Are you (still) an Anarchist poll 2021 edition.

[planetgeli]

Curious about this. Can you expand a bit as it does not chime with my experience at all.

I have seen such from some tankies, recognise that the LP (or equivalent) line is crap but it does not match up with any modern anarchist group I know.

Well I'll give you the IWCA for a start. Not anarchists, I know that. But broadly representative of any Left group (on this issue) I've seen.

You tell me. Quite prepared to believe I'm out of that loop and have missed something. In fact would love that to be true. Point me somewhere.

 

[chilango]

I can see where planetgeli is coming from. I've seen the IWCA stance echoed (including by myself) amongst @ types. Perhaps less stridently, but certainly the same general thrust. I suspect there also been a bit of an influence of sXe on some too.

 

[chilango]

I can see where planetgeli is coming from. I've seen the IWCA stance echoed (including by myself) amongst @ types. Perhaps less stridently, but certainly the same general thrust. I suspect there also been a bit of an influence of sXe on some too.

Otoh you can see a very different perspective coming from the ACFM types, so I guess it's complicated!

 

[ska invita]

My relationship with anarchism boils down to:

All politics is a question of power, and anarchism is the ultimate critique of power relations < i'm fully subscribed to that.
I do my best to apply anarchism in my day to day life: in my working life, with money, in living relationships (with humans, animals, plantlife), and in the community (inc activism) more broadly. I once heard anarchism described as a compass, and I try and follow the bearing as close as possible.

Where I start to go a different way is in regards the State.
From what I've read of anarchist critiques of the state, whilst I agree broadly with the critique, I dont see how its possible to move beyond the modern state. If I was alive in the 19th century I might well have felt differently, but the modern state is too engrained, not just in war and taxes, but crucially also civil functions. Reforming the state on anarchist lines may seem near impossible, but no more so than any other anarcho-utopian vision. I guess I'm a state reformist, though my vision of the state would be revolutionary as far as traditionalists are concerned.

 

[SpookyFrank]

If I was alive in the 19th century I might well have felt differently, but the modern state is too engrained, not just in war and taxes, but crucially also civil functions. Reforming the state on anarchist lines may seem near impossible, but no more so than any other anarcho-utopian vision. I guess I'm a state reformist, though my vision of the state would be revolutionary as far as traditionalists are concerned.

If you look at civil functions though, state power is actively degrading most of them. Healthcare we all know about. Education is my wheelhouse, and it's the same there. State supervision makes evidence-based best practice impossible; it enforces inhuman workloads; it makes something that should be a simple, joyous thing into a scorched hellscape.

Everywhere you look resources needed for the orderly running of society are being stolen or squandered by state power, capital and all the bureaucratic tentacles they need to justify their existence and ensure their own survival. Healthcare is not run by doctors, education is not run by teachers, infrastructure is not run by engineers; and what's more they never can be in a state-capitalist system. Because eventually anyone who knows what they're doing and has a stake in how it gets done will reach the conclusion that outside meddling by managerial types whose fundamental priority is never the functioning of the thing they're supposed to be managing must be stripped away.

 

[kebabking]

Having long, and utterly, sold out to the capitalist/imperialist running dogs, my anarchism mainly coalesces around resentment at having to follow other people's rules and joyously ignoring speed limits on fast roads.

My last informal anarchist action was not filling out the Census form. I know, bad to the bone....

 

[LDC]

I can see where planetgeli is coming from. I've seen the IWCA stance echoed (including by myself) amongst @ types. Perhaps less stridently, but certainly the same general thrust. I suspect there also been a bit of an influence of sXe on some too.

My position on this is a bit IWCA-ish I have to say. Living in poor areas and seeing what not the 'war on drugs' has done, but actual drug dealing and the gangs and anti-social behaviour that has gone along with it has done is very depressing and has fucked up the lives of loads of people that are nothing to do with drugs, largely working class people that can't afford to move to a 'nicer' area. The area I live in now is largely dominated by young organized drug dealing gangs on the street nearly 24/7 openly dealing, racing cars, threatening people etc. Plenty of families have already left, and I expect more will follow.

