Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:00:53 -0700
From: Dave Hayman <dhayman-AT-igc.org>
Subject: [Fwd: Anarchy Magazine and Violence]


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

Sorry, Iain, this was meant for the -AT--list.

Message-ID: <37262C00.BD6A74AF-AT-igc.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:28:32 -0700
From: Dave Hayman <dhayman-AT-igc.org>
Reply-To: dhayman-AT-igc.org
Organization: Concerned Nihilists
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U)
To: Iain McKay <iain.mckay-AT-zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Anarchy Magazine and Violence
References: <Pine.LNX.3.95.990424194232.8192F-100000-AT-parsons.iww.org> <3724D167.22026501-AT-zetnet.co.uk>

Haven't been reading AJDA lately, but if it's so controversial, perhaps
I'm missing something.

Iain McKay wrote:
> 
> I'm anti-work, I'm also anti-trade union (we can do much better!). Does
> that mean I'm against anarcho-syndicalism? Or workers struggle? Or
> somehow "anti-worker"? I don't think so. I'm anti-work *because*
> I'm a worker. 

As we all know, most right-wingers are anti-trade union. Iain is
anti-trade union because "we can do much better!", by which I suppose he
means some form of association that would not be deeply complicit with
worker exploitation. But, as he admits below, there isn't anything
available to replace them at this point. And there is no way to know
that the best way to replace them isn't to reform what exists. Iain
shows respect for other viewpoints when he airs his, but many AJDA
writers do not.

> primitivism, a critique of
> > rationalism and opposition to "civilization".
> 
> Well, I'm against "civilisation" -- if by that you mean what we have
> now. As for rationalism, well, look at the Randites who are the
> greatest example of the irrationality of rationalism I can think
> of! I'm not against reason, rational investigation and debate,
> scientific analysis, and so on. I am against the dismissal of
> other ways of looking at thinks and of ignoring your emotions
> and gut feelings.

Sure, the "civilization" we have now sucks. Does that mean any possible
civilization would suck? Wouldn't a global anarchist society be a
civilization?
"Primitivism" has never held much appeal for me, lifelong cityboy that I
am. If others want to hang out in the woods eating berries and
scratching fleas, fine, but count me out.
> 
> > I think Anarchy magazine should not kid itself and pretend it does not
> > have a specific agenda or ideology.. it clearly does, as Jason McQuinn has
> > made clear.
> 
> Well, I would suggest that by ideology they mean a set of fixed ideas.
> rather their approach is to question everything, including what we
> anarchists hold dear. And so it should be. We should be developing our
> ideas by analysis and critique, not repeating old dogma's.

I suspect that AJDA does have an ideology that it's not honest about,
but that just puts it in the same bag with virtually every other media
outlet. I think we'd make more progress by helping each other be more
honest than by making harsh accusations. As used in political discourse,
"rational" and "irrational" have become nearly content-free labels to
praise or blame. So what do we mean by "rational"?
> 
> Ultimately, anarcho-syndicalism will mean opposing the trade unions.
> It depends what you oppose the unions with. Anarchy does not really
> suggest anything. That is a problem, to understate the point!
> 
> The left are part of the problem, imho. Anarchists need to realise that
> the left is the left-wing of what the right are the right-wing of,
> namely capitalism. In that sense Black is right and Bookchin is
> wrong. The "left that was" was authoritarian, elitist, state
> capitalist, pro-Stalin, pro-social democracy, etc. What has all
> that to do with socialism, nevermind libertarian socialism?

I'm still not ready to accept this definition of Left: all the shit, and
none of the value. When anarchists disavow the left they put themselves
in a void cut off from the rest of the world. What we need to do is
distinguish between what's good about historical and extant Leftism, and
what needs to be pitched. And if we agree that the name for the good
stuff should be "anarchism", fine, but don't deny where it came from.

Dave Hayman