academiccompositionab
Empowerment Equalizer
SSaragian
Antony Sammeroff
Ann Sterzinger
Rodney
RJ
busterjames
cainusmaxus
Craig FitzGerald
David Heleniak
Caity & Dan Greene
keirmartland
Keith Preston
Bill the Butcher
ljp711
MRDA
Jack Donovan
Rachel Haywire
comrade hermit
Michael
Vince
Regan
robertstark2014
Noonan
S E Pearson
Rachel Haywire
Nexus X HumectressBy Cake Boy
I see a lot of authoritarian/totalitarian political influence in modern anarchism.
We have leftist anarchists, who say that Maoists are ‘their comrades’.
This is ridiculous. Maoist China was a totalitarian state, and you anarchists are supposedly against states? There has never been a more powerful, intrusive, inhuman state than the Maoist communist state.
When you read about anarchism in Cuba, you see that the Cuban anarchists flee to the US once Cuba becomes communist. Why do you think this is the case? Because they know they will get a lot of problems, as anarchists, in a communist dictatorship
We have some nationalists, anarchists, who believe the Holocaust didn’t happen, and they think fascism is somehow ‘interesting’.
To the national anarchists, I would say: Of course, the Holocaust happened. Totalitarian systems create death camps. As an anarchist or libertarian, you could understand this. States kill masses of people. This is the reason anarchists are critical of states. The Holocaust is the reason anarchism has a point in the first place.
Anarchism says: look what happens when bureaucracy gets out of hand. Then you get holocausts, gulags, piles of skulls, look what can happen, with centralised power. Look how a state can turn into something like nazism. Centralisation is dangerous, so you want decentralisation. You find the same argument in the works of Mises and Hayek.
The current Zionists indeed use antisemitism as a political weapon, as a reason for their horrible politics. But that doesn’t mean that antisemitism doesn’t exist.
It is true that they use the Holocaust to legitimize their acts of cruelty. But that doesn’t mean the Holocaust didn’t happen.
A lot of Jews hold political and financial power, they will say.
The fact that a lot of Jews hold power in the US doesn’t mean the Holocaust didn’t happen, and it doesn’t mean antisemitism doesn’t exist. It also doesn’t mean there is some bigger plan going on. If there are conspiracies (which there probably are) than we don’t know about it. Because, otherwise, it wouldn’t be a conspiracy. If we all knew what’s going on, then it would not be a ‘secret agenda’ anymore…
For the analysis of state power, it’s not important if the people in power are Jews, Arabs, Christians, Buddhists, or whatever. Centralised/political Power is power, in black hands or in white hands, in religious hands or in secular hands. If the Jews didn’t have that power, another ethnicity would have it, and they would do the same things. Predation comes in all colors and forms.
Capitalism doesn’t change when it’s in the hands of arabs or white people. Communism doesn’t change when it’s in the hands of black people instead of Chinese people.
Some people will say, Why can’t you question the holocaust, but you can question other genocides? Besides, whether you are allowed to question it by law or not, it did happen. It’s a bit strange that you can’t question one genocide, but can question another, I agree. There are more things in the culture that are taboo or inconsistent. But that doesn’t mean the holocaust didn’t happen. And it doesn’t mean it’s all part of some bigger agenda.
Then they will say, there were not 6 million Jews killed, but 2 million, or something like that. Maybe it was 5 million, maybe it was 9 million. Maybe the historians don’t know the exact number. But all of this is not that important. We understand that the Nazi fools killed millions, and this is seen as a problem…As you can imagine…
When you see the images of the Nazis, the rants, the mass formation, the marching boots, the insanity in their eyes, than its not that hard to imagine a holocaust coming out of something like that, you only need a little bit of political/psychological insight.
My grandparents told me stories about the Holocaust. I have seen the holes in the wall where the Germans shot. My family has been in camps. For Americans, all of this is a bit more abstract.
Within modern libertarianism, we have the Hoppe supporters who flirt with South American fascism. They post memes about killing union leaders, and they are praising dictators like Pinochet.
As if Chilean fascism had anything to do with free markets, individual freedom, free speech, the values libertarians support. South American fascism was the most brutal form of crony capitalism/corporatism possible. A cruel state that didn’t accept any political dissent.
People will say I’m indoctrinated by mainstream culture and media. The fact that something is said by a mainstream person doesn’t mean that it’s untrue by definition. Not everything you learn from school or the media is nonsense. Some things they teach you are actually true. It’s not black/white.
Also, when someone from the mainstream says something, it’s nonsense. But when you read it on an alternative site on the internet, is it true by definition? The alternative site can’t make things up? Are they always right? When a site on the internet says the holocaust didn’t happen, is it true? When a site says jews made Atlantis, is it true? Is it true when a site says there were no people on the moon? When a site says there are many lizard people, is it true?
If anarchism for the next era wants to be successful, it needs to get out of authoritarian influence. Out of Marxism and out of racial/fascist discourse.
After that, it needs to connect the left and the right libertarianism, somehow. Maybe its too much asked, i don’t know. I think this is the only way people can save the political tradition.
