Heard y'all are anti organisations or do u count market as one?

https://mirror.anarhija.net/usa.anarchistlibraries.net/mirror/g/gd/gilles-dauve-alice-in-monsterland.lt.pdf

Another critical essay removed from the (so-called) Anarchist Library about the identity politics moralistic point-of-view. Perhaps expounding on the themes dealt with in Feral Fauns essay “Child Love”.

Is Duavé within any (popularly) notion of post-left?

I'm a total noob. Tip?

as an anthropologist: Graeber claimed (in his "Fragments") that he was pretty much the first actual anarchist anthropologist, despite the work of Harold Barclay and James C Scott, and the radical anti-tankie marxists Stanley Diamond and Pierre Clastres. so, arrogant and ignorant at the same time.

for his sweeping (and totally unreadable vanity project "Direct Action"), he reports as a participant-observer on the strategies and tactics of various anarchist and anarchist-influenced activist groups; many of the people he participated with and observed were not informed that their conversations and activities would be documented in a book. so, questionable ethics.

as a revolutionary tourist: like that other fool Milstein (and plenty of others, including a good personal friend of mine), Graeber was completely taken in by the PR handlers of the YPG when visiting Rojava. his paeans to the "Rojava Revolution" with their empty comparisons are painful to read for anyone who actually knows about the revolutionary projects of anarchists throughout the 20th century, like the Makhnovshchina, the various communes in pre-Mao China, the original Zapatistas, and the collectives in the Spanish Revolution. totally unlike the aforementioned examples, Rojava has no agricultural or industrial base to collectivize into economic self-management. the only aspects of life in Rojava that appear to be horizontal are the militias; while crucial for the defense of revolutionary experiments, the independent existence of militias is never sufficient for the flowering of such experiments. in most cases of anarchist and anarchist-influenced social revolution, militias arose AFTER the collectivization and self-management of agricultural and/or industrial areas. so, upside-down historian.

his campaigning for Corbyn was a colossal embarrassment for anyone familiar with the long-standing anarchist position on electoral politics (hint: anarchists are not in favor of parliamentarism). he should have known this already after writing a book called "Direct Action" -- which is the exact opposite of electoral action. plus, the fact that Corbyn did exhibit some soft antisemitism could never be admitted by Graeber or most other Jewish pro-Corbyn people. compounding the embarrassment is the fact that as a non-UK citizen, he wasn't even able to do what he encouraged others to do. so, shallow understanding of antisemitism, and shallow understanding of the role of parliamentarianism in propping up industrial capitalism.

as an anarchist: he didn't understand why anarchists are opposed to electoral politics; he didn't understand how he wasn't the first anarchist anthropologist; he didn't understand that the slogan he helped popularize ("We Are the 99%") is a majoritarian deception perpetrated by pro-capitalist populists who instinctively accept that landlords and cops are or can be our comrades in the struggle against a handful of "bad" capitalists. he didn't understand that going against the mainstream (in the case of his co-authored ode to urbanism, "The Dawn of Everything") often just makes you look foolish rather than radical. so, bad anarchist.

eagerly anticipating the flurry of downvotes from the anti-intellectual mob.

Sup im pretty new to anarchism come from an ML background if i did understand that right postleft Anarchist reject organizations and ancom/sydicalist build horizontal orgs my question is how do postleft anarchist do organization?

Hello! I'm an anarchist who's curious about post left anarchy. I really like the concept but at the same time I'm having a bit of trouble really pinning it down. For starters, what's the exact difference between post left anarchy and other forms of anarchy (i.e. anarcho-communism or anarcho-egoism)? Second, I understand anti-work is also a part of it and I find the concept intruiging. Could you explain it in more detail? Thank you sm!!

I know, slogans are spooky symbols of virtue, but it just sounds annoying when i say anything about Marx.

inb4 second amendment

/insert essay here

Is he still active? How is he viewed within the community?

This is an analysis that seems to be original coming from me but an undeniable thing I notice is that the decline of anarchism over the 1st quarter of century 21 correlates with the end of musical youth cultures and the rise of memetic online internet youth culture.

It seems the circle @ just hasn't been able to adjust to this change. One of the characteristics of this age is ubiquitous consumerism, something that runs counter to what anarchism and the greater radicalism that it was a part of was for which was anti-consumerism or consumer agnosticism. I think that modern music better played into a not-so consumerist mentality given that music is something produced and has a general creator basin. This is not the case with video games, high speed internet and the current digital nexus.

