[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/anarcho/ - Anarchism Board

Anti-Capitalist & Anti-State

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.

Revolt. Agitate. Organize. Educate. Board Guidelines

File: 1428842541221.png (106.33 KB, 1024x634, 512:317, anarchist-disorganizationa….png)

8bb04c No.8515

Discuss.

0d8a62 No.8516

What exactly is "Disorganizational Anarchism"?

f1baf0 No.8518

>>8516

this. i've never heard the term disorganizational anarchism before.

i have heard of ontological anarchism. and hakim bey is an interesting guy. is it something like that?

cdf55e No.8521

>>8516
>>8518
I guess post-left or maybe insurrectionary anarchism?

0d8a62 No.8524

>>8521
post-left possibly, but i don't see insurrectionists as being inherently disorganized.

635ef9 No.8525

>>8516
>>8518
>>8521
>>8524
I was indeed referring to the post-left, egoist, insurrectionists and anarcho-primitivist crowd (which seems to intermix to a great degree).
Feral Faun, Renzo, Zerzan etc.

The anarchists who refuse to cooperate with the social anarchist movement at large, accusing it of being "leftist", "old", "STATIST" or other inflammatory crap.

I got the 'disorganizational' description from this section of the anarcho-communist wiki-page (which I now notice actually used the term "anti-organizational"): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism#Organizationalism_vs._insurrectionarism_and_expansion
>But "While they were not opposed to strikes as such, they were opposed to trade unions and the struggle for the eight-hour day. This anti-reformist tendency was accompanied by an anti-organisational tendency, and its partisans declared themselves in favour of agitation amongst the unemployed for the expropriation of foodstuffs and other articles, for the expropriatory strike and, in some cases, for 'individual recuperation' or acts of terrorism."

12e759 No.8526

I think all the anarchist tendencies should mix in anarcho-communism in the end if you truely want an other world. I don't mean anarcho-commnuist ideology but I mean anco organisations. We need organisations for production and distribution BUT anarcho-communists must evolve. You can't just keep telling the same stories from 1936. For example, I don't even wanna listen an anarchist who still thinks that "animal rights are stupid bourgeois concerns, we need to feed the poors first. stop being lifestylist. Vegans are degenerate" and so on. Green-anarchists have some really good arguments, listen to them and take what you can. Animal rights are not bourgeois concerns in fact animal's captivity is pretty relevant with human's captivity . You can't see nature only as "resource" but most ancos are tend to do so. I can continue with the examples. I think all anarchist branches (except ayncraps and transhumanists I don't see them as anarchists but they exist on this board I guess) have valid points they all need to taken seriously to create true anarchism without adjectives. And yeah I think anarcho-communists are fucking boring in riot times too. I always hangout with insurrectionists in street clashes while anarcho communists are debating "what this riot really means, is this really political or is it just a teenage angst" in their collective cafes/bookshops. They always contradict with themselves in riot times because they have too many "political" concerns.

635ef9 No.8527

>>8526
I think you meant anarcho-syndicalist when using the term anarcho-communist, because the insurrectionaries are also ancoms. They just want to arrive there through completely 'spontaneous' ways, in contrast to the organizational ways that the syndicalists wants to get there.

But I totally get your point. And there's indeed a lot of validity to green anarchism, my personal line though is drawn at the anarcho-primitivists. I agree with the general impression of them being disturbingly misanthropic and dangerous, to the point of rivaling fascists. I think that being species-centric (anthropocentrism) is inherent to any lifeform. To negate this is to deny it the ability to evolve, which results in stagnation and later death.

That said I do think that one needs to be responsible and limit waste in the furthest extent possible. For example, replace protein from fauna to protein directly from the source - flora. This is efficient. It saves on resources, is better for the body and for the environment we are situated in. This is only rational. The point is that we sadly do not live in a very rational society. But we can try changing that through different governmental structures (bioregionalist communism, for example) and that could be hastily approached with the help of revolutionary trade-unionism and cooperative movements, possibly spotlighted with the help of a revolutionary, libertarian marxist party, whose sole purpose is propaganda for the (regional) class struggle. This is the example of an organizationalist approach.

30244c No.8529

>>8526
Fucking greenfags. Pls go. I want muh merge with tech. Screw animals.