Cake Sensei
Attack the System
Categories: Anarchism/Anti-State
I get your frustrations and agree in places, but I think when we interrogate the deeper reasons why certain factions of anarchism are attracted to authoritarian ideologies and what the historical conditions are which led to that or what mechanisms are sustaining that sort of thing, it’s often less about supporting the actual regimes and more about rejecting neoliberal decay and going through phases in identity in their own personal ideological journey.
The way I see it, we’re all human. People don’t walk into anarchism from a vacuum. Most come dragging ideological baggage from whatever systems they were previously orbiting—whether it’s Marxism, liberalism, conservatism, or something more personal like family history, trauma, or cultural memory. And sometimes, yeah, they’re still unlearning the myths that got baked in back there.
If someone has a knee-jerk sympathy for say, Maoism, it’s worth asking why? Is it a desperation for a system that actually stood up to imperialism? Is it because they associate it with land reform or collectivized survival against starvation? Is it aesthetics? Is it miseducation? Is it the vacuum left behind after neoliberal betrayal? Is it just where they’re at right now in their own ideological journey?
I try to remember that treating people like they’re just tainted because of ideological residue won’t help them evolve. At the end of the day, if anarchism is going to mean anything, it also has to offer a space for transformation. Otherwise, it just becomes another exclusionary club.
Baggage is part of being human. The question isn’t who’s got it. The question is are they willing to unpack it? And are we willing to help them do that, or are we just here to show them the door?
Thanks for the comment
Its not that im angry at these people. They are often just a bit confused. A lot of modern people are confused, because (post )modernity doesn’t give people clarity, direction
or what mechanisms are sustaining that sort of thing,
People are looking for absolute awnsers, its seems. They are looking for a sense of grip, in a chaotic world. Its all the fault of the ‘cis people’. Its all the fault of ‘the jews’. Its all the fault of white/black people. Its all the fault of ‘the free market’.
These absolutist movements also give people a sense of belonging. I didn’t knew who i am, but now im ‘a white person’, or ‘a queer activist’. I dissapear into something thats bigger than me
If someone has a knee-jerk sympathy for say, Maoism, it’s worth asking why? Is it a desperation for a system that actually stood up to imperialism? Is it because they associate it with land reform or collectivized survival against starvation? Is it aesthetics? Is it miseducation?
The ancoms in my country, are pro maoism, because maoists are against conservatism. And to them, the core of ancom is about being against conservative tendencies in society. They think anarchism is by defenition (radical) progressivism. They think, the communists agree with them on this subject, so they are ‘comrades’.
When you read old ancom work ,you see that it was against communism/marxism, and it didn’t have an opinion when it came to cultural matters. The working masses that supported it, where even often pretty conservative (think of the russian farmers)
Its on the one hand miseducation. On the other hand, people don’t trust the state anymore. So when the state schools say that Mao killed people, than they don’t believe that story. This is understandable. So, it has also to do with the disintegration of the western institutions/culture.
Also, modern leftist anarchism, is very much anti intellectual, and anti academic. The leaders of these antifa cults have no intellectual background, and do not know what they talk about. What remains is a lot of noise, and masked insecurity
Baggage is part of being human. The question isn’t who’s got it. The question is are they willing to unpack it? And are we willing to help them do that
The antifa’s i knew, where not able to have a debate, have a conversation, listen to your arguments, consider your position etc. They think they know everything, and the world should just listen. I did try this, i was very patient, i tried to start some discussions. But these people just lack cognitive capacities. It sounds hard, but we have to be realistic about it. They are the unintelligent people, that lost themselves in a chaotic and threatening world. And they ruined the reputation of anarchism
Cake
Sounds like your country has a deeper anarchist subculture than mine.
What country are you in? I was thinking the Netherlands, Germany, or Belgium?
I agree with most of what you’re saying. I think you’re right that people are trying to get a grip and that clinging to rigid identities gives a temporary sense of coherence. But I think where we disagree is that I don’t think those who fall into bad-faith ideologies are just too dumb to get it. Some are. I know American anarchists who think Bakunin is a protein bar. But generally the intellectual anemia we’re seeing on the modern left isn’t just about cognitive capacity—it’s systemic. These movements have been gutted by the same processes that gutted every other institution: commodification, meme logic, clickbait attention cycles, etc.
I’m not anti-academic anarchism, but one of the reasons why I don’t care about anarchist theory anymore (and where I differ from most people on this site) is that I don’t believe we should waste a whole lot of time thinking about an anarchist led, cross ideological opposition to the state. In my country, I believe the next anarchism won’t come from theory at all. It’ll come from broken infrastructure, empty shelves, and the cold mechanics of necessity. Just regular people at the local level building something that works where and when the systems aren’t working anymore. Something the algorithm can’t see
Hey Ryan
I would like to read your book, and write a review about it.
The most famous anarchist activist here, didn’t knew who Bakunin was…..
