File spoon-archives/anarchy-list.archive/anarchy-list_1999/anarchy-list.9912, message 709


Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:50:28 -0800
From: Joshua Houk <jlhouk-AT-uswest.net>
Subject: Re: Anarchism: Two Kinds




"Shawn P. Wilbur" wrote:

> Josh, my friend, find a demand for "a comprehensive knowledge of
> anarchist theory" - hell, even a strong suggestion - anywhere in
> anything i've written here. I'll continue to argue that a critical
> knowledge of anarchist history is damned useful, particularly if we
> don't want