Galloway's Workers' Party of Britain

[GroovySunday]

For me, anarchism is located within socialism. In a Venn diagram of the left, there is left>socialist>communist>libertarian/anarchist communist.

In anarchist circles, “Leftist” means something like statist or Marxist-Leninist. But it is not to deny anarchism as being a subset of the wider left (small l, no suffix). I’d be concerned that emphasising individualism and denouncing the left (or worse still, saying “neither left nor right”) would be leading one into murky territory.

There is definitely a balance to be struck between the individual and the collective: that’s what libertarian means. But to deny the collective or to downplay community and society is to place oneself on the right.

I don't want to derail this thread, but people like me view it a bit differently.

For starters, the left is the left wing part of bourgeois politics, so I don't see how anarchism can be part of left wing politics (and for people like me it simply isn't and is part of the problem).

As for individualism, people like you don't seem to like it and for you individualism is a dirty word. But all that is meant by it really is free, autonomous individuals (which is where the emphasis is for individualists). which can only be a good thing.. If communism or anarchism is not aiming for free and autonomous individuals then personally I don't see the point in it. Don't you want people to be free and autonomous individuals and to be one yourself? And all the main anarchist and libertarian thinkers were individualists in that sense and advocated for the freedom of the individual, even Kropotkin did this (and warned of how community could be a form of tyranny). The word individualism was also sometimes used, including by Oscar Wilde in the Soul of Man Under Socialism, and I'm sure by others.

The so-called 'individualism' of conservatives is, alot of the time, just right wingers being arseholes. It's not genuine individualism. It's also often a psychological device used to try to make people feel empowered and in control, rather than helpless. But I see no reason to reject, or be uncomfortable with, genuine individualism at all. Infact it really is a beautiful and very worthy cause and is really the whole point of anarchism and communism ( individualism through collectivism). And people like me definitely see capitalism and conservatism as enemies of the individual, not as individualist. Thats how people like me see things, and we do not reject collectivism. We just don't want a type of collectivism that denies individuals their freedom and autonomy and is in anyway authoritarian or unjust.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Did LiveJournal shut down?

 

[danny la rouge]

As for individualism, people like you don't seem to like it and for you individualism is a dirty word

Thats how people like me see things, and we do not reject collectivism. We just don't want a type of collectivism that denies individuals their freedom and autonomy and is in anyway authoritarian or unjust.

Here are two contradictory opinions within the same post by you.

1. You making claims about what me and “people like me” (anarchist communists?) think about individualism.

2. You bemoaning what other people claim you think about collectivism.

This could easily be cleared up, except from past experience it’s going to end up with you going ballistic and throwing your toys out of the pram.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Here are two contradictory opinions within the same post by you.

1. You making claims about what me and “people like me” (anarchist communists?) think about individualism.

2. You bemoaning what other people claim you think about collectivism.

This could easily be cleared up, except from past experience it’s going to end up with you going ballistic and throwing your toys out of the pram.

STOP OPPRESSIN' ME, MAAAAAN

 

[GroovySunday]

Here are two contradictory opinions within the same post by you.

1. You making claims about what me and “people like me” (anarchist communists?) think about individualism.

2. You bemoaning what other people claim you think about collectivism.

This could easily be cleared up, except from past experience it’s going to end up with you going ballistic and throwing your toys out of the pram.

Seems to me we've both made ourselves clear. You said yourself you're concerned about emphasis on the individual, which is clearly the case with 'anarchists' such as yourself (whereas I don't have a problem with it).

And we also differ on the whole thing about the left. I think I've always made my views clear on here. I'm struggling to see anything contradictory in what I've posted.

 

[danny la rouge]

Seems to me we've both made ourselves clear. You said yourself you're concerned about emphasis on the individual, which is clearly the case with 'anarchists' such as yourself (whereas I don't have a problem with it).

The post of mine you quoted says literally:

“There is definitely a balance to be struck between the individual and the collective: that’s what libertarian means.”

 

[GroovySunday]

The post of mine you quoted says literally:

“There is definitely a balance to be struck between the individual and the collective”

Yeah I agree with that, but I guess we seem to want to emphasise more one or the other?

Certainly I think theres a lack of emphasis on the individual in the formal anarchist scene (where individualism is a dirty word). And someone like you wouldn't call yourself an individualist would you?

I think there are also other differences.

 

[hitmouse]

The original post by 39th that started this off was:

In my experience both Militant and the SWP had some good hard working members who were respected in their workplaces and communities, raised families and were perfectly normal people.

Do you reckon that being respected in one's workplace and community is a good or a bad thing? Is it inherently an affront to individualism to be someone who earns the respect of those around you?

 

[danny la rouge]

Yeah I agree with that, but I guess we seem to want to emphasize more one or the other?

Certainly I think theres a lack of emphasis on the individual in the formal anarchist scene (where individualism is a dirty word). And someone like you wouldn't call yourself an individualist would you?

No, I definitely wouldn’t call myself an individualist. Nor would I even call myself an individualist anarchist.

 

[GroovySunday]

The original post by 39th that started this off was:

Do you reckon that being respected in one's workplace and community is a good or a bad thing? Is it inherently an affront to individualism to be someone who earns the respect of those around you?

I was more referring to what he said about raising a family and what seemed to me to be this idea of only valuing certain kinds of people.

 

[Pickman's model]

people like me

i think that's been disproved repeatedly over a number of threads

 

[danny la rouge]

I was more referring to what he said about raising a family and what seemed to me to be this idea of only valuing certain kinds of people.

I can’t speak for The39thStep but I didn’t read that as only valuing people who raise families.