12e759 No.8530

>>8529
you don't even exist.

8bb04c No.8533

Please try to not derail this thread from it's intended subject of discussion.

8b2cae No.8538

>>8526
I really like this post.

407677 No.8542

I think the revolution will be spontaneous and brought on by food price spikes world wide caused by global warming and other related ecological destruction and will be pure fucking chaos and I think the only goal right now for any anarchist is simply to propaganda the fuck out of everything and be ready to educate/organize the stupid and angry masses when they rise up in 10-20ish years from now

16f2a1 No.8678

Bump


f3de72 No.8680

>>8526

I'm onboard with this sentiment, except for the part about transhumanists. The fuck is your problem with us comrade? We're not all ancraps who happen to like cool gadgets.

>>8527

Also this. I hate to be so dismissive, but anarcho-primitivism is a joke.

The problem I have with them isn't so much their being misanthropic and dangerous (I am sympathetic to anarcho-nihilism) so much as it is contradictory. They say they want to return to a primitive human society; okay, what do you mean when you say "primitive"? Relative to our times, the Egyptians were pretty fucking primitive, weren't they? So do you want to go back to the state of human civilization in Egyptian times? But then again, the cavemen hunter-gatherers were much more primitive than the Egyptians; do they want to go back to hunter-gatherer times, then? That seems to be the sentiment, but then again isn't being a non tool-using ape even more hardcore primitivist?

Oh, what, you don't want to go back to not using tools at all? Exactly, because using technology in all forms is something immanent to human existence. Without technology, we would have died out long ago since nature has not afforded us with claws, strong hind legs, fur, or other biological tools that would enable us to survive effectively otherwise.

But anyways: The one problem I have with this semi-pluralist anarchy-without-adjectives standpoint is whether or not all the different forms of anarchism could ever be compatible with each other. What would that society look like?


a4c9ae No.8683

>>8680

>They say they want to return to a primitive human society; okay, what do you mean when you say "primitive"?

Tribal hunter-gatherer societies. Think an egalitarian native american tribal society. That's their 'ideal'.

Also I think I heard Derrick Jensen say he disliked the term anarcho-primitivist, deeming it racist. I think he suggested the term anti-industrialist instead, which admittedly is a more informal name. That makes what they're coming from pretty clear, innit?

>The one problem I have with this semi-pluralist anarchy-without-adjectives standpoint is whether or not all the different forms of anarchism could ever be compatible with each other.

I always got the impression of synthesis anarchism of trying to work out the similarities and differences between anarchist economic theories specifically, not the more identitarian theories of anarcho-transhumanism, -LGBTQ, -nihilism etc.


cb2548 No.8684

>>8683

>I think he suggested the term anti-industrialist instead

Feudalism was anti-industrialist.


a4c9ae No.8685

>>8684

It was "indigenist", not "anti-industrialist", I don't know where I got that from.

Here's the full context:

>Jensen also considers himself an anti-capitalist, a critic of organized religion (including Buddhism), a critic of science, an anti-racist, and a radical feminist, and he has also been called an "anti-civilizationist."[16] His work has often been labelled anarcho-primitivistic,[17][18][19] which he once accepted; however, he has more recently distanced himself from both the terms "anarchist" and "primitivist," especially criticizing modern anarchism's herd mentality and describing "primitive" as a "racist way to describe indigenous peoples." He prefers to be called "indigenist" or an "ally to the indigenous," because "indigenous peoples have had the only sustainable human social organizations, and[…] we need to recognize that we [colonizers] are all living on stolen land."


8bb162 No.9869

>>8685

>indigenous peoples have had the only sustainable human social organizations

What the hell is this supposed to even mean? Every system that doesn't end up collapsing is "sustainable." The systems in the US, UK, Australia, etc. all capitalist societies are "sustainable", that doesn't mean they're good or preferable, because they're not, but still. This just seems meaningless to say.

>we need to recognize that we [colonizers] are all living on stolen land.

Saying "stolen" implies it belonged to someone else in the first place, someone's private property. Even if you drop the "native" line, it's not "their" land either, they were just born into it. Either the land is everyone's or the land is no one's, to say it belongs to any one person is indicative of private property.

Even then, there's no way I'm giving up technology to live in a utopia.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]