I’m digging anarchists’ more hands on, pragmatic approach to politics. I finished The Conquest of Bread a couple of weeks ago and I’m currently working my way through Bullshit Jobs. Any suggestions about theory, praxis, mutual aid, etc. would be appreciated
I saw this post from /all…
But isn’t the entire point of anarchy no government, how exactly do you think thats “hands on”?
Or is this one of those things where people have invented new definitions for existing terms like saying the USSR was communist?
Chomsky is considered an anarchist but does talk about justified/unjustified hierarchies.
Please See rule number 4 of this community and if this was really a naive question than please educate yourself about the very basics of Anarchism before posting in this community.
Oh and despite all its failings the USSR never claimed to be communist.
No worries, I’ll just block this community.
…?
It’s really simple… the whole idea behind anarchism (and all libertarian socialist thought, for that matter) is to put the power of decision and action back into the hands of communities and not a bunch of far-removed and unaccountable political racketeers (which is essentially how anarchists view “formal” political establishments - and they are entirely correct in this view)
No. Nothing new about it… the meaning behind the term “socialism” (for instance) has always referred to a condition where the workers own the means of production. The big split in the left happened because Marxists believed the state could represent the workers - the Bakuninist anarchists believed the state would simply form a new “political elite” and simply become the new elite repressing the working class. This happened long before the Russian revolution… and subsequent events proved the anarchist side correct beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I think what they mean by hands on is most likely direct action. That would include going to protests and participating in projects of mutual aid.
There are many disagreeing takes on everything from folks who identify as anarchist, but “no government” doesn’t mean “nothing the government does should be done at all.”
Instead the idea is to foster organization of society such that relationships of domination are minimized. Some frame this as the development of a much more active and empowered “civil society” of negotiation, production, and problem solving that, in its approach, is fundamentally at odds with and hampered by the authority-oriented organizational model of government.
And the notion of direct action emphasizes the difference between petitioning representatives to change the world on one hand, with taking up responsibility for action and organization yourself on the other.
How the fuck is it NOT hands on if there’s no government in the way? Whose hands do you think we’re talking about?