A Survey of Hyphenated Anarchist Tendencies and Their Opposites 6

I think that ARV-ATS has to a great degree developed to the point where we are ready to enter a new stage of our development. Over the years, I have made an effort to assess the limitations of previously existing anarchist movements, and to formulate a new theoretical paradigm and strategic model for a 21st century anarchist movement. I call this the “third wave” of anarchism, with classical 19th/early 20th century anarchism being the first wave, and the New Left/neo-Marxist anarchism that dominates anarchism today being the second wave. At this point, I think we have all theory and strategy we need, and it’s time to start developing more action-orientated cadre of radicals and activists.

The first task would seem to be the development of an Anarchist “gray” macro-tribe that forms and maintains a political and cultural identity of its own that is completely separate from either the Left or Right. At present, far too many anarchists, libertarians, and others with similar views are merely leftists or rightists under another name. They are ultimately leftists or rightists first, and anarchists second, third, or fourth. However, what we need is a pan-anarchist movement that has “Anarchy First!” as its revolutionary battle cry irrespective of the kinds of fault lines that normally divide left and right.

The need for anarchists to coalesce into a gray macro-tribe is the most pressing movement issue we face at present, and the one that is most hindered by divisiveness over other matters. I have been especially critical of left-anarchists and left-libertarians over these issues in the past as the cultural Left has for some time maintained hegemony in the anarchist milieu. However, many right-leaning libertarians and anarchists likewise display similar characteristics.

The movement question of the era is: How can all of these scattered anarchist tendencies ultimately unify into an effective fighting force, as they must do if anarchists are to go about shaping the future evolution of societies around the world?

By John Zube

ANYONE IS INVITED TO REPRODUCE AND IMPROVE THIS DRAFT. Just send me a copy including your improvements!

A first draft was undertaken on 13 March 96, as a step towards a complete survey of this kind. Extensive help is needed to complete this listing. How many different kinds of anarchism are there or have ever been advocated and are still advocated by some? I do not know. Do you?

Further entries to this listing are welcomed, as well as corrections. No one knows or appreciates all of them alike. My bias will show, inevitably. Enter your own favourites and also the types you dislike or hate most.

Doubling up of descriptions in different terms and the overlapping of descriptions has not been avoided so far. Nor have these entries been sufficiently grouped and sorted, if at all. Neither has the most suitable term always been placed first, for future alphabetization. Consider this to be no more than a first brainstorming effort, with some additions now, 13.3.00, that invites further brainstorming input.

The final list, if it ever becomes finalized, will look very different from this listing. It will be much clearer and explicit, I hope. It will also have sufficient groupings or cross references.

Many of these terms are loaded with value judgements. If you can, please do express them more objectively.Finally, ask yourself: Can all of these types, their principles, institutions and communities, peacefully coexist with each other? Can all of them not only do this but can they also coexist, peacefully, with all kinds of competing governmental, economic and social systems that are not anarchistic in their ideals, among a majority or minorities of remaining statists or governmentalists?

If so, then what kinds of minimum common premises, principles, methods, processes, institutions and organizations or frameworks would be required for this?

Could these one day come to turn minorities and even majorities of statists into our allies or at least neutralize them?

I make no secret out of my preference for the panarchistic framework for all but aggressive criminals with victims. I much prefer it even over any radically decentralized but still territorially exclusive and uniform communities, intentional communities or utopian colonies. On a proprietary and cooperative

basis these could be realized under panarchism, too, but our options would not be confined to them. Nor would we have to respect their land-grabbing and usurping territorial claims, their exclusive and imposed constitutions, laws, jurisdiction, police and other armed forces and their artificial borders.

Cities, religious liberty, private diverse actions and associations, the Internet and some past and partly remaining historical traditions demonstrated to me, convincingly, that peaceful coexistence and individual choices in the “public” sphere are rightful, possible and desirable, even peace-, progress-, justice-, freedom- and prosperity-promoting. I am preparing an encyclopaedia on that option, called ON PANARCHY, as part of my PEACE PLANS series. The first 19 volumes and some supplementary volumes on extraterritorial autonomy are already

out, all only on microfiche. Until pulled together by an alphabetical index, after a few more such volumes, it is only a materials collection.

