What are /lit's thoughts on Anarchism

[Anonymous No.20457862]

Anarchism seems pretty based but its mostly associated with coloured haired women and Antifa folks. So is it worth reading about and what would you recommended, I've mainly read Kaczynski and he seems right about a lot of problems of our day.

[Anonymous No.20457888]

>>20457862
>What are /lit's thoughts on Anarchism
A stupid ideology that failed whenever implemented.

[Anonymous No.20457915]

>>20457862
Libertarian socialism is better.

[Anonymous No.20457928]

>>20457888
Ya I don't think its ever gonna be implemented or successful, but from an ideological point of view it seems to be the most ethical and logical.

[Anonymous No.20457931]

>>20457862
if you like ted k, read ellul. ted literally said after he read ellul he felt like there was no point in writing or reading anymore because ellul had "said it all"

the colored hair people sometimes interpret anarchism as a way to go from individual/social liberty to "this particular future that I want should exist". that's one thing a person could take away from anarchist work, but I wouldn't avoid it just because of that

the one's that people usually point to are proudhon and kropotkin. They're great, but keep in mind they were writing very much in response to capitalism and the industrial revolution (so was ellul and I guess ted k)

if you just want to dip your toe in to get an idea of which directions to look, theanarchistlibrary.org is a good place to start as they host a lot of free texts with new and old stuff and with appropriate breadth.

[Anonymous No.20457935]

>>20457928
Yeah ethical and logical until Attila the Hun or any great conqueror comes up and kills your family, rapes the women and children and burns your shit to the ground. Should've built a bigger gun I guess.

[Anonymous No.20457942]

>>20457862
It’s retarded. A hierarchy just reasserts itself.
t. Has lived in anarchist ‘spaces’

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20457966]

>>20457862
Anarchists are against fascists, so the young will play around with hair dye in opposition to the shaved head boot kissers.
Uncle Ted is a good independent thinker many anarchists can include as honorary thinkers, much like Stirner or Nietzsche, or even Bookchin’s hybrid thing. It’s a far more organic idealism and can fit many different directions and facets of life. No Gods, No Masters is a good intro to the early thinkers. Graeber is also pretty inspiring fun reading. Also pic rel has a great point.

>>20457888
That’s like saying forests failed to cover the earth. Your deserts and urban sprawl are creeping, but you haven’t beaten us yet

[Anonymous No.20457973]

>>20457942
can you share more about your experiences?

I used to go to an anarchist bookstore in baltimore and always wondered how the thing actually functioned, like what its corporate structure was and how their wages were set and stuff.

Honestly from the outside looking in (over the course of a few years) it looked like it just had a regular board (I assume the bankers/lawyers/landlord types) who took the revenue and then set a budget for them, and then the "worker-control" part was just them collectively making decisions around the shop, which are ultimately much more minor than where the rent goes...

they ended up catering more and more towards an artist community atmosphere and moved to a part of town where there are less bums and more people who just look at it as a lifestyle I guess, but probably spend more money at the shop

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20457977]

>>20457915
Libertarian socialism is anarchism.
>>20457928
It’s implemented by the whole if they’re able to overcome the failed machine of state.

Another choice history for the enemies of state-capitalism

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20457982]

>>20457935
Attila the Hun was a bro for proto anarchist freedom from the slaver state

[Anonymous No.20457987]

>>20457862
Anarchists are just communists who fell on the other side of the line. Take >>20457966 for example. Not only does he earnestly believe "real anarchy" hasn't been practiced yet, he still worships the people who wrote this ideology and would no doubt elect them into office or follow under their rules. Yet another "anarchist" folly.

[Anonymous No.20457993]

>>20457987
>he
Umm sweaty, Butters transitioned.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20457997]

>>20457987
>Anarchists are just communists
Oh! You noticed!
Lenin was a reactionary counterrevolutionary shit of course.

[Anonymous No.20458008]

>>20457977
Not necessarily, ever heard of "night watchman states"?

