unfortunately its been tightly aligned with capitalism over the last half century.
Clearly you know nothing about anarchism. Stop speaking about it like you know what you are talking about.
That’s simply not anarchism. Over the last half century, there has been an effort to co-opt it by the right. Libertarianism is literally a left wing philosophy in most other parts of the world, but some dunce-muppet named Murray Rothbard stole it as his own (p83) and on this page he even admits that it was a word used by anarchists, which he distances himself from. One of the foundational anarchist thinkers, Proudhon, literally says “Property is theft,” a complete rejection of fundamental property rights needed for an “an”cap society.
Stealing words from the lefties isn’t anything new, the Nazi party did with their “National Socialism” (granted there’s some interesting history with it. Even though all of the nominally economically left wing nazis were killed in the night of long knives, they kept the socialist bit). But to say Nazism was ever socialist would be parroting a pathetic right wing talking point that should have died a long time ago.
If you ignore the entirety of anarchist thought, throughout well over 180 years of development and practice, where hundreds of thousands of people fought against authoritarianism, fascism, and capitalism, you could only lie through your teeth when saying shit that wack. Or, you would have to not know anything that you are talking about.
To say that failed “anarcho”-capitalist projects are the fault of anarchism, an ideology that rose in opposition to capitalism is ignorant.
And to consider Milei an anarchist, someone who is weilding the power of the state in service of right wing ultra-neoliberalism, you would have to be insane. If you don’t take my word that as anarchists we hate Milei, how about you check out this Crimethinc. article on Milei covering the topic from the perspective of an argentine anarchist.
I’m not a libertarian communist so my knowledge of this stuff is lacking, but I do know that Rojava, a radically feminist experiment inspired by Bookchin’s later works. It is based in NE Syria has been doing decently well. Especially considering it is under constant attack from the Turkish government, the second largest NATO military. They even managed to push out ISIS, which is an impressive feat for a new government. While they haven’t gotten rid of capitalism, they aren’t fully capitalist.
If you paid attention to the news during the trump years you might know of trump betraying the Kurds, which is usually how the media refered to Rojava.
This is the Anarchism At Home. If you want 19th century European anarchism, you’re going to need a boat and a time machine.
Rojava, a radically feminist experiment inspired by Bookchin’s later works. It is based in NE Syria has been doing decently well.
It’s a heavily armed Kurdish cut out that exists primary to fight proxy wars with Turkyie and the remnants of the Iraqi military. It has some excellent press around it, thanks to US/UK media needing a progressive champion in a region where everyone hates us. But there’s a word for a minority militant left wing proxy force.
No, it is not. I have never met a single "an"cap in the real world, yet I’ve stumbled across quite a few anarchists throughout my time on this planet. Fuck, I used to be a far-right wing libertarian, and even in those spaces I did not see one “anarcho”-capitalist.
You are just wrong, but the special type where you double down, and just dig deeper and deeper trying to back your point, and end up being even more spectacularly wrong.
Look, just because you say “no, this completely different right wing philosophy that stands opposed to the basic foundational principles of this left wing philosophy are same” doesn’t make it true.
If you want to apply this logic, couldn’t I say that “anarcho”-capitalists are just liberals? Going back to that page I quoted in my previous comment, Rothbard, an “anarcho”-capitalist, says:
Other words, such as “liberal,” had been originally identified with laissez-faire libertarians, but had been captured by left-wing statists, forcing us in the 1940s to call ourselves rather feebly “true” or “classical” liberals.
Clearly, this man is a liberal.
If you want 19th century European anarchism, you’re going to need a boat and a time machine.
Do I? While I’d love to meet some figures like Emma Goldman, DeCleyre, Parsons, Kropotkin, and so-on, that seems a bit over the top considering I just need to go to my community centers and say “Hello” to the wonderful men, women, and enbies who are stocking the community fridges, stand in solidarity with other activists doing antifascist, unhoused, or queer liberation activism, or volunteer my time at any other mutual aid org.
If you think it just existed in the 19th century, you are plain wrong, considering it has continued to exist throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. For example, there is the anarchist free territories in Ukraine in the early 1900s, or the Soviets before the Bolsheviks seized power, or the anarchist uprisings in Patagonia, or anarchist Manchuria, or the Spanish civil war, or the Zapatistas, or The Queer Insurrection and Liberation Army and the IRPGF. These events cover various points in the 1900s and 2000s.
If you think it only existed in Europe, then I regret to inform you about the aforementioned Patagonians, Manchurians, Mayans, Syrians, and others. The US had it’s first red scare surrounding Anarchism in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Some famous American anarchists include Emma Goldman, Voltarine DeCleyre, Alexander Berkman, Lucy Parsons, David Graeber, and others.