Several hundred copies, primitively offset printed and home-bound, of my peace programme, based on panarchistic ideas and alphabetized, are still available in this offset and bound form (apart from a 3-fiche and $ 3 issue of it, available for $3 in Australian postage stamps or 3 IRCs ) for $ 5 plus postage.

Title: An ABC Against Nuclear War, 1975, 270pp of fine print. Subtitled: “A handbook of ideas on the prevention of nuclear war, proposing: Dissolution of the warfare State through extension of individual liberties and responsibilities, freedom vs. the ultimate of statism – nuclear holocaust. …”

This book, in PEACE PLANS Nos. 16-18, contains ca. 500 alphabetized suggestions. Among several other relevant essays, in its appendix, it contains the classicdescription of panarchism by P.E. de Puydt: Panarchy, Brussels, 1860, Revue Trimestrielle, in a translation by Adrian Falk.

================================================================================

??? – anarchism vs. existentialist anarchism.

??? – anarchism vs. situationist anarchism. (I am still confused or ignorant about their aims and meanings and saw never anything moral, rational and attractive in the little that I read about them. Thus I would rather class them with the primitive and circus anarchists. J.Z.)

Absolute property rights anarchism of the Robert LeFevre type, including absolute property in land and natural resources, vs. various types of anti-property to limited property notions of anarchism.

Alternative or parallel institutions or competitive anarchism or self-liberation anarchism vs. destructive, revolutionary or abolitionist anarchism or one-model only anarchism for all, whether they believe in it or not.

Altruistic anarchism vs. egoistic anarchism.

American anarchism vs. European anarchism.

Anarchism now! – anarchism vs. far future realization of the anarchist dream. Compare alternative institutions.

Anarcho-capitalism vs. communist anarchism or libertarian socialism.

Anarcho-liberal vs. anarcho-conservative. (Anarcho-liberal is an oxymoron. Some liberalsbelieve in the State and anarchists do not, says ANY TIME NOW, No. 7, in Summer, Fall 99. However, many classical liberals take many anarchistic positions, especially in economics and in reducing the State at least to Wilhelm von Humboldt’s “nightwatch man” status. And at least some conservatives adopt more and more individualist anarchist positions, or at least discuss them thoroughly. – Alas, the terms “liberal” and “conservative”, as usually understood or misunderstood, only add to the confusion. – J.Z.)

Anarcho terrorists or bomb throwers and assassins vs. non-violent and pacifist or civil defence anarchists.

Animal rights anarchism vs. human rights anarchism. (For me H.R. come first and animals have only the right of irrational beings, i.e., not to be killed unnecessarily, not to be cruelly treated and, in our own interest, not to be wiped out as a species. – J.Z.)

Antisemitic anarchism (Duehring?) vs. non-racist anarchism.

Anti-technology anarchism vs. technology anarchism.

Atheist, agnostic, deist, humanist, rationalist anarchism that, apart from its propaganda and self-concerned actions or non-actions, remains tolerant towards tolerant religious choices and actions of others vs. anarchism that sees red regarding any religious sentiment, idea and ritual and would prefer to hang all priests and close all churches.

Autarchism or autarchic anarchism of the Robert LeFevre Type vs. retreatist anarchism and national territorial and “economic” autarchy attempts of totalitarian regimes.

Authoritarian anarchism vs. voluntary anarchism.

Atheist anarchisms vs. christian or other religious anarchism.

Back to nature anarchism vs. forward with nature anarchism.

Bottoms-up or grass roots anarchism, based on individual sovereignty vs. top down or centrally planned and directed anarchism, based on collective sovereignty.

Brotherhood anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Buddhist anarchism vs. other religious kinds of anarchism.

Bureaucratic anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Capitalistic anarchism, anarcho-capitalism or market-anarchism or laissez-faire anarchism vs. socialistic, collectivistic, communistic anarchism or libertarian socialism. (Just a shorter version of the propertarian etc. anarchism.) See: Laissez-Faire anarchism and Free-Market anarchism.

Christian anarchism vs. atheist anarchism.