[Anonymous No.20458019]

>>20457987
the whole break between marx and the anarchists was about his authoritarianism, which they correctly predicted would lead to new masters/statesmen as the history of authoritarian communist states shows..

But anarchism is pre-capitalist. Bookchin's work I think shows this quite well. It wouldn't make sense to judge "success" in anarchism by how many states become anarchist... If people believe the state (and other authoritarians, like their boss or teacher or whomever) is idiotic for asserting unjust authority over them, then anarchism exists. I think if you look around yourself that view is much more successful than whatever propaganda states push.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20458027]

>>20457987
*and the rest of what you say is 100% bullshit. You don’t know what you’re talking about
“Elect to office” haha

For the newfags, this >>20457993 is a troll. I am not trans (I am even terf)

[Anonymous No.20458051]

>>20457966
How does an Anarchist gel with Kaczynski? I am asking genuinely. It is clear that there exists in his philosophy a heavy inspiration from Anarchism in, for instance, his focus on freedom. Other than this shared common ground, Kaczynski takes pains to distance himself from Green Anarchism and Anarchism in general. I don't remember precisely what his criticisms were, but I do remember the great deal of importance on it. There has, it seems, been a tendency in these anarchist-leftist circles to rehabilitate Kaczynski, but they are really no less illegitimate in their claim than white nationalists' use of him.

[Anonymous No.20458061]

>>20457862
Anarchism is based
Anarchists are cringe

[Anonymous No.20458068]

>>20457928
>logical
the most logical socialism is marxism.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20458085]

>>20458051
Anarcho-primitivism gels with what he gets at perfectly well. Bookchin Derrick Jensen and other environmentalists writers are also of the same opinions. This pictured book included.

So OP, thai thread is about to become flooded with Biden bros promoting fascism, monarchism and the Bible, but what I’ve posted should be pretty good to start with.
Still honing my pillars on organization, education and defense, so will be monitoring this thread for sincere recs. Later.

[Anonymous No.20458096]

>>20458085
Ted K isn’t an anarchist. He’s a burn it all downist.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20458113]

>>20458096
That’s antinatalist psychos

>>20458068
>scientific socialism
>logical

>>20458061
People are too free to be themselves? You don’t forgive the awkwardness of youth? Work on that.

[Anonymous No.20458122]

>>20458085
butters, not sure if this is what you meant by 'education' but I've recently been trying to get more knowledge on non-hierarchical learning/teaching. Like John Dewey type stuff.

Someone here recommended Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed a while back and it was superb. It's more directed to teaching people how to organize themselves, I guess, but he was a very highly regarded educator and I think a lot of the book can be taken with regards to teaching in general.

[Anonymous No.20458132]

>>20458085
Kaczynski explicitly critques Anarcho-Primitivism as utopian and building of anthropological research which mischaracterizes hunter-gatherer societies as functioning in accordance with modern-day anarchist principles (sexism, egalitarianism, lack of hierarchy, etc, and especially the notion of the original affluent society, which I think figures like Zerzan hold to). He wrote more but it's been a couple years.

[Anonymous No.20458151]

>>20458122
As someone who went to a non hierarchical school, let me tell you, they’re shit. Only marginally better than public school.

[Anonymous No.20458162]

>>20457862
anarchist theories are just moral idealization of current society. they're thoroughly anti-revolutionary.
>And when such an ideologist constructs morality and law from the concept, or the so-called simplest elements of “society”, instead of from the real social relations of the people round him, what material is then available for this construction? Material clearly of two kinds: first, the meagre residue of real content which may possibly survive in the abstractions from which he starts and, secondly, the content which our ideologist once more introduces from his own consciousness. And what does he find in his consciousness? For the most part, moral and juridical notions which are a more or less accurate expression (positive or negative, corroborative or antagonistic) of the social and political relations amidst which he lives; perhaps also ideas drawn from the literature on the subject; and, as a final possibility, some personal idiosyncrasies. Our ideologist may turn and twist as he likes, but the historical reality which he cast out at the door comes in again at the window, and while he thinks he is framing a doctrine of morals and law for all times and for all worlds, he is in fact only fashioning an image of the conservative or revolutionary tendencies of his day — an image which is distorted because it has been torn from its real basis and, like a reflection in a concave mirror, is standing on its head […].