It’s a heavily armed Kurdish cut out that exists primary to fight proxy wars with Turkyie and the remnants of the Iraqi military
No, it is not. One of the most important reasons it exists is because of the Kurdish ethnic cleansing carried out by the Turkish and Iraqi governments, and ISIS. Rojava rose out of the Syrian Civil war, not out some geopolitical fuckery. And while I’d listen to an argument about the civil war rising from geopolitical fuckery, that doesn’t mean Rojava came from that.
It’s not entirely Kurdish, but I’m not surprised it is heavily Kurdish considering the ethnic cleansings that have been taken place over the last hundred years.
And if you think it only fights proxy wars, then why is it only seeming to defend itself when Turkey attacks it time and time again?
It has some excellent press around it, thanks to US/UK media needing a progressive champion in a region where everyone hates us?
So? So what if a new and radical project arising in one of the most inhospitable places on earth gets positive press. Are you saying an autonomous government exists because the US/UK media needs a progressive champion??? Why would this need be there if we have Israel, a country that is commonly shown as a progressive oasis, and “the only democracy in the middle east” even though it’s not, it’s an apartheid state.
But there’s a word for a minority militant left wing proxy force… Tankies.
Since you love to use wacky definitions, go off champ. But that’s not what a tankie is.
First, Tankie originally meant an authoritarian communist that supported sending the tanks into Hungary to violently suppress the Hungarian revolution. Obviously that’s not how it’s used now, but if what you said was an actual definition, then you shouldn’t have said “who will protect us from the Far-Left Authoritarian Tankies?” in the first comment I replied to, since there is not any far left minority left wing proxy force in the US. But it is clear that you don’t care about definitions, or even being consistent with them.
More modernly speaking, Tankies are just authoritarian communists, most often Stalinists. But the important bit is authoritarian communists.
Second, to call the Rojava project full of tankies is an exercise in absurdity. Rojava is a famously anti-authoritarian project. One of their key philosophies is feminism, since they believe that in order to start getting rid of authoritarianism, you’ve got to go at the roots, and liberating women from patriarchal systems of oppression is their place to start. Further, Rojava has famously not been executing ISIS members, since they fundamentally believe people can change. And they do this at great cost to themselves, since they’re stuck maintaining a prison system full of people who would love to kill them for anti-authoritarian philosophical reasons. The craziest part is there is an interview conducted by Robert Evans, where he interviews an ISIS bride who is surprised about the treatment she is getting. An authoritarian government would cut their losses, then cut them down.
Clearly you know nothing about anarchism. Stop speaking about it like you know what you are talking about.
That’s simply not anarchism. Over the last half century, there has been an effort to co-opt it by the right. Libertarianism is literally a left wing philosophy in most other parts of the world, but some dunce-muppet named Murray Rothbard stole it as his own (p83) and on this page he even admits that it was a word used by anarchists, which he distances himself from. One of the foundational anarchist thinkers, Proudhon, literally says “Property is theft,” a complete rejection of fundamental property rights needed for an “an”cap society.
Stealing words from the lefties isn’t anything new, the Nazi party did with their “National Socialism” (granted there’s some interesting history with it. Even though all of the nominally economically left wing nazis were killed in the night of long knives, they kept the socialist bit). But to say Nazism was ever socialist would be parroting a pathetic right wing talking point that should have died a long time ago.
If you ignore the entirety of anarchist thought, throughout well over 180 years of development and practice, where hundreds of thousands of people fought against authoritarianism, fascism, and capitalism, you could only lie through your teeth when saying shit that wack. Or, you would have to not know anything that you are talking about.
To say that failed “anarcho”-capitalist projects are the fault of anarchism, an ideology that rose in opposition to capitalism is ignorant.
And to consider Milei an anarchist, someone who is weilding the power of the state in service of right wing ultra-neoliberalism, you would have to be insane. If you don’t take my word that as anarchists we hate Milei, how about you check out this Crimethinc. article on Milei covering the topic from the perspective of an argentine anarchist.
I’m not a libertarian communist so my knowledge of this stuff is lacking, but I do know that Rojava, a radically feminist experiment inspired by Bookchin’s later works. It is based in NE Syria has been doing decently well. Especially considering it is under constant attack from the Turkish government, the second largest NATO military. They even managed to push out ISIS, which is an impressive feat for a new government. While they haven’t gotten rid of capitalism, they aren’t fully capitalist.