Circus anarchism, play-acting or lunatic anarchism vs. rational, moral, serious, scientific, educational anarchism.

Classical anarchism vs. modern anarchism.

Collectivist anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Communist anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Competitive anarchism vs. exclusive, monopolistic, privileged and uniform anarchism imposed upon all, whether they like it or not.

Competitive anarchism vs. cooperative anarchism. (Under voluntarism the two are not opposites. Moreover, ompetition is a form of cooperation and cooperation is a form of competition. – J.Z.)

Compulsory anarchism vs. voluntary anarchism.

Concrete-bound and almost mindless activist anarchism vs. theoretical, philosophicial, educational and talk-talk anarchism.

Conservationist anarchism vs. economic development anarchism.

Consistent anarchism vs. inconsistent anarchism.

Cooperative anarchism vs. competitive anarchism. (Under voluntarism the two are not opposites. Moreover, ompetition is a form of cooperation and cooperation is a form of competition. – J.Z.)

Cooperative production and consumer coop anarchism vs. syndicalist and collectivist and unionist anarchism. (IWW etc.)

Cooperative production and cooperative and voluntary intentional community anarchism, partnerships, self-management schemes, autonomous group-work, all no longer under government legislation and jurisdiction, vs. share company and corporation anarchism, including multinational corporations, no longer under

government legislation and jurisdiction. (The best forms of each come close to their seeming opposites. J.Z.)

Cooperative, competing, voluntarist, propertarian and tolerant anarchism vs. compulsory, expropriative, exclusive, violent, unionist or syndicalist anarchism.

Daily private and individual choices and actions anarchism, expanded to all “public services” (see under “panarchism”) vs. prescriptive anarchism of a few for all, whether they are anarchists or not. (As a German proverb says: “If you don’t want to be my brother then I’ll bash your head in!”)

Decentralized anarchism vs. centralized or federated anarchism.

Defensively and liberatingly forceful anarchism, using non-violent options first but only as far as they go vs. dogmatically and exclusively non-violent or totally pacifistic anarchism or one committed only to civic defence and resistance anarchism. (Gandhi, LeFevre, Martin.)

Diverse anarchism vs. uniform anarchism.

Dog eat dog anarchism vs. altruistic, collectivist, socialist, communist etc. anarchism.

Dogmatic anarchism vs. scientific, speculative, pragmatic and experimental anarchism.

Ecology anarchism vs. economic development anarchism.

Economic and political anarchism vs. holistic anarchism.

Economic anarchism vs. lifestyle choice anarchism.

Educational and enlightening anarchism vs. nihilistic, protest, actionist (action for the sake of action, no matter how futile and senseless, wrongful, destructive, provocative and self-defeating, like marching, demonstrating, shouting, banner-waving and sloganeering) anarchism. (Some do consider even criminals with victims as anarchists.)

Egalitarian anarchism vs. individualist and voluntary anarchism.

Egoistic, self-serving and self-responsible or individualistic anarchism vs. altruistic, fraternal, egalitarian, all for one, one for all or communistic, collectivistic, socialistic anarchism or libertarian socialism.

Emotional anarchism vs. educational, philosophic, scientific, rational, human rights, natural law or ethical anarchism.

Evolutionary and developmental anarchism vs. revolutionary, coercive, militant, “radical” anarchism.

Existentialist anarchism vs. ??? anarchism. What is its opposite? Non-existing anarchism?

Experimental anarchism vs. theoretical, dogmatic and speculative anarchism.

Exterritorialist anarchism vs. territorialist anarchism.

Exterritorially decentralized or networked anarchism (panarchism) vs. decentralized anarchism that is exclusively territorially organized.

Federalistic anarchism vs. individualistic anarchism.

Forward with nature vs. back to nature anarchism.

Fraternal anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Free exchange or earnings from labour and capital anarchism vs. coercively and artificially distributionist anarchism, e.g. according to egalitarian or Georgist principles. (Just another version of propertarian anarchism.)

Free-Market anarchism vs. self-sufficiency or autarchist anarchism & retreatist or decentralist or socialist anarchism.

Futuristic anarchism vs. retreatist anarchism.