So anarchist - but with a dash of Genghis Khan when it comes to drug dealing and anti-social behaviour.

 

[chilango]

My position on this is a bit IWCA-ish I have to say. Living in poor areas and seeing what not the 'war on drugs' has done, but actual drug dealing and the gangs and anti-social behaviour that has gone along with it has done is very depressing and has fucked up the lives of loads of people that are nothing to do with drugs, largely working class people that can't afford to move to a 'nicer' area. The area I live in now is largely dominated by young organized drug dealing gangs on the street nearly 24/7 openly dealing, racing cars, threatening people etc. Plenty of families have already left, and I expect more will follow.

So anarchist - but with a dash of Genghis Khan when it comes to drug dealing and anti-social behaviour.

Yeah living in Manchester and later Mexico made me hate the drugs industry.

I don't - particularly - care one way or the way about the use of drugs though.

 

[brogdale]

If you look at civil functions though, state power is actively degrading most of them. Healthcare we all know about. Education is my wheelhouse, and it's the same there. State supervision makes evidence-based best practice impossible; it enforces inhuman workloads; it makes something that should be a simple, joyous thing into a scorched hellscape.

Everywhere you look resources needed for the orderly running of society are being stolen or squandered by state power, capital and all the bureaucratic tentacles they need to justify their existence and ensure their own survival. Healthcare is not run by doctors, education is not run by teachers, infrastructure is not run by engineers; and what's more they never can be in a state-capitalist system. Because eventually anyone who knows what they're doing and has a stake in how it gets done will reach the conclusion that outside meddling by managerial types whose fundamental priority is never the functioning of the thing they're supposed to be managing must be stripped away.

An important observation that might logically lead more to consciously or unconsciously adopt more anarchistic positions.
If the neoliberal state really is just a vehicle to transfer wealth from taxes on labour to unearned income returns to capital, why would working people be motivated to organise to control it?

 

[redsquirrel]

Well I'll give you the IWCA for a start. Not anarchists, I know that. But broadly representative of any Left group (on this issue) I've seen.

Not saying you're wrong just that my recollection is largely the opposite, that the IWCA got a lot of flack on here from their stance (admittedly that is individuals not groups, both from anarchists and some (ex-)trots.

(That said like LDC and chi, l I am not a million miles from the IWCA. I don't favour prohibition but I do think that drugs are often harmful to both society and individuals , and that communities self-organising to tackle the problems drugs cause is potentially a good thing)

 

[redsquirrel]

Where I start to go a different way is in regards the State.
From what I've read of anarchist critiques of the state, whilst I agree broadly with the critique, I dont see how its possible to move beyond the modern state. If I was alive in the 19th century I might well have felt differently, but the modern state is too engrained, not just in war and taxes, but crucially also civil functions. Reforming the state on anarchist lines may seem near impossible, but no more so than any other anarcho-utopian vision. I guess I'm a state reformist, though my vision of the state would be revolutionary as far as traditionalists are concerned.

Considering that the state and capital are utterly intertwined in the I think the logical extension of your argument is that moving beyond capitalism is not possible.

Indeed that is why I a think anarchism is necessary, the fight against capital is a fight against the state (and vice versa).

 

[Rimbaud]

I selected, "Anarchy forms an important part of my compass but not the main."

My ideal would be a democratic socialist society where a federalised structure of cooperatives and directly democratic workers councils and neighbourhood councils effectively constitute the state. So I'd say I'm influenced by anarchist ideas but I also don't see any mass movement for this emerging anytime soon so for now I'm just really hoping for reforms that make things a bit less shit for working class people.

 

[planetgeli]

Not saying you're wrong just that my recollection is largely the opposite, that the IWCA got a lot of flack on here from their stance (admittedly that is individuals not groups, both from anarchists and some (ex-)trots.

