NationStates Jolt Archive

i'm doing a paper about the anarchist platform and i would like to know if other anarchists are actually against this platform. surprisingly enough, googling this is difficult. i would have thought many would have thought this was hypocritical (since it talks about forming an organization with a uniting theory and where the majority decides what anarchism is all about and how it will be portrayed)

for more info: http://www.anarchism.ws/platform.html

(since it talks about forming an organization with a uniting theory and where the majority decides what anarchism is all about and how it will be portrayed)
I don't see how a uniting theory would be against anarchism.
Where did they say say that the majority decides what anarchism is about? It seemed to me that they said quite the opposite, them saying that they were part of the 'platformist tradition' or whatever within the larger grouping of anarchism. But then again, I didn't read in too deeply, so they might have said it somewhere I didn't look.

I'm sort of an anarchist. I had a look at this site, though I didn't read too much of it, and I too found I disagree with this platform. These anarchists believe in working in ideological unity and tactical unity.

I don't believe in working.

malatesta and makhno exchanged letters on the subject back in the day, though they were hindered by language differences and the fascists (who kept busting malatesta's shit). they can be found here (http://www.nestormakhno.info/index.htm), and are worth reading.

nefac is neo-platformist/takes inspiration from the platform, so you should look into what they have to say (http://nefac.net/node/544).

bob black wrote one of his standard style articles on the subject fairly recently called Wooden Shoes or Platform Shoes? (http://www.geocities.com/kk_abacus/ioaa/bblack.html). he also has been having an extended exchange with iain mckay on the subject in the letters section of the last few (dozen) issues of 'anarchy: a journal of desire armed', but that's mostly name calling - more so than usual even.

let's see, there a whole bunch more too. i'll look around.

personally, i've never really understood the point of the 'anti-organizationalist' tendency. to me it seems like setting yourself up to fail. i'm not a platformist in any strict sense, but i'm closer to that than to a lot of what is floating around as 'post-____ anarchism'.

I am an anarchist of sorts, but anarchism will come about because of technological advancement, not because of class warfare.

I am an anarchist of sorts, but anarchism will come about because of technological advancement, not because of class warfare.

Considering the potential for surveillance that this technology brings, I'm not so sure.

btw,

i'm doing a paper about the anarchist platform

a school-type paper or are you writing an article for submission somewhere?

any of you other ns anarchos got anything relevent to say or link to about platformism for this guy? i know you're out there.

any of you other ns anarchos got anything relevent to say or link to about platformism for this guy? i know you're out there.

what, am i the only one who knows what the platform is or something?

what, am i the only one who knows what the platform is or something?
I'm baffled that anarchists have a platform. Why do you have to complicate a beautiful thing like anarchy with political statements?

I'm baffled that anarchists have a platform. Why do you have to complicate a beautiful thing like anarchy with political statements?


well, other than the fact that we've always had such things, the platform itself was written largely by some exiles based on their experiences in the russian revolution.

sorry dude, but it looks like i'm the only one around here currently who knows anything about the platform

I am an anarchist of sorts, but anarchism will come about because of technological advancement, not because of class warfare.

I don't know if this thread is the right place, but I am very interested in this statement and would really like you to explain further. What will the end product be like? How exactly will technology negate the apparent need for government?

Has this platform been edited to reflect my somewhat recent breakthrough in anarchophilosophosyndicommunity?

Basically, the various 'schools' of anarchism can be united clearly under one over-arching philosophical umbrella which preserves the core of each while accentuating the differences cogently.

It is called "anarcho-waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh" where "waaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh" is the noise a child makes when it's crying.

I don't know if this thread is the right place, but I am very interested in this statement and would really like you to explain further. What will the end product be like? How exactly will technology negate the apparent need for government?

I believe anarchism is only possible with complete devolution of property rights, in other words, property is available to anyone who can earn it. I believe the path to this state is through capitalism.

The problems capitalism has right now are caused by bottlenecks in resource and good distribution chains, which limit the free spread of property. These bottlenecks are pretty much economies of scale problems which gather wealth in pools.

As technology pushes further, it will decrease these bottlenecks and lower the economies of scale. The internet, air shipping, cars, they are all dramatic examples of technology that has indirectly opened up massive amounts of resources to the masses.

Has this platform been edited to reflect my somewhat recent breakthrough in anarchophilosophosyndicommunity?

Basically, the various 'schools' of anarchism can be united clearly under one over-arching philosophical umbrella which preserves the core of each while accentuating the differences cogently.

i'll ignore you childishness (why must you always make a fool of yourself in these anarchism discussions?) for the moment.

there is actually a position that came to be known as 'synthesist' that holds something like that, but in terms of organizations rather than philosophy. there was actually a debate between synthesists and platformists way back when too, with other exiles from the russian revolution taking the synthesist side.