Futuristic anarchism vs. traditional or reactionary anarchism. (Golden Age notions!)

General and free and private individual choice anarchism vs. sexual revolution or liberation anarchism, which holds that everything else is secondary. (Armand)

government legislation and jurisdiction. (The best forms of each come close to their seeming opposites. J.Z.)

Golden Age anarchism vs. progressive and free market anarchism.

Gradualist anarchism, as far as actions, not principles and final aims, are concerned vs. “anarchism now and for all” attempts.

Gradualist, daily life, step by step anarchism vs. package deal or wholesale utopia anarchism.

Green anarchism vs. economic development anarchism.

Holistic anarchism vs. economic and political anarchism.

Household or parochial anarchism vs. internationalist anarchism.

Human rights anarchism vs. utilitarian anarchism.

Hyphenated anarchism vs. unhyphenated anarchism.

Individual rights anarchism vs. “rights” of the needy and poor anarchism, presuming “rightful” claims against the property and earnings of others, even those who dissent against this “ideal”.

Individual secessionist and voluntaryist constructive and self-management anarchism vs. abolitionist and destructive anarchism.

Individualist anarchism vs. left-wing and right-wing anarchism, egalitarian anarchism, communist, socialist, collectivist anarchism, syndicalism, bureaucratic or federalistic and representative and structured anarchism and libertarian socialism.

Informed and enlightened anarchism vs. uninformed, ignorant and prejudiced anarchism.

Innovative and futuristic anarchism vs. historical and traditional anarchism.

Intentional community anarchism vs. ??? What exactly is its opposite?

Internationalist anarchism, that applies its principles to defence, liberation efforts and revolutions against dictatorships, vs. more or less parochial to national anarchism or even mere household and friendship-circle anarchism.

Intermediate technology anarchism vs. high technology anarchism. (The latter includes microfilm options, at least as long as it hasn’t lost its remaining leading edges.)

Laissez faire economics anarchism vs. various forms of communist and socialist or collectivist anarchism.

Land reform anarchism of e.g. the Henry George, Silvio Gesell and K.H.Z. Soneman type vs. proprietary community land holding, as proposed by Spencer Heath et al and open coops for land and natural resources, as proposed by Theodor Hertzka and limited to voluntary practice by Ulrich von Beckerath.

Left wing anarchism vs. upwing anarchism.

Lifestyle anarchism vs. economic anarchism (Laissez-faire anarchism).

Literary, verbal and ideas anarchism vs. visual, illustrative, symbolic, logo or artistic anarchism.

Lunatic anarchism, play-acting or circus anarchism vs. rational, moral, serious, scientific, educational anarchism.

Macroeconomic anarchism vs. microeconomic anarchism.

Microeconomic anarchism vs. macroeconomic anarchism.

Militia anarchism, based upon individual rights, self-management and self-determination even for soldiers, for the protection of individual rights, in ideal volunteer militias vs. conventional militia and liberation forces or “freedom fighters” with all too limited and usually nationalistic or racist “liberation” programmes. (See PP 61-63.)

Moderate and non-violent anarchism vs. radical, revolutionary and terrorist anarchism or bomb-throwing anarchism.

Modern anarchism vs. classical anarchism.

Monetary freedom or merely gold-bug anarchism vs. money abolitionist anarchism, wanting to return to a barter- or gift-or no-pricing economy, based on communistic notions.

Mutual aid anarchism vs. rugged individualist, egoist, individualist, free market, capitalist or laissez faire anarchism.

Mutualist anarchism vs. communist or socialist anarchism.

Natural law (early E. Burke), moral law, human rights, ethical anarchism vs. artificially designed, intentional community or social engineering, constructed, constitutional, utopian or synthetic and utilitarian anarchism.

Natural man anarchism, for man as he is vs. anarchism for a future, changed and supposedly better man. Compare natural anarchism vs. realistic anarchism.

Non-racist anarchism vs. antisemitic anarchism (Duehring?).

Nonviolent anarchism vs. militant, violent, armed, and militarily organized and trained anarchism.

Open-minded anarchism vs. closed minded and dogmatic anarchism.