(That said like LDC and chi, l I am not a million miles from the IWCA. I don't favour prohibition but I do think that drugs are often harmful to both society and individuals , and that communities self-organising to tackle the problems drugs cause is potentially a good thing)

It's the War on Drugs that is harmful to society and individuals, not individuals who are victims of that and get the double whammy of a lack of understanding from the Left and the Right. As always it's the working class who are worst hit through the circumstances that war produces. The Left is supposed to stick up for the working class. Instead the Ghengis Khan line attacks the elements affected while professing to stick up for others who are victims of the anti-social behaviour some drug use, because of prohibition, causes. This line completely misses the point and I'm not here to write an essay why. The whole WoD stems from racism and an attack on poor people while professing to care for them. The shit starts at the top, not the bottom.

Working class individuals, however much you hate them, have not created the circumstances they've fallen into. Lining up gangs to scare off addicts and small time dealers misses the point as much as the Mail does.

Attacking those in poverty isn't my thing.

 

[redsquirrel]

I don't disagree with most of that.

Where we probably do disagree is that the actions of the IWCA or other groups that have taken action against drugs is attacking those in poverty. In fact quite the opposite. Australian Aboriginal communities, for example, deciding collectively to prohibit alcohol can be an example of the working class (and often an extremely poor element of it) defending themselves.

 

[A380]

My position on this is a bit IWCA-ish I have to say. Living in poor areas and seeing what not the 'war on drugs' has done, but actual drug dealing and the gangs and anti-social behaviour that has gone along with it has done is very depressing and has fucked up the lives of loads of people that are nothing to do with drugs, largely working class people that can't afford to move to a 'nicer' area. The area I live in now is largely dominated by young organized drug dealing gangs on the street nearly 24/7 openly dealing, racing cars, threatening people etc. Plenty of families have already left, and I expect more will follow.

So anarchist - but with a dash of Genghis Khan when it comes to drug dealing and anti-social behaviour.

There are no food gangs fighting over turf in the west to bring bread in to cities. Netflix and Britbox don’t employ 17 year olds to kill each other to sell you entertainment. Alcohol even is delivered through non violent means - now in the USA. except for the states monopoly of violence stopping people stealing / redistributing it most commodities are supplied without massive bloodshed- Energy perhaps being the main exception.

As a fucking reformist we could slash violence both upstream and downstream and as a side benefit end c70% of ‘minor crime’. Ok the usual suspects would get even more wealth, but so would pension funds…

 

[danny la rouge]

I’m anti prohibition and pro harm reduction. But I’m also pro communities empowering themselves to deal with anti social behaviour.

 

[bimble]

I got dumped by someone not very long ago because of how I reacted to his saying ‘I am an anarchist’. I had misunderstood, he was not saying he thinks that this revolution will or might or could actually happen in our lifetimes or any foreseeable timeframe, he was just telling me the shape of his utopia.

 

[chilango]

...all of this said, I cannot remember the last time I said to anyone irl "I'm an Anarchist" (...or any other -ist for that matter). Even in political contexts.

 

[planetgeli]

Shall we beat up PRU kids as well? Most of them are anti-social little fuckers, the ones I work with anyway. Most use drugs, some are dealers. Their life goes something like,

Born into abject poverty > Adverse Childhood Experiences > Drugs

So let's not worry about the societal fuck ups that created the abject poverty and the ACEs. Let's attack them, physically if necessary, for being victims of circumstances created by capitalism and the racism where the WoD began (and continues).

That'll solve it. And they're used to a good beating anyway.

Then the problem will go from here.....> to there.

Great stuff.

