"We have done this because we love liberty and hate authority." – Voltairine de Cleyre
Diogenes’ Barrel.
Aug 20th
The always insightful and wonderful Broadsnark has asked an important question:
So I guess what I’m wondering is: Do you market anarchist types envision a world full of artisans trading labor with one another or actual employment relationships? Do the majority of anarchists, who don’t subscribe to capitalist or market ideologies, envision a world based entirely on a gift economy? (A New Yorker goes to Hong Kong and has immediate access to what she needs to meet her needs?) Do you object to any sort of trading of labor for stuff?
My response:
Dear Mel,
This is a great question and a keen observation. Why would an Anarchist, one who finds hierarchy undesirable, volunteer or consent to an Employee/Employer relationship, a hierarchy? I would be suspicious of all contexts or circumstances that would bring such a relationship about; I smell authority and monopoly.
As a Wobbly I am committed to the eventual Direct Action dissolution of the wage-system and the promotion of Industrial Organized Labor into the mutually supportive industries of One Big Union, de-central and monumental.
As a market anarchist I foresee an economic landscape of communes, collectives, co-operatives, IWW closed-shops, Time Stores, Garage Networks, Self-employed micros, Family Mom & Pops, Gift Econs, Charity Non-Profits, Monastic Orders from Benedictines to Zen Buddhists, Strangers passing through towns nobly demanding to “earn their keep,” but let’s not forget Hermits, Homesteads and squatters. Everything in between, all of the above to include the stuff not even thought of yet. The “market” in market anarchy, for me, is a vocational, lifestyle, life-path bazaar; the more options the better I feel that authority is curbed and monopoly buried. I see/want a world where people can browse, taste test, try on, kick the tires and hassle free return any life they fancy; or knuckle down on one thing and feel the novel sensation of fusion with or mastery of one skill or craft, pushing it into new boundaries, ripping it up and starting again whether it be post-punk music, cabinet making or Starcraft II.
The only thing I ask is that the anarcho-culture understands, recognizes and supports the institutions of “opt-out,” “push-back” and the “benign busybody.” That the culture allows anyone to “opt-out” of anything whenever they don’t feel comfortable, or for any other reason really, without fear of reprisal. That the culture accepts “pushing back” as a natural, acceptable and corrective reaction, if someone is feeling controlled, dominated or marginalized. And that the cultural sees the pondering busybody who asks, “Is that really liberty? Is that really Equality? Is that really Solidarity?,” as benign and healthy for cultural anarcho-maintenance; meeting their questions with curiosity, reflection and concern for anarcho-sustainability.
I may be asking for too much from, but this is my commitment to you and everyone. I will be open and scrupulous, if you let me be fussy and indecisive.
Anarchy: dumping the bosses off our backs and unleashing our inner weirdo since Diogenes’ Barrel.
Keep us Honest,
–James
Strikes! Keep them General and Wild.
Aug 15th
Child, demanding better working conditions, meet the State.
This is the picture I see in my anarcho-head: The state is a thug (that’s you cops) which holds us down while the capitalist picks our pockets. If we can get the thug off our back, we can, finally, get our hands around the capitalist’s throat. This is why I hate the State first and most, because I am itching for a good ol’honest fight. Bring back the strike, make it general and wild. Fire us in droves; we will just out compete you.
“Laborers are free to compete among themselves, and so are capitalists to a certain extent. But between laborers and capitalists there is no competition whatever, because through governmental privilege granted to capital, …, the owners of it are enabled to keep the laborers dependent on them for employment, so making the condition of wage-subjection perpetual. So long as one man, or class of men, are able to prevent others from working for themselves because they cannot obtain the means of production or capitalize their own products, so long those others are not free to compete freely with those to whom privilege gives the means.” –Voltairine de Cleyre
“The State always represents the organized interests of a dominate class; therefore the subjection of other classes may be said to benefit the State and their emancipation may be opposed as a danger to the State. It is evident from the very nature of the State that its interests are opposed to those of Society…” –Suzanne LaFollette
Bravo Section in Pictures.