Panarchist anarchism of competing governments and free societies on the basis of full minority autonomy, exterritorially under personal laws, or panarchism, vs. limited competition anarchism, in which competition is considered acceptable only between anarchistic societies and communities.

Panarchistic anarchism vs. non-panarchistic anarchism.

Permanent protest anarchism vs. anarchism with a positive liberation program.

Philosophical anarchism vs. anarchism by deed.

Philosophical anarchism vs. instinctual, emotional, pragmatic, realistic, day-to-day anarchism.

Planet-wide anarchism of one particular form vs. competitive forms of anarchism that compete not only with other forms of anarchism on one planet but also with various forms of voluntary statism. (The planet-wide form of a single kind of anarchism is all too wide spread in SF, while the peaceful coexistence of numerous forms of governmental and non-governmental societies on the same planet, on the basis of voluntarism and exterritorial autonomy {panarchism} remains largely unexplored in this literature. – J.Z.)

Play-acting or circus or lunatic anarchism vs. rational, moral, serious, scientific, educational anarchism.

Pluralistic anarchism vs. uniform and authoritarian or egalitarian anarchism.

Popular anarchism (“direct – democratic”, “representative”, “republican” anarchism of the people, by the people and for the people anarchism, that liberates and empowers the people or the masses, instead of looking down upon them vs. elite-anarchism based on the assumption that “might equals right” “anarchism” of the few, an elite of “supermen” (Stirner, Nietzsche, Redbeard ).

Practical anarchism vs. idealistic, theoretical, educational & utopian anarchism.

Pragmatic vs. theoretical anarchism.

Principled anarchism vs. casuistic and unprincipled anarchism.

Pro-inheritance anarchism vs. anti-inheritance anarchism.

Pro private, competitive and cooperative property in land anarchism (Theodor Hertzka’s “open coops”, U. von Beckerath’s tolerant variations of them, Spencer Heath MacCallum’s “proprietary communities”, Robert LeFevre’s “absolute property” concept & autarchy ) vs. anti-property land reform anarchism of various types. (Henry George, Tolstoi, Silvio Gesell, Solneman.)

Programmed anarchism, based on well thought out and proven programmes, gradualist to radical, reformist to revolutionary, non-violent to militant, for volunteer communities only vs. dream-time anarchism, with its flawed utopias to be forced upon all.

Progressive anarchism vs. primitive anarchism and “Golden Age” anarchism.

Progressive anarchism vs. self-sufficiency or autarchist anarchism.

Progressive anarchism vs. traditional or reactionary anarchism.

Propertarian, pro-property, pro free enterprise and cooperative property and earnings, pro-interest & profits & dividends & rent & competition & free trade & freedom of exchange or capitalist anarchism, market anarchism, laissez-faire, laissez passer (Let people produce, let people exchange) or anarcho-capitalism vs. various forms of communist, socialist, collectivist, left anarchism, opposed to property, especially in means of production and land, and opposed to interest, profit, dividends, rent, markets, free pricing, market wages and earnings, money, capital markets, corporations, multinationals, development, growth.

Proprietary Community anarchism vs. various forms of decentralized, municipal, territorial, communist, socialist or libertarian socialist and exterritorial or panarchistic anarchism.

Pseudo anarchism vs. rational anarchism.

Radical, revolutionary and terrorist anarchism or bomb-throwing anarchism vs. moderate and non-violent anarchism.

Rational anarchism vs. emotional anarchism.

Realistic anarchism vs. idealistic anarchism.

Reformist anarchism vs. revolutionary or “radical” anarchism. (I hold that many reforms are more radical than many of the proposed revolutions. J.Z.)

Religious and tolerant anarchism, favoring religious liberty and tolerance vs. anarchism intolerant of religions and sectarian beliefs, atheistic, rationalistic and humanist anarchism.

Representative anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Retreatist anarchism vs. progressive or free market, capitalist or futurist anarchism.

Revisionist anarchism vs. traditional anarchism or classical anarchism.

Right wing anarchism vs. upwing anarchism.

Right-wing anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Right-wing anarchism vs. left-wing anarchism.