>What divides these gentlemen from the bourgeois apologists is, on one side, their sensitivity to the contradictions included in the system; on the other, the utopian inability to grasp the necessary difference between the real and the ideal form of bourgeois society, which is the cause of their desire to undertake the superfluous business of realizing the ideal expression again, which is in fact only the inverted projection of this reality.

[Anonymous No.20458175]

>>20457977
>Libertarian socialism is anarchism.
Wrong

[Anonymous No.20458182]

>>20457862
>anarchism is antifascist
Why is this a surprise to you?

[Anonymous No.20458184]

>>20457935
As if states dont enable mass violence on an even greater scale.

[Anonymous No.20458187]

>>20458184
Give me one (1) good reason why I shouldn't kill your entire family and steal your shit.

[Anonymous No.20458189]

>>20457966
>never met a SHARP in his life
ngmi

[Anonymous No.20458213]

>>20457987
>>20457997
Our ideal revolutionary is very simple, we will see: he is composed, like all of our predecessors, of these two terms: liberty and equality. Only there is a slight difference.

Educated by the dodging that reactionaries of all sorts and of all times have done of liberty and equality, we are wise to place next to these two terms an expression of their exact value.

We thus place, next to these two terms: liberty and equality, two equivalents of which the clear significance cannot give rise to ambiguity, and we say: “We want liberty, that is to say, anarchy, and equality, that is to say, communism.”

Anarchy today is an attack, a war against all authority, against all power, against all States. In future societies, anarchy will be a defense, the prevention brought against the reestablishment of all authority, of all power, of any State: full and entire liberty of the individual who, freely and pushed only by his needs, by his tastes and his liking, combines with other individuals in groups or partnership; free development of partnership which federates itself with others in the commune or in the neighborhood; free development of communes which federate themselves in the region – and so on: regions in the nation, nations in humanity.

Communism, the question that occupies us most specifically today, is the second point of our ideal revolutionary.

Communism today is still an attack; it is not the destruction of authority, but the taking, in the name of humanity, of all the wealth that exists on the globe. In the society of the future, communism will be the enjoyment of all existing wealth, by all men and according to the principle: From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs, that is to say: from each to each according to his will.

Carlo Cafiero

“I very much admired him [Marx] for his knowledge and for his passionate and earnest devotion to the cause of the proletariat. But…our temperaments did not harmonize. He called me a sentimental idealist, and he was right. I called him vain, treacherous, and morose, and I was right.”

Michail Bakunin

Kropotkinskaya (Russian: Кpoпóткинcкaя, IPA: [krɐˈpotkʲJnskəjə]) is a station on the Sokolnicheskaya Line of the Moscow Metro. One of the oldest Metro stations, it was designed by Alexey Dushkin and Ya. Likhtenberg and opened in 1935 as part of the original Metro line, named after Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin.

Mount Kropotkin is a peak on the west side of Jøkulkyrkja Mountain in the Mühlig-Hofmann Mountains of Queen Maud Land, Antarctica. It was mapped by the Norsk Polarinstitutt from surveys and air photos by the Sixth Norwegian Antarctic Expedition, 1956–60. The peak was also mapped by the Soviet Antarctic Expedition in 1961 and named for Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin.

[Anonymous No.20458215]

>>20458187
Because you're not a state with an unquestioned monopoly on violence. So I can also kill you and your family and defend myself. Also, most apex predators leave each other alone in the wild unless scarcity appears and they need to encroach on each others territory, because fighting on even ground is always a toss up and risky.

