- Re: First they came or the anarchists ... Archived Message
Posted by johnlilburne
on December 17, 2019, 1:32 pm, in reply to "Re: First they came or the anarchists ..."
|
government and authority is corrupt and should be swept away in favour of people leading themselves. Well, obviously. The state is always oppressive and operates in the interest of the few and should be replaced by voluntary association and mutual aid. I pretty much stand by this: Anarchism is about trying to balance the needs and interests of the individual against the needs and interests of the community as a whole. Where you strike the balance depends on what kind of anarchist you are. I don't that is at all convoluted. Anarchy is an ongoing process, a dialectical process if you like, never finally resolved. I don't like the term 'anarchism'. It implies an ideology, something that may be imposed, whereas anarchy is a practice. Anarchy is about compromise and trying to reach consensus. Binary choices and decisions by majority should be avoided wherever possible. Of course, anarchy is, unfortunately, virtually impossible in mass society, where oppressive power relations are entrenched. The tyranny of the majority Exactly that. Replacing the tyranny of a 'superstate' by that of a state solely. An illusion of freedom. Nothing for a self-proclaimed anarchist to boast and gloat about as if it's some big achievement to discomfort others. Totally against the generous spirit of the only anarchy worthy of the name. |