 

[LDC]

It's the War on Drugs that is harmful to society and individuals, not individuals who are victims of that and get the double whammy of a lack of understanding from the Left and the Right. As always it's the working class who are worst hit through the circumstances that war produces. The Left is supposed to stick up for the working class. Instead the Ghengis Khan line attacks the elements affected while professing to stick up for others who are victims of the anti-social behaviour some drug use, because of prohibition, causes. This line completely misses the point and I'm not here to write an essay why. The whole WoD stems from racism and an attack on poor people while professing to care for them. The shit starts at the top, not the bottom.

Working class individuals, however much you hate them, have not created the circumstances they've fallen into. Lining up gangs to scare off addicts and small time dealers misses the point as much as the Mail does.

Attacking those in poverty isn't my thing.

I mostly agree, but that's a political stance that has little to no bearing for people having their lives ruined now. The same as loads of aspects of society but for many of them we offer practical day-to-day solidarity and activity that can make people's lives better in the here-and-now and offer a glimpse of how things might be better in the future. What's the daily realistic activity we offer to improve the lives of those struggling with drug dealing and related problems in their area now? Just telling them it's the war on drugs and prohibition that's causing the problem offers nothing, and imo isn't quite the whole answer.

Also my views on this aren't very strongly held (and nor do I do anything about them) so no need to get too irate about the left getting ready to kneecap some ABSO kids for smoking weed.

 

[planetgeli]

I mostly agree, but that's a political stance that has little to no bearing for people having their lives ruined now. The same as loads of aspects of society but for many of them we offer practical day-to-day solidarity and activity that can make people's lives better in the here-and-now and offer a glimpse of how things might be better in the future. What's the daily realistic activity we offer to improve the lives of those struggling with drug dealing and related problems in their area now? Just telling them it's the war on drugs and prohibition that's causing the problem offers nothing, and imo isn't quite the whole answer.

You offer that solidarity to everyone. You don't move the problem on to the next area.

What's the daily realistic activity you offer to abject poverty? Arguing for pages and getting nowhere over a bookfair? Read my pdf?

Just telling them it's the war on drugs and prohibition that's causing the problem offers nothing, and imo isn't quite the whole answer.

And I never said it was.

 

[bimble]

...all of this said, I cannot remember the last time I said to anyone irl "I'm an Anarchist" (...or any other -ist for that matter). Even in political contexts.

Maybe it should be said more often, to normalise the idea, like as an explanation when you let someone go in front of you at the checkout because they’re old.

 

[planetgeli]

For the record, I'm currently in the middle of offering practical help to one user on here. Call it informal anarchist action if you want. I call it practical help. It's all I or anyone can practically do atm.

But I am practically doing it.

 

[LDC]

What's the daily realistic activity you offer to abject poverty? Arguing for pages and getting nowhere over a bookfair? Read my pdf?

Anarchists and others do food banks, encouraging expropriation, mutual aid groups and networks, small scale social and financial support, fighting for better wages, action against poor employers and landlords, healthcare access for marginalized groups, etc etc.

And we're not talking about users here are we, but dealers and those above them.

 

[chilango]

Maybe it should be said more often, to normalise the idea, like as an explanation when you let someone go in front of you at the checkout because they’re old.

I'm not doing that because "I'm an Anarchist" though, just because it's considerate. Even non-anarchists can be considerate

 

[Steel Icarus]

I don't know. Is there a "How anarchist are you?" quiz I can do?

 

[hitmouse]

I'm not doing that because "I'm an Anarchist" though, just because it's considerate. Even non-anarchists can be considerate

Being Considerate: A Factor of Evolution?

 

[Sue]

Maybe it should be said more often, to normalise the idea, like as an explanation when you let someone go in front of you at the checkout because they’re old.

informal anarchist actions thread ===>

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Bring back the IWCA!

 

[xenon]

hmm Non aligned, anarcho-curious.

I believe in self organisation, flattening hirearchies. people before profit well and prophet too. All that wet libral stuff. But in practise I spose can't throw away the idea, sometimes you just need someone to take charge and get something done. I loathe the general cliche of meetings and endless consultation, voting on biscuit budget allocations etc.