Rugged individualist anarchism vs. altruistic, communistic, collectivistic, socialistic, religious and decentralist anarchism.

Scientific anarchism vs. dogmatic or utopian or “idealistic” anarchism.

Scientific, forward-looking, progressive, technological anarchism vs. backward-looking, mythical, golden-age, back to nature, primitive, traditional, historical, and utopian novel anarchism.

Secessionist anarchism and deserters etc., striving for exterritorial autonomy for voluntary protective associations vs. unity, territorialist, loyalist and traditionalist anarchism, that would not allow individuals to secede from or desert its communities to join others or even archist communities.

Self-management and cooperative anarchism vs. market and capitalist anarchism based on the continuance of the employer-employee relationship in most enterprises.

Self-sufficiency anarchism vs. free market, progressive, capitalistic or futuristic anarchism.

Serious anarchism, backed by social science research deserving the name vs. circus anarchism, from flower power to play power and various other supposed “actions” and “demonstrations”.

Situationist anarchism vs. ??? Where are its opponents situated?

Social Darwinist anarchism vs. altruistic anarchism.

Socialist anarchism vs. individualist anarchism.

Spiritual anarchism vs. realistic or practical anarchism.

Speculative, pragmatic and experimental anarchism vs. dogmatic anarchism.

Structured anarchism vs. unstructured anarchism.

Syndicalism vs. individualist anarchism.

Technological anarchism vs. anti-technology anarchism.

Technophobic anarchism vs. technophilic anarchism. (Anarchists loving liberating technologies, like e.g. the Internet and microfilm options.)

Territorial anarchism vs. exterritorial anarchism.

Terroristic, bomb-throwing, revolutionary, militant anarchism vs. non-violent, philosophical, educational, reformist and individualist anarchism.

Theoretical anarchism vs. pragmatic anarchism.

Tolerant anarchism vs. intolerant anarchism.

Traditional anarchism vs. futuristic or progressive anarchism.

Traditional anarchism vs. revisionist anarchism.

Tyrannicidal anarchism vs. assassinationist anarchism, that wrongly or ill defines its enemies and thus badly serves its cause or sets it back. (“For every tyrant a 1000 ready slaves.”) – The tyranny in the slaves ought to be exterminated. Otherwise even a proper tyrannicide is largely in vain. J.Z.)

Unhyphenated anarchism vs. hyphenated anarchism.

Uniform anarchism vs. voluntary anarchism.

Unlimited progress and growth and development, or “no limits!” anarchism, pro science and technology vs. green, conservation, ecology, anti-science, anti-technology, zero population growth, anti-development, back to nature, back to the caves and subsistence economy “anarchism”, that loves everything in nature but man and his works and sees in man the greatest threat to the natural life of all other creatures and to himself.

Unlimited vision or space and science fiction anarchism, expanding into the universe vs. dirtball earth anarchism, with the urge to remain in this womb and limited horizon and overpopulation notions.

Unstructured anarchism vs. structured anarchism.

Upwing anarchism vs. left and right – wing anarchism.

Up-wing anarchism vs. retreatist anarchism; back to nature anarchism?

Utopian anarchism vs. practical anarchism, scientific anarchism and rightful & voluntary anarchism.

Utopian colony anarchism vs. internationalist anarchism.

Voluntary or voluntaryist anarchism vs. authoritarian, compulsory, uniform, egalitarian and utopian anarchism.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

There are probably hundreds to thousands of different definitions or terms and explanations or distinctions – but they do not come to my mind at present. Please, point them out to me. I, too, have had access to and have read only a fraction of all anarchist writings.

Some kinds of definitions or terms help to distinguish the essential differences between the different kinds of anarchisms and other isms. E.g. Don Werkheiser’s distinction between “single convenience relationships” and “mutual convenience relationships”.

The advocates of “anarchist unity” or of “un-hyphenated” anarchism should at least attempt to find out which, if any, features of all the different types are common and essential for all of them. To do this, they ought to properly register, define and explain as well as criticize all the hyphenated types. Only then will the come close to a kind of consensus, one at least strong enough to make them tolerant enough towards each other and towards other dissenters.

