economic relationships are based hierarchy and coercive force, and all forms of exploitation are abolished. This brings anarchist into conflict with capitalism, western representative democracies, and authoritarian leftist regimes. After almost every communist revolution, Anarchists have been imprisoned or executed.

Anarchists and other, more authoritarian leftists have their antagonisms, but they are both extremely in favor of providing support for the labor movement and social programs that encourage redistribution and collectivization.

Another term to describe them would be Libertarian Socialists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism


Patrick: thanks for the thought-provoking comment. If indeed anarchists don't "even technically envision a world "without government"," but instead "encourage redistribution and collectivization," then they aren't anarchists. They are socialists. I am not sure what the phrase "libertarian socialists" could possibly mean.


Check it out, I provided a link to the wikipedia article for the term. Here it is again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

Anarchism and Socialism are not mutually exclusive terms. To understand this, one must have a clear understanding of the word "socialism". Socialism is too often in America lazily associated with hyper-authoritarian regimes like the USSR under Stalin. Despite this, Socialism has no explicit implications of authoritarianism. Socialism concerns itself with the ownership of the "means of production" in a given society, with workers having direct ownership over their workplaces and the instruments that make society work. Anarchists advocate socialism because it is a system that seeks to remedy many of the injustices of capitalism.

Again, Anarchists are not against governance or order. Anarchists envision an extremely orderly society and equally elaborate apparatuses to organize it. The difference is, to anarchists, stripping these systems of coercive control and hierarchy.


"Anarchists are not against governance?" But I thought anarchy meant "rule by none."

And it seems to me that socialism _does_ have explicit implications of authoritarianism. If your goal is to reallocate the means of production in a society to eliminate the capitalist-worker system because it is supposedly coercive, you must inevitably use 'coercive control' to prevent workers from voluntarily entering into these relationships in the first place.

Therefore any 'elaborate apparatuses' which these so-called 'anarchists' envision to achieve their ideal society will require the use of coercive force itself, you might as well call it a government, or an "archy."


...and "an archy" is very different from "anarchy".

The comments to this entry are closed.