He is an unitelligent person, that makes a lot of noise. Someone who is very insecure in the core, and has some personal issues, probably.
These movements have been gutted by the same processes that gutted every other institution: commodification, meme logic, clickbait attention cycles, etc.
Still the socialist party here, is far more serious than the ‘anarchists’ in this country. Also the communists, are more serious. The anarchist movement here, is the most incompetent thing you will ever see
I personally just thinks, that anarchism as a social system (so a political anarchism) could only exist in a panarchy/cross ideological way. If a world like that will ever exist, i don’t know. I can’t say
But we did saw that Rojava could happen. So it seems that systems that are different than commuism and neoliberalism, can arise, now and than, in specific situations. Which might suggest that we did not reach the ‘end of history’
I agree with you. We see this all the time, when there is a crisis, the people will come with radical proposels. When the Syrian war happend, people started to expiriment with a new kind of ideology. Something that succeed, or failed, depends on who you ask.
Cake
I never would have even considered that there were anarchists who supported Mao. They make a stink about Lenin, but Mao is just China’s Stalin. He killed a lot of people, too. That’s interesting. Well, yes, very fanatical people have swarmed into the movement. And it’s gotten much worse because of it. Even in the early days of anarchism. There’s nothing you can do about it, it’s everywhere.
What do you think is the best way to move in order to make a positive shift, if not a success, in the swamp in which we are standing? Should we continue to work with the ones we’ve been given in this community? You know, the ones who are antifa and honor Mao. Can we at least work with some of them and steer them in the right direction?
Or are we better off separating ourselves from the mainstream and doing our own thing? This was the idea of the National Anarchists, they argued that anarchy can be built even without a mass revolution of the proletariat and can coexist with states, if they do not aggressively seize them. It would be difficult, it would be necessary to come to a conflict or compromise with them. Or maybe everything will be different for us and we will simply not be touched. It’s a shame their website is dead. They would have shared their thoughts and experiences with us. It seems like they don’t exist anymore, but it doesn’t matter.
There are right-wing libertarians like Free Cities or Seasteading, which seems much cooler. Essentially neutral waters are essentially a permanent autonomous zone. There’s virtually no government jurisdiction there, which means you can try ancap, mutualism, ancom, or whatever. The only problem there is the cost of the project and possible difficulties in resource production.
As I wrote above without the people it will be hard to get results in this world. Sometimes you need a crowd of comrades to fit in for you. But if they are not going to do it anyway, because you belong to the wrong branch of ideology or just don’t want to woke hysteria, fuck them.
It would be better to manage your time more correctly, you could try to start an organization at least virtually through the Internet at first. One that would unite all adequate anarchists and that would not die like the site of National Anarchists, because nobody needs it anymore. You wrote a lot about it, but you never even tried, and that’s for nothing.
What do you think is the best way to move in order to make a positive shift, if not a success, in the swamp in which we are standing?
A positive thing, would be when left and rightwing anarchists work together, in the here and now. They could meet each other in person, and support each other. If the endgoal is panarchy, than they could as well just work together allready. They could start a community land trust, or other kinds of mutualist projects. Support each other, meet each other etc. Debate etc. The coming times will be hard, so this would benefit people, if they start helping each other.
This could than be done with the people that are not antifa communists, and not hoppean fascists. This could be done with the people who have a vision like ‘live and let live’ and people who are open to debate and open to disagree.
In the end, you would than have three groups: altright libertarians, woke/antifa anarchists, and anarchists who think panarchy/libertarian unity is possible. If this split would happen, it would all become a bit more clear. It would solve some issues
you know, the ones who are antifa and honor Mao. Can we at least work with some of them and steer them in the right direction?
You can’t talk with cult members. They do not want to debate, because they are right, in their view. There is no need to talk. They do not have a mindset of curiosity
This was the idea of the National Anarchists, they argued that anarchy can be built even without a mass revolution of the proletariat and can coexist with states, if they do not aggressively seize them.
It will have to coexist with states, and it will need to have good diplomatic relations with these states. A mass revolution of the proletariat, will probably turn into something ugly. So here is agree with them.
Im not a person that starts parties and all of that. I am focused a lot on my own life and well being. In a way, inspired by Stirner and other existencialists. I don’t want to lose myself, in some megalomaniac political project. These days, i should really take care of myself, and becomming a stronger person, and more happy and all of that.
But i liked to help you guys think. I was like, if i read a lot about anarchism, i could as well join the debates.
This site is allready meant as a project for libertarian unity, by the way.
For organisation, i would use the mutualists model. So, the dual power model. Creating your own networks, helping each other, in the here and now. Like how friends help each other. Friends sometimes lives together, share stuff with each other etc. This will make you stronger against state and predatory capital, when your less atomized, and it won’t mean you lose your privacy/individuality
Cake Sensei
You could see it like this
Affinity networks for the here and now, made up of different kinds of anarchists. Based on the mutualists theory.
You start a credit union. You start a solidarity group, and you come together each week, to see what is needed, and how you can support each other. And if it doesn’t work anymore, than you just leave the group.