Build the Anarcho-Coalition!

This statement originally appeared on Facebook. I am re-posting it here along with my original comments in response.

Image may contain: text

Here is my response:

Here are the main difficulties that I have encountered with this kind of work:

1. Many anarchists and other libertarians are so committed to their particular economic paradigm that they often dismiss each other as crypto-statists. Some kind of mutual non-aggression pact is necessary on the economic questions.

2. An even bigger issue is the battle between leftists and anti-leftists, who accuse each other of crypto-bolshevism or crypto-fascism. Any kind of rapprochement between the “social justice” anarchists and the fans of Sargon of Akkad is an uphill battle.

3. You will be attacked for your associations regardless of whatever other ideas you have. For many years, I was associated with the alt-right, largely on “anti-American imperialism” grounds. Therefore, I am widely regarded by leftists as a fascist. In more recent times, I have moved toward the anti-imperialist far left, and I expect the accusations of crypto-Stalinism carrying water for Putin, Assad, and the Iranians to start coming.

4. Mainstream politics tends to creep into anti-state movements. Many anarchists and libertarians are merely Blue Tribers or Red Tribers under another name.

5. Anarchists have generally failed to break into the mainstream political culture, in large part because they tend to be oriented toward fringe subcultures on a personal level. At present I lean toward the view of an “anarcho-coalition” that presents itself as a “revolutionary center” that seeks to shun, bypass and marginalize the statist left and statist right while vociferously attacking the establishment center (“No Commies, No KKK, No Fascists, No USA!”).

6 replies »

  1. Some more thoughts on such a project.

    Based on past experience, I’d say it is crucial for anarchists interested in such a perspective to develop strong anti-institutional stances that represents opposition to elites across the spectrum. On an intellectual level, this means applying the insights of elite theory. On a popular level, this means bashing government, corporations, banks, techno-oligarchs, university administrations, the mass media, military, intelligence services, etc with equal fervor. The selective partisanship of the anti-Trump anarchists (such as the J20 crowd) and the libertarian obsession with “business good, government bad” are examples of what not to do.

    It’s necessary to position ourselves as the “revolutionary center,” i.e. the people vs the elite, while shunning the far right and far left. Based on my experience of working with these in the past, I’d say the far right and far left aren’t worth the bother.

    We need to “dumb it down” so that average people can understand what we’re talking about. We also need to find constituencies outside the usual radical left/radical right paradigms. The conspiracy milieu may be promising in that it fuels anti-system thought in a way that it beyond the ordinary left/right dichotomy.

    Pluralism is absolutely essential. Movements that just want everything to be about race vs. race, class vs class, men vs women, gays vs religion, etc are a dead end. The consistent line needs to be that we all have a common enemy in the power elite regardless of race, class, religion, culture, gender, sexual orientation, etc. The chessboard analogy meme in the ATS statement of purpose has it right.

    The anarchism without adjectives/voluntaryism paradigm is essential as well. All kinds of anarchism and all kinds of voluntary association should be welcome in our movement.

    • I prefer libertarian third position to revolutionary center. Centrism is too gay, and CNN friendly. It will set off the nazis who think it is oxymoronic, and sjws who think it is fascist. Normies would think both sides are crazy since third position is innocuous, and libertarians would latch on because they will pay 80 shitcoins for anything that has libertarian in the title. Although I hate Dugin, “Beyond Left and Right, but against the center” is a good motto.

      • I don’t think either “revolutionary center” or “libertarian third position” would be a good public label. It’s more of just a description of which angle to approach “attacking the system” from.

  2. Panarchy/polyarchy would give almost all of the isms their best chance to prove in practice whatever would be right in them – by free and tolerant experimentation with them, always restricted to their kind of volunteers and this only within their own networks, all of them confined to non-territorial autonomy.

  3. I couldn’t agree more! This is what we are trying to achieve in the Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus, a union of anti-authoritarians from across the bottom of the political spectrum.

Leave a Reply