If you paid attention to the news during the trump years you might know of trump betraying the Kurds, which is usually how the media refered to Rojava.
Edit: fixed typo
This is the Anarchism At Home. If you want 19th century European anarchism, you’re going to need a boat and a time machine.
It’s a heavily armed Kurdish cut out that exists primary to fight proxy wars with Turkyie and the remnants of the Iraqi military. It has some excellent press around it, thanks to US/UK media needing a progressive champion in a region where everyone hates us. But there’s a word for a minority militant left wing proxy force.
Tankies.
No, it is not. I have never met a single "an"cap in the real world, yet I’ve stumbled across quite a few anarchists throughout my time on this planet. Fuck, I used to be a far-right wing libertarian, and even in those spaces I did not see one “anarcho”-capitalist.
You are just wrong, but the special type where you double down, and just dig deeper and deeper trying to back your point, and end up being even more spectacularly wrong.
Look, just because you say “no, this completely different right wing philosophy that stands opposed to the basic foundational principles of this left wing philosophy are same” doesn’t make it true.
If you want to apply this logic, couldn’t I say that “anarcho”-capitalists are just liberals? Going back to that page I quoted in my previous comment, Rothbard, an “anarcho”-capitalist, says:
Clearly, this man is a liberal.
Do I? While I’d love to meet some figures like Emma Goldman, DeCleyre, Parsons, Kropotkin, and so-on, that seems a bit over the top considering I just need to go to my community centers and say “Hello” to the wonderful men, women, and enbies who are stocking the community fridges, stand in solidarity with other activists doing antifascist, unhoused, or queer liberation activism, or volunteer my time at any other mutual aid org.
If you think it just existed in the 19th century, you are plain wrong, considering it has continued to exist throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. For example, there is the anarchist free territories in Ukraine in the early 1900s, or the Soviets before the Bolsheviks seized power, or the anarchist uprisings in Patagonia, or anarchist Manchuria, or the Spanish civil war, or the Zapatistas, or The Queer Insurrection and Liberation Army and the IRPGF. These events cover various points in the 1900s and 2000s.
If you think it only existed in Europe, then I regret to inform you about the aforementioned Patagonians, Manchurians, Mayans, Syrians, and others. The US had it’s first red scare surrounding Anarchism in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Some famous American anarchists include Emma Goldman, Voltarine DeCleyre, Alexander Berkman, Lucy Parsons, David Graeber, and others.
No, it is not. One of the most important reasons it exists is because of the Kurdish ethnic cleansing carried out by the Turkish and Iraqi governments, and ISIS. Rojava rose out of the Syrian Civil war, not out some geopolitical fuckery. And while I’d listen to an argument about the civil war rising from geopolitical fuckery, that doesn’t mean Rojava came from that.
It’s not entirely Kurdish, but I’m not surprised it is heavily Kurdish considering the ethnic cleansings that have been taken place over the last hundred years.
And if you think it only fights proxy wars, then why is it only seeming to defend itself when Turkey attacks it time and time again?
So? So what if a new and radical project arising in one of the most inhospitable places on earth gets positive press. Are you saying an autonomous government exists because the US/UK media needs a progressive champion??? Why would this need be there if we have Israel, a country that is commonly shown as a progressive oasis, and “the only democracy in the middle east” even though it’s not, it’s an apartheid state.
Since you love to use wacky definitions, go off champ. But that’s not what a tankie is.
First, Tankie originally meant an authoritarian communist that supported sending the tanks into Hungary to violently suppress the Hungarian revolution. Obviously that’s not how it’s used now, but if what you said was an actual definition, then you shouldn’t have said “who will protect us from the Far-Left Authoritarian Tankies?” in the first comment I replied to, since there is not any far left minority left wing proxy force in the US. But it is clear that you don’t care about definitions, or even being consistent with them.
More modernly speaking, Tankies are just authoritarian communists, most often Stalinists. But the important bit is authoritarian communists.
Second, to call the Rojava project full of tankies is an exercise in absurdity. Rojava is a famously anti-authoritarian project. One of their key philosophies is feminism, since they believe that in order to start getting rid of authoritarianism, you’ve got to go at the roots, and liberating women from patriarchal systems of oppression is their place to start. Further, Rojava has famously not been executing ISIS members, since they fundamentally believe people can change. And they do this at great cost to themselves, since they’re stuck maintaining a prison system full of people who would love to kill them for anti-authoritarian philosophical reasons. The craziest part is there is an interview conducted by Robert Evans, where he interviews an ISIS bride who is surprised about the treatment she is getting. An authoritarian government would cut their losses, then cut them down.