You're also on 4chan so their is a 50% chance you're a morbidly obese NEET.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.20458219]

>>20458122
Thanks
>>20458132
Which is good. Fredy Perlman did the same. It’s an endlessly adaptable ideal that has to fit everyone and every period/stage
>lack of hierarchy
Anarchism is a challenging of unjustifiable hierarchies.

>>20458175
No, that’s right.
>>20458189
Please explain.

[Anonymous No.20458233]

>>20458219
>Anarchists are against fascists, so the young will play around with hair dye in opposition to the shaved head boot kissers.
I have to admit those I knew became either fascists or stalinists though

[Anonymous No.20458262]

>>20458215
Not one reason, let alone a good one. You'd better be a lot tougher than your words if you want to survive in anarchy.

[Anonymous No.20458378]

>>20458262
You know, even "anarchy" can't just be "rape and kill all day". At some point, you need to build a house, dig a well, craft tools, gather resources and such, shit you can hardly do alone. That's how communities are formed. And if you are good at, say, choosing which wood to use for different things, people will not just "rape and kill you and all your family", because you are valuable.

Not the same anon btw

[Anonymous No.20458388]

>>20457915
>>20457977
>>20458175

[Anonymous No.20458405]

>>20458388
Imagine how different would it be now if Lenin would have granted Makhno some autonomy, like Victor Serge states was his intention...

[Anonymous No.20458409]

>>20457862
Incredibly bizarre and contradictory philosophy. They claim to be about freedom, emancipation, and the absence of rulers, and in order to make this work, they demand that everyone organize themselves into highly specific social orders (usually some kind of idealistic vision of a patchwork of small agrarian communities) and submit themselves to highly strict and specific social codes, in order to prevent “the old order” from re-emerging and ensure that no one accumulates private property. Essentially they end up reinventing all of modern society if pressed enough, just with them in charge.

[Anonymous No.20458417]

>>20457862
Pure anarchism? No. But if we where to regress in all froms of technology and authority bar medicine I belive we would be happier.

The world we live in is not the world we were designed for. Progress is not intrinsically good.

[Anonymous No.20458500]

>>20458378
>You know, even "anarchy" can't just be "rape and kill all day"
Says who? If you build a house why can't I tear it down? If you have food what is going to stop me and a gang from taking it?

[Anonymous No.20458547]

>>20458409
You'll also notice that the people who write about anarchy often have money and really just hate taxes.

[Anonymous No.20458629]

>>20458500
>Says who?
You reap what you sow. People WILL kill you. That's it. No more rape and kill for you, we like to grow our potatoes.

[Anonymous No.20458722]

>>20458547
that's because anarchism is the ideology for the petty bourgeoisie. they like all the good things their private property gives them as bourgeois individuals, but they despise that those things are constantly being curbed by the big bourgeoisie (taxes being raised, funding for their projects being cut, their small businesses being crushed by large corporations, each new crisis threatening to declass them from the middle class to the proletariat, etc.).
and by way of wishful thinking and impotency of understanding, they attribute those bad things to the supposed insufficient realization in bourgeois society of its own ideals (justice, freedom, etc.). and it's by an appeal to those ideals that they try to advocate for reshaping society according to their own interest as petty owners, and they try to recruit the proletariat to help them achieve that.
but all they're able to do by acting in that direction is ultimately just to strengthen private property. and the normal functioning of private property is exactly the thing that in the first place leads to accumulation of capital and produces all the things that the pb are trying to fight against. it's quite pathetic. the only tangible thing they can gain out of all the larping is the sense of moral high ground they get when they denounce things around them as unjust while spitting their onions lattes over their mac book pros out of excitement.

[Anonymous No.20458747]

anarchism seeks to dismantle governments.
this is the only time uncoordinated revolutions would work.

to bad most battles and any level of community building requires some sort of bureaucracy.

i mean you can do without it, but good luck maintaining and producing all the wonders of the 21st century without it.

[Anonymous No.20458758]

>>20458417
the world we live in was given to us by our forebears.
change and progress
by and large happens with new generations
much like evolution