Need I stress that my inclinations, preferences and convictions are usually expressed on one side only of this listing – but that I have no objection at all if others make other choices for themselves?

Combine or separate the distinctions here made and correct, enter or expand their supposed opposites.

When complete, we might end up with a list and short description, including literature title samples and main authors’ names, with hundreds of anarchists “faiths”, movements, sects, or ideologies, like some democracies or republics end up with hundreds of different political parties and even supposedly

unifying religions, all supposedly believing in a single god only, ended up even with thousands of different faiths and their organizations and rituals.

Alternatively, we might succeed in cleaning our stables sufficiently, turning its manure into useful fertilizer and grow some healthy fruits upon fields fertilized with it, still a variety of fruits, due to invididual tastes, preferences and temperaments – but all supposed to be beneficial for those who

chose them for themselves, without blemishes, diseases or remaining contradictions.

At least some of us might lose some of our blinders and some of our dogmatism and of our intolerance towards dissenters, when perusing, pondering and completing such listings.

It seems to me that no degree of ignorance, stupidity or prejudice seems to be so large, for all too many, that it will not be embraced, all in the name of “freedom” or “anarchism”, for all too many years, if not decades or centuries.

This list may help increase the awareness of this kind of self-defeating “party politics”, dogmatism and sectarianism among freedom lovers.

Those who manage to find, peruse and ponder this listing will often be forced, by their own remaining degree of rationalism, to re-examine their own definitions, assumptions and animosities and to consider a great variety of other ideas more or less rationally.

If anarchists and other more self-limiting freedom lovers had not been so incredibly split up among themselves, fighting each other often more than their major enemies, e.g. the totalitarians, they often delivered themselves right into the hands of totalitarians. If they bothered to find out what their common features and aspirations are and what would permit them to peacefully coexist, then they would be well on the way to become invincible towards totalitarians and dictatorships. For instance, I have met all too many “anarchists” who took their “egalitarianism” much more serious than the essentially voluntaristic and non-violent and non-interventionist characters of anarchism as a system that does not try to impose its features upon non-aggressive dissenters. To define private property as inherently aggressive does completely misunderstand the nature and function of private property and its relationship to individual rights. Propertarians permit anti-propertarians to do their own things to themselves at their own risk and expense – but anti-propertarians are not prepared to let propertarians act at their risk and expense. The major bone of contention between them are different concepts regarding rights in land and other natural resources, in which both agree not to consider state granted privileges as basic rights. The anarchists, however, should have seen that there are xyz systems of land title and land use and that only an anarchistic or panarchistic approach to all of them would be rightful, one that would let each such system be practised freely among its adherents, at their own expense and risk, i.e., allowing none of them to be imposed upon its numerous dissenters. – J.Z.

The various classification schemes, charts and tables for political, economic and social systems (still to be combined in a first LMP microfiche edition) should be compared and an attempt should be made to place each of the above and verbally distinct types into one or several agreed upon survey tables,

schemes, or charts. Here, too, one picture may express more than a thousand words. What seems verbally distinct might then graphically show up as occupying either the same or a very near position.

This listing is anti-copyright. Copy and duplicate freely. Put it on the Internet. But as an initiator of this listing I do claim a “right” to a photocopy or e-mail message of your additions and corrections.

If you can, add typical definitions for each type, also typical representatives and texts.

Since I have my hands full with hundreds of further libertarian

microfiching projects, do not expect any reply or a reply soon.

On the other hand, sooner or later your contribution will end up in one of the LMP microfiche – unless you object, in writing.

Note that I have not yet perused the lengthly Anarchist Theory FAQ 7.6 for its many versions of anarchism. But I have fiched it, to the extent that it was then completed and wish someone else would undertake the job of extracting all hyphenated anarchism notions from it that are not yet included in this list.

Are those who do call themselves “libertarians” as seriously split up as are the anarchists? If so, then a similar listing of their differences might help. I would be glad if anyone provided me with such a draft for fiching in my LMP series.

PIOT (Panarchy In Our Time or: To Each the Government or Non-Governmental Society of His or Her Dreams) – largely through the extensive use of our micrographic options, John Zube.