 

[Pickman's model]

I was more referring to what he said about raising a family and what seemed to me to be this idea of only valuing certain kinds of people.

everyone lives in a family. families differ greatly in structure. so it seems to me your great difference here is with the notion of what a family consists of. i have no children but i have a family unit, ie me and my partner, and our relations. presumably (tho atheism help them) you have relatives too. raising a family doesn't have to be solely the preserve of a mum and dad, but grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins and so on too. and in many societies in addition to the uk that's how things are done.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't want to derail this thread, but people like me view it a bit differently.

For starters, the left is the left wing part of bourgeois politics, so I don't see how anarchism can be part of left wing politics (and for people like me it simply isn't and is part of the problem).

As for individualism, people like you don't seem to like it and for you individualism is a dirty word. But all that is meant by it really is free, autonomous individuals (which is where the emphasis is for individualists). which can only be a good thing.. If communism or anarchism is not aiming for free and autonomous individuals then personally I don't see the point in it. Don't you want people to be free and autonomous individuals and to be one yourself? And all the main anarchist and libertarian thinkers were individualists in that sense and advocated for the freedom of the individual, even Kropotkin did this (and warned of how community could be a form of tyranny). The word individualism was also sometimes used, including by Oscar Wilde in the Soul of Man Under Socialism, and I'm sure by others.

The so-called 'individualism' of conservatives is, alot of the time, just right wingers being arseholes. It's not genuine individualism. It's also often a psychological device used to try to make people feel empowered and in control, rather than helpless. But I see no reason to reject, or be uncomfortable with, genuine individualism at all. Infact it really is a beautiful and very worthy cause and is really the whole point of anarchism and communism ( individualism through collectivism). And people like me definitely see capitalism and conservatism as enemies of the individual, not as individualist. Thats how people like me see things, and we do not reject collectivism. We just don't want a type of collectivism that denies individuals their freedom and autonomy and is in anyway authoritarian or unjust.

you're trying to be sterner than stirner

 

[andysays]

GroovySunday is so keen on autonomous individuals he's pretending to be two of them simultaneously

 

[DaveCinzano]

you're trying to be sterner than stirner

More Steiner, and I don't mean Michael Caine in a groovy Luftwaffe leather jacket

 

[Fozzie Bear]

The so-called 'individualism' of conservatives is, alot of the time, just right wingers being arseholes. It's not genuine individualism. It's also often a psychological device used to try to make people feel empowered and in control, rather than helpless. But I see no reason to reject, or be uncomfortable with, genuine individualism at all. Infact it really is a beautiful and very worthy cause and is really the whole point of anarchism and communism ( individualism through collectivism). And people like me definitely see capitalism and conservatism as enemies of the individual, not as individualist. Thats how people like me see things, and we do not reject collectivism. We just don't want a type of collectivism that denies individuals their freedom and autonomy and is in anyway authoritarian or unjust.

But how is it possible for someone who embraces individualism to denounce conservative expressions of it? Surely that denies people the autonomy that you are so keen on?

 

[hitmouse]

I was more referring to what he said about raising a family and what seemed to me to be this idea of only valuing certain kinds of people.

OK. If we agree to bracket aside the question of raising a family, can we at least agree that it is a good thing to be respected in your workplace (if you have one) and community?

 

[GroovySunday]

Here are two contradictory opinions within the same post by you.

1. You making claims about what me and “people like me” (anarchist communists?) think about individualism.

2. You bemoaning what other people claim you think about collectivism.

This could easily be cleared up, except from past experience it’s going to end up with you going ballistic and throwing your toys out of the pram.

It looks to me like you've entered this 'discussion' in a dishonest way. You've claimed my post was contradictory when it's not. So there's probably no point continuing this discussion.

 

[GroovySunday]

But how is it possible for someone who embraces individualism to denounce conservative expressions of it? Surely that denies people the autonomy that you are so keen on?

This is just a ridiculous post that makes no sense

 

[danny la rouge]

It looks to me like you've entered this 'discussion' in a dishonest way. You've claimed my post was contradictory when it's not. So there's probably no point continuing this discussion.

Here we go.

 

[GroovySunday]

No, I definitely wouldn’t call myself an individualist. Nor would I even call myself an individualist anarchist.

I'm still happy to call myself an anarcho-communist. But I also don't automatically reject all other types of anarchism in their entirety and claim to have the 'one true way'. I guess I'm a bit of an anarchist without adjectives these days.

 

[GroovySunday]

I can’t speak for The39thStep but I didn’t read that as only valuing people who raise families.

Valuing 'normal people', which to him includes people who raise families.

 

[DaveCinzano]

I guess I'm a bit of an anarchist without adjectives these days.

I'm sure the class can suggest a few

 

[GroovySunday]

OK. If we agree to bracket aside the question of raising a family, can we at least agree that it is a good thing to be respected in your workplace (if you have one) and community?

What if most people in said workplace are arseholes?

 

[hitmouse]

What if most people in said workplace are arseholes?

And here we come to it. It's always the children that are wrong, right?

 

[danny la rouge]

Valuing 'normal people', which to him includes people who raise families.

I really think you’re reading into that things that aren’t there.

But I have to say, for me the category “normal people”, as a throw away term, though I’d probably have chosen “ordinary” in the context, definitely includes people who raise families.

 

[PTK]

I'm not sure whether or not to read this book. Many people recommend it, but what if those people are all arseholes?

 

[Fozzie Bear]

This is just a ridiculous post that makes no sense

Who determines what is "genuine individualism"? Presumably it has to be an individual?

I have not really kept up with individualism since hitting puberty, so you might need to spell it out?

 

[DaveCinzano]

you might need to spell it out?

Dishing out orders now is it, Herr Obergruppenfuhrer Fozzenbach?!