Does anarchism have a serious future?

[RedSkin]

Yeah I kind of understood that. I used to call myself an anarchist. I'm just interested at what point do anarchy and class struggle diverge. All revolutionaries should be pragmatists so they shouldn't be bound to any doctrine whether that be 'anarchy', 'socialism' or 'communism'.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

Yeah I kind of understood that. I used to call myself an anarchist. I'm just interested at what point do anarchy and class struggle diverge. All revolutionaries should be pragmatists so they shouldn't be bound to any doctrine whether that be 'anarchy', 'socialism' or 'communism'.

oh definitely mate!

BTW what do you call yourself hnow if asked ur politics (please resist the temptation to give a joke answer here )

 

[RedSkin]

I posted you a lovely long reply detailing my political history but I lost it before I could submit! So here's a brief summary:
Dissillusioned Anti-Cpaitalist. Used to go on all the anti-cap things from b4 J18 till I realised that no-one was intersted in building day to day resistance, just planning the next big event.
I'm a lazy cunt! but I regularly donate to the IWCA but I don't do anything. IWCA literature and Red Action's in the lead up to ther IWCA's founding is,IMO, the best political analysis in this country.
I'm a G.P.M.U. (Amicus) member. Work's hotting up at the minute.

When talking to someone in work, or a 'layman' i describe myself as a socialist coz it's easier for them to get a handle on than 'anarchist' or non-authoritarian communist. I beleive in justice and redistribution of wealth and all that but I know the state won't give it up without a fight.

Class War was my favourite @ publication. I don't do a lot at the mo I guess I'm just waiting for 'the next big thing'. When the whole ID cards thing kicks off I guess I'll see some of you out there. I'll carry one over my dead body!

 

[Joe Reilly]

slightly redundant question: it varies from a person to person basis. There isn't an u75 anarchist group with a set analysis.

That said the overwhelming majority of @'s here are class struggle, and have come to @ through class struggle. They would argue that anarcho-communism and class struggle are the same thing.

They might argue that. It has also been argued that the reason anarchist theory has no application is because 'there is no audience'. However when the logical question is posed, it is evident there are neither plans nor ambition to reach said 'audience'. Thus 'anarcho communism and class struggle are the same thing' only in the minds of those who politically define themselves as such.

 

[Ryazan]

Anarchism exists, not as a set of organisations, but as a current of activity within society and within anti-capitalist social movements. The record of anarchism within UK movements is a good one -- mostly these have been protest movements, but that is down to the nature of UK society. Anarchism rises when popular activity rises (for example, during the poll tax protests) and falls again when activity diminishes.

So I'd say thatthe answer to the question 'does anarchism have a future?' depends how you see our society going. I'd say that mass movements and protests are going to continue to be a part of our history, and anarchism will continue to be a part of them.

Many self-described anarchists (as opposed to people who simply organise in anarchic ways) have gravitated to protest activism; partly because of the continued activity in the ecological and anti-military scenes, and partly because of the university backgrounds of many anarchist activists. I think the crucial test for anarchism in the next 10 years is whether it can adapt itself to go beyond the established protest scenes and link up with other forms of popular activity that are developing -- both in the community and in the workplace.

How does anarchism, mainly dominated by middle class people become relevant to working class people?

 

[Joe Reilly]

How does anarchism, mainly dominated by middle class people become relevant to working class people?

When the working class wise up and all become anarchists presumably. But in meantime if truth be told who really needs them?
Certianly not - ANARCHISM!- which is, so we are assured, getting along fine without help from any of them.

 

[Random]

How does anarchism, mainly dominated by middle class people become relevant to working class people?

Anarchism is generally relevant to working class people when anarchist ideas and practise become useful to them. As I said before, this usually happens when certain struggles take place -- like those that go beyond legal/parliamentary means -- where anarchism has been useful.

 

[montevideo]

They might argue that. It has also been argued that the reason anarchist theory has no application is because 'there is no audience'. However when the logical question is posed, it is evident there are neither plans nor ambition to reach said 'audience'. Thus 'anarcho communism and class struggle are the same thing' only in the minds of those who politically define themselves as such.

but anarchism isn't a political doctrine that you can subscribe you. Regardless of how some may want it to be.

I would suggest anarchism is a method, a way working together as people.

One thing the iwca have done is taken The Working Class (as an identity, as a category, as a form of social identification) from the workplace & put it in a wholly social (& geographical) setting.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

They might argue that. It has also been argued that the reason anarchist theory has no application is because 'there is no audience'. However when the logical question is posed, it is evident there are neither plans nor ambition to reach said 'audience'. Thus 'anarcho communism and class struggle are the same thing' only in the minds of those who politically define themselves as such.

don't really see why you want to kick off now - i'm sure everythings been said. Most @'s here give support to IWCA (if not in public then at least in private) and that just proves that they are willing to move with the climate IMHO, cos it would be unthinkable to the 'ideology' of @ to use electorlaism as a tactic - ever...

What more do you want from them?

 

[Joe Reilly]

don't really see why you want to kick off now - i'm sure everythings been said. Most @'s here give support to IWCA (if not in public then at least in private) and that just proves that they are willing to move with the climate IMHO, cos it would be unthinkable to the 'ideology' of @ to use electorlaism as a tactic - ever...

What more do you want from them?

Electoralism is a term with common usage with apparently a multitude of meanings. You for instance employ it as if standing in front of the working class for election and something called 'electoralism' are one and the same thing. Which just further confuses.

Ps. If you check the original exchanges the thread never had anything much to do with the IWCA at all.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

yeah but you do

was just trying to cut the shit mate. You know, just say that they aren't knocking you so why knock them? If you're right then anrchism has no relevance and will plod on/disappear without bothering you - so why bother it?

I don't understand what you mean about electoralism (i'm thick) - i thought it was the tactic of standing in elections whatever your political or class persuasion