PEACE PLANS, ON PANARCHY, MONETARY FREEDOM SERIES, ANARCHIST

SERIES, FREE MARKET SERIES, FREE TRADE SERIES, COOPERATIVE

PRODUCTION SERIES, LAND REFORM SERIES, MICROGRAPHIC

SELF-PUBLISHING AND READING SERIES, LIBERTARIAN MAGAZINES AND

NEWSLETTERS, PAMPHLETS, LEAFLETS, BOOKS, PAPERS AND ESSAYS,

DIRECTORIES, BIBLIOGRAPHIES. LITERATURE FOR SALE LISTS, all on

microfiche. If you know of another, larger and cheaper single

publishing source for libertarian writings, please let me know.

WEBSITE: www.acenet.com.au/~jzube E-mail: jzube@acenet.com.au

John Zube, 35 Oxley St. or P.O. Box 52, Berrima, NSW 2577, Australia.

Tel.: (02) 48771436. No FAX!

Competitive anarchism vs. cooperative anarchism. (Under voluntarism the two are not opposites. Moreover, ompetition is a form of cooperation and cooperation is a form of competition. – J.Z.)

6 comments

  1. Thanks for reproducing this. The response was so far so poor that I did not bother to enter all supplementary notes, which have accumulated since then. If anarchists do not take these contradictions serious then why should anyone take such anarchists serious? – JZ, 1.3.15.

  2. Please note that my email address has changed to the one below. I still hope to receive more input to the above anarchist spectrum draft by my impression is that most anarchists do not take their anarchism serious enough to be interested in a display of all anarchist ideas and notions and their contradictions and criticism of them. They are, mostly, all too much like religious sectarians. As an individualist anarchist I am also somewhat of an anarchist sectarian. But as a panarchist I am not and do favour all kinds of anarchists, libertarians and statists to do their own things among themselves, always only at their own risk and expense. – Currently I do not have a website but much of what I offer is on the one of the tolerant anarchist G. P. de Bellis, mentioned below, who independently re-invented panarchist ideas and gave them, among others, the term polyarchy. – JZ, 28.8.15.

  3. An intriguing list. There are some scattered attempts to try and form coalitions with variant forms of Anarchism; the Black Flag Coalition is one which I am apart of on Facebook. But I’ve seen others. I love the idea of ‘Anarchy First’ Keith, but one of the things both Left and Right do (and a particular Pet Peeve of mine) is define Anarchy narrowly into their totality of ideology. Anarchy -must- for example include; capitalism, socialism, communism, feminism, masculinism, etc, etc, etc. For the most part though, I feel we’ve at least laid some groundwork for what ‘Anarchy First’ would really mean. Anti-imperialism, anti-hegemony, anti-state, etc. I guess my point is we’ve got the start of various little decentralized grey tribes, it’s a matter of getting them to communicate with one another.

  4. “I love the idea of ‘Anarchy First’ Keith, but one of the things both Left and Right do (and a particular Pet Peeve of mine) is define Anarchy narrowly into their totality of ideology. Anarchy -must- for example include; capitalism, socialism, communism, feminism, masculinism, etc, etc, etc. For the most part though, I feel we’ve at least laid some groundwork for what ‘Anarchy First’ would really mean. Anti-imperialism, anti-hegemony, anti-state, etc. I guess my point is we’ve got the start of various little decentralized grey tribes, it’s a matter of getting them to communicate with one another.”

    Well, what you’ve outlined in that statement really summarizes the task ahead very well. Building solidarity of anti-state forces under the black flag is the first goal obviously, and there needs to be some common ethos that allows us to work around these difference. “Anarchy First” within the context of decentralized pluralism at the macro-level, and infinite diversity at the micro-level would seem to be the way to go.

    Beyond that, we obviously need greater numbers and better organization. Studying the examples of the CNT-FAI, PKK/YPG/YPG, Pirate Party, etc are all worthwhile in this regard.

    Of course we also need to identify common issues and common strategies that will help us to reach out to people with more mainstream views. Opposition to corporate/bank welfare, for example, which is something that virtually all radicals of any honest persuasion should agree on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s