I also think this explains why the right wing stuff(authoritarian and non-authoritarian) took off. The ancaps were the original edgelords and they easily fit in with the emerging high speed internet video game cultures of web 2.0. So did the fascists and other rightist authoritarians sadly. They never got going back in the old zine scene niche musical youth culture days but they and the anarchists have essentially switched places now. It very much plays to on the nose propaganda this is reminiscent of radio propaganda(which also tracks with more right wing mentality)

I don't see a late development happening where @ s and their adjacents get going. What will have to happen, likely, is a new media ecological context that is friendly to anarchists and their friends.

I heard that Bob Black and other post-leftists hate Democracy as they think it is another system of leviathan and control, and this is fine; but what do you contrarians offer in return? What other system?

Title really

Learn about it if you don't know about it by clicking here.

Pretty much just the title.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/a-comrade-robbed-of-savings-to-leave-an-abusive-situation?utm_campaign=p_cp+share-sheet&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3uwvF7iFTX5j-yW8t6FG1zqidLA0QWwqW9bPmuPZZIFzBYU7a6IdwWzBg_aem_ARvRyH5Xr9gecuKA_3-rVCPKSXslxD6DYqRytcJSqJxCkrG4HdrbrKA8-yXueMM33wDID-W0rmJ1weZDSi2tEdmG

Some little background of me: I live in Russia (hence I am not really integrated in modern western political discussion, despite trying to understand what's happening both in the U.S. and Europe politics). I was always impressed by left anarchism ideas, I read Kropotkin, however I think that the way old and new left movements organize themselves is inefficient and seems to always end in some sort of authoritarian way or cooperating with the state. I disagree with some ideas of modern western popular left-wing movements, i.e. gender problem, while I support LGBTQ+ movement, I think the concept of gender itself should be eliminated long term, as well as a concepts of race and nation. I like core concepts of Anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism such as elimination of central goverment, elimination of market economy and money in general, federalized horizontal society structure without hierarchy, however being a 19th century ideas their proposed real life implementation seems underdeveloped and outdated to me, that's where transhumanism and technology development comes in. I believe that the further technology goes the more there are possibilities both for extremely totalitarian states and anarchist societies. I don't believe that humanity with their current technological progress nor humans with their current biological capabilities are able to establish any form decentralized horizontal society, however it doesn't mean we can't change human body and brain to fulfill our needs. I believe that capitalism at some point of its technological progress will destroy itself and hence establish a more effective federalized horizontal society without hierarchy. And in all of that being said, while not considering myself right wing, but both disagreeing with most popular left wing ideologies I began looking towards post left anarchism and whether these ideas are adjacent to my worldview or not. Any help in figuring my views out is appreciated.

I can remember various antifa critics talking about antifa being a bubble and that so many anarchists membraning themselves with it was going to have negative downstream effects.

It seems like this is exactly what has happened to @ discourse now that the bubble has burst.

So I watched the bulk of Cuck Philosophy's video on urban guerrillas that he just put out that was a pretty good synopsis of the last 2 major post-18th century radical ages and it got my neuro noodles noodling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-pdWG8YkZ8&t=26s

I very much think that revolution as a prime moving idea is something to be jettisoned by future @ s. I see it as an outgrowth of mechanical solidarity more-so then organic(I'm reversing Durkheim's idea of organic vs mechanical solidarity as he gets scale wrong and had no idea about Dunbar's number). For me I think that anarchists/anarchs should look at things like emergent imaginaries and egregores as sources for anarchy and not revolution, the latter which arises more from inflamed contexts that quite often do not transform into anarchic contexts. I'm not saying there should not be a tertiary place for revolution(social only) but insurrection and imagination is better.

Essentially circle@s should look more into mythology then revolution. Revolution will always be a process of society revolving into yet another society.

I've finally reached my limit with all the fucking Marxist seepage over there. All these clowns insisting that Marx was a pivotal figure in... what, exactly? Sociology of capitalism, according to some. Plenty of anarcho-leftists think anarchism without a Marxist analysis of capitalism is unthinkable, even useless. I imagine they measure this by the number of self-described adherents to Marxism as opposed to anarchism. Then why not quit pretending to be anarchists? Most of their organizations and projects eerily resemble Leninist outfits anyway. I'm tired of pointing out the flaws in the LTV, and explaining that you don't need the metaphysics of "value" to understand how exploitation works. I'm tired of pointing out that plenty of famous and influential anarchist theorists borrowed virtually nothing from Marx or Marxists, and their ideas and projects never suffered from such a supposed lack. I'm tired of pointing out the lived history of Marxists going out of their way to attack and murder anarchists. They can keep their fucked up playpen.