Aug 10th
Bravo Section, the Introduction to Anarchism Class that I volunteered to administrate for C4SS, now has some crazy logos. Stickers, Buttons and T-Shirts should be on the way, enjoy.
If you are interested in jpeg copies of these items, email me or leave a comment. Feel free to promote the Center, Stateless U. or Bravo Section with these icons to your heart’s desire. ALL the best!
“By Sacrilegious Hands”
Aug 3rd
Alex Svoboda and dislocated knee, Thanks LEOs.
The June, 2010 issue of the Industrial Worker tells the story of Alex Svoboda who was brutally attacked by three police officers while participating in a union solidarity rally. The attack left her pinned to the ground, handcuffed and her left knee severely dislocated. She was then charged with assaulting an officer. The police assault charges are, now, officially in doubt.
In Lagrane, Missouri an American Bulldog named Cammi is filmed while the local police department proceeds to subdue her, secure her… then shoot her in the head.
In Seattle, Washington police officers are filmed screaming racially charged threats and kicking the head of a compliant and innocent man before letting him go.
El Reno, Oklahoma ten police officers suffocate and taser a disabled eighty-six year old grandma who was confined to a hospital style bed.
As the stories of insane abuse keep flooding in many local law enforcement agencies, instead of reflecting on their behavior, their judgment or the validity of the laws being enforced, are seeking State and Federal protections.
Several states have made it illegal to record the Police as Wendy McElroy explains:
“In response to a flood of Facebook and YouTube videos that depict police abuse, a new trend in law enforcement is gaining popularity. In at least three states (Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland), it is now illegal to record an on-duty police officer even if the encounter involves you and may be necessary to your defense, and even if the recording is on a public street where no expectation of privacy exists.”
And Jenn, writing for copblock.org, points out that even a police officer’s credibility is becoming beyond reproach:
“Recently, a defense attorney was ordered by a judge to apologize to a police officer witness for implying the officer was untruthful. While the whole point of trial is to discredit the other side’s witnesses, apparently, cops are supreme beings, more deserving of respect and authority than the rest of us peons. This judge felt implying a cop is not a credible witness was an offense by which a lawyer should be humiliated.”
Why is this happening? How do we stop it?
The revered and radical historian Lord John Acton can offer an insight into both these questions.
Why is it happening?
“Where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control.” –Lord Acton
It must be understood that the “services” police claim to provide are, also, the right of anyone and everyone to perform: Defending yourself and your friends from violence. Dispute resolution. Restoration.
And it is exactly the “services” that the police are known for providing that no one has the right to perform: Theft through taxes, fines and asset forfeiture. Intimidating and assaulting people walking down the street. Torturing old ladies in their beds. Dislocating knees. Shooting pets.
Stopping it is a matter of time and pressure. There really is only some much abuse good people can take, if they wish to remain good. This is similar to the way Lord Acton describes the run up to the Reformation:
“During the latter part of the Middle Ages, the desire for reform of the Church was constant. It was strongest and most apparent among laymen, for a famous monastic writer of the fourteenth century testified that laity led better lives than the clergy. To the bulk of ordinary Christians reform meant morality in the priesthood. It became intolerable to them to see the Sacrament administered habitually by sacrilegious hands, or to let their daughters go to confession to an unclean priest. The discontent was deepest where men were best. They felt that the organization for the salvation of souls was serving for their destruction, and that the more people sought the means of grace in the manner provided, the greater risk they incurred of imbibing corruption.” –Lord Acton; Lectures on Modern History, Pg 90.
Law enforcement has become, has always been, the organization claiming to administer justice for citizens all the while serving up their destruction; and the more people sought justice in the manner the police provided, the greater risk they incurred of imbibing the same corruption.
Reformation (fingers crossed it’s a revolution too), as long as the people wish to be or remain good, is only a matter of time and pressure. God I hope Americans want to be good.
Welcome to Bravo Section…
Jul 5th
Dear Reader, I have volunteered to help the Center for a Stateless Society as an ombudsman (of sorts, a cheerful sort!) for one of their Introduction to Anarchism classes. Below is a quick bio and break down of some of my anarcho-proclivities. I hope you enjoy.
Dear Friends,
I want to take the opportunity to thank you for your support of the Center and to welcome you to the Bravo Section of An Introduction to Anarchism.
For the next ten weeks I have pledged to make my time, enthusiasm and perspective available to further our growth, understanding and confidence in Anarchism. Warning! Anarchist studies can become an obsessive habit; the more you grow within anarchism the more anarchism grows within you. …
A brief background will offer some insight into my approach to Anarchist Studies.
George H. Smith’s Atheism: The Case Against God was my first exposure Aristotelean thought and the word “Libertarian.” From the back cover bio: “Long a student and advocate of the libertarian point of view, George H. Smith studies philosophy at the University of Arizona”
With George H. Smith’s help I was able to become a Post-Objectivist without going through Objectivism and an Agorist/Voluntaryist without going through Anarcho-capitalism. Unfortunately those, and other, philosophical transformations began during a 5 year active enlistment in the U.S. Army. Full fledge acceptance of anarchism happened, for me, during the latter half of a 2 year tour in South Korea. U.S. Army South Korea is an Infernal Wonderland, where up is down, down is up, war is peace, freedom is slavery etc, etc…
Recently it has been the combined, Voltronic, forces of Shawn Wilbur, Kevin Carson, Gary Chartier, Roderick Long, and Charles Johnson that have challenged and encouraged my conceptions of anarchism, theory and practice.
A prospective student asked about my professed “brand” of anarchism (Wobbly-Left-Libertarian-Market-Anarchism) and how much of an influence “it” will play on this class:
“I would like to confirm your definition of Left-Libertarian Market Anarchist. I assume (given the “dues paying Fellow Worker of the Industrial Workers of the World”) you believe in the redistribution of wealth, as opposed to the Left-Libertarian view promoted by Konkin.
Although I realize it is impossible for a person to be 100% objective, how much of your course will be devoted to this side of anarchism? Or, put another way, how open is the class to a person that does not conform to this form of anarchy?”
My answer was as follows:
“First off, my role is that of a Fellow Traveler and to offer feedback, not to sort or to pigeon hole. I will, personally, determine my job a success if you come away from the class feeling confident about anarchism as a possible and desirous future social arrangement.
My definition of Left-Libertarian Market Anarchism would be a book length project, but I will give it a – standing on one foot – shot.
Left: New Left goals (anti-militarism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, LBGTQ liberation, etc) are not only consonant with libertarianism, but are indispensable for a proper understanding of libertarianism.
Libertarian: libertarianism is the continuous exploration in the application of a non-aggression. For me this translates into a principle of non-aggression, a presumption of liberty, and a historical perspective of liberty vs. authority.
Market: for me the fullest flourishing of human happiness is found in an open exploratory space. Trade is a natural and rewarding relationship between individuals with incalculable social value. The concept of market, for me, is tantamount to an endorsement of the values of peace, progress and harmony.
Anarchism: anarchism, for me, is a perpetual social critique. It knows no limits and gives no ground. It values liberty, equality and solidarity, but it only honors them by repeating three questions: “Is that really liberty?” “Is that really equality?” “Is that really solidarity?” It is up to us to answer these questions, then answer them again, then answer them again.
I do not regard redistribution as a value “in and of itself.” I do think that in a freed market you will see a massive redistribution of wealth from its current accumulations. Think of the current capital distribution as an upside down pyramid that is kept aloft by the state. If the state is removed and the forces of gravity (or market and social forces) are allowed to assert, then the pyramid will right itself.
My status as a dues paying, Fellow Worker of the Industrial Workers of the World is determined by a feeling of solidarity with working class people as a working class person. I approach the employee/employer relationship with suspicion; the labor contract as a contested or aggravated contract and not as some sort of performance bond or title transfer; and the industrially organized, fighting union as revolutionary force with great potential for peaceful social transformation.”
