Comments for Contr'un: Anarchist Theory It is the clash of ideas that casts the light Fri, 08 Jan 2016 09:18:35 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Notes on the Malheur refuge occupation by Anarcho Fri, 08 Jan 2016 09:18:35 +0000 “And for those of my anarchist and libertarian friends who might consider even this tepid defense of government agencies shocking, the lesson should be clear: Federal land management at the very least sets a bar that any anti-governmental alternative will have to exceed.”

Just to say, I agree with your comments and discussion. Life is complex and anarchists need to recognise that (part of my dislike of propertarianism is that they have a “one size fits all” approach). In terms of reforms in the here-and-now, it is clear that neo-liberal governments make things worse for the majority of people when the “roll-back” the state — what gets me is how propertarians side with the government against its subjects during austerity (as per the whole “why are anarchists joining anti-austerity protests?” thing).

Any libertarian solutions need to be better than the alternative, very true. So, for example, abolishing the welfare state and ending all legal rights to organise will, undoubtedly, produce a road of private serfdom (it has to a large — look at the impact of the Tory anti-union laws in the UK).

I would expect that any anti-government solution to land management would involve commons and community management. I would expect that the protesters (and propertarians) would be just as opposed to that as to the current system (see Rothbard’s comments on Native American common land ownership). The shade of Locke hangs heavy over all this — suffice to say, to privatise these resources state intervention would be needed as it always has.

Sorry, just a few words (probably in need of proper expansion) in support.

Comment on 2015-16 by bill Wed, 06 Jan 2016 17:47:29 +0000 Shawn,
I really hope inspiration strikes soon and “The Humanisphere” works its way again to the top of your pile…I know that the interest in it and the demand for it are strong!

Comment on Jean Grave, “The Adventures of Nono” (1901) – Full translation by John Carter Mon, 29 Jun 2015 15:37:10 +0000 Thanks for writing such a good article, I stumbled onto your blog and read a few post. I like your style of writing… russian translation

Comment on New Uncertainties and Opportunities by Me Sat, 16 May 2015 06:10:23 +0000 Hello again, I think I’ve found another use of the term anarchist by a bakuninist before the 1880’s(in this case Jules Montels),but it’s from the late, and not early 1870’s

The text can mean two things:
1.That Montels really did use the term “anarchism” in his pamphlet
2.That he was referring to the bakuninist international of wich he was a member.

Comment on Max Nettlau, A discussion with an old comrade (c. 1936) by Admin Fri, 15 May 2015 15:51:12 +0000 There aren’t any footnotes. The bracketed numbers are manuscript page numbers. Sorry for any confusion.

Comment on Max Nettlau, A discussion with an old comrade (c. 1936) by Bea Travenne Thu, 14 May 2015 09:34:38 +0000 Where may one find the footnotes to this excellent text?

Comment on New Uncertainties and Opportunities by shawnpwilbur Tue, 12 May 2015 19:47:40 +0000 Thanks! I see that Guillaume includes part of their manifesto in his history of the International. IISH seems to have the paper. Another thing to follow up on for the Collectivist Reader.

Comment on New Uncertainties and Opportunities by Me Tue, 12 May 2015 19:19:02 +0000 Hey there, if you’re interested in the information, I’ve read on a libcom biography of anarchist Charles Alérini there was a group of bakunian internationalists who used the term “an-archie” to describe their ideas in their publication:

“With Paul Brousse and Camille Camet and others in Barcelona he founded the Comité de propagande révolutionnaire socialiste de la France méridionale (Committee of Revolutionary Socialist Propaganda for Southern France) which in 1873 published the paper La Solidarité Révolutionnaire (10 issues June-September) and which employed the term “an-archie” to describe its ideas in a signed programme. This group attempted to rebuild the movement in southern France and launch a new insurrectionary movement but soon Brousse moved to Switzerland and Camet returned to France leading to the cessation of the paper.”

I tried searching for some issues of the paper online, but didn’t find any text directly from the paper, just some references to it.

Comment on The “Benthamite” anarchism and the origins of anarchist history by shawnpwilbur Sat, 11 Apr 2015 21:55:23 +0000 There is obviously a lot more story to be told. My sense at this point is that there were incentives around the time of the Black international for a range of anarchist tendencies to see themselves as more closely connected than might have been possible at early points in the history. I’m working right now on the publishing history of Bakunin’s “God and the State,” and it’s really remarkable how many factions end up being involved in the translation and dissemination of that text in the early 1880s. It is likely that there was a fairly widespread solidarity in those years that did not hold up under various pressures, both internal and external. At the same time, the various attempts to explore anarchist history undermined the sort of account that Kropotkin gave in “On Order.” I think we can probably mark out another era that runs into the 1920s or so, where “anarchism” splintered into something fairly familiar, in terms of the competing tendencies. There’s an attempt to present the plural anarchism that resulted in the period of the Encyclopédie Anarchiste.

The new diversity of positions ends up being sort of a funhouse reflection of the old range, I think, in part because the general worldview has changed dramatically from the mid-19th century to the turn of the 20th and in part because the problems of ideology and organization cannot help but occupy a central place in the later era. I don’t know how to use the notion of “leftism” carefully enough to be useful, but I suspect some of the tendencies that I am focused on, such as shifts in the role of science within anarchism and that new emphasis on specifically anarchist ideologies and institutions, cross concerns with the critique of “leftism.”

Tucker is not Proudhon, nor is he Greene, or Warren, or Spooner. He is very much a product of a different worldview. The same is true when we compare Kropotkin or Most to Déjacque or the communists of l’Humanitaire. The individuals who cross over from one era to the other are fairly marginal in the stories we’ve told, though also very interesting.

Comment on The “Benthamite” anarchism and the origins of anarchist history by v! Sat, 11 Apr 2015 20:00:51 +0000 shawn – i’m really enjoying the ‘era of anarchy’ –

how quickly do you think, after 1880 or so, do you surmise it took for the ‘commitment’ you spoke of in ‘our lost continent’ to really take hold. do you see it as a rather quick move to reified anarchism or a slow motion towards less wingnut (i use that term affectionately), less diverse, and more leftist versions?

of course, the wild offshoots (l labadie, EO wilson, e.g.) continued to arise, so the question is really, how clean cut do you see the end of the Era, or in how many ways would you characterize the shift?

another question – perhaps there was really no shift but that which is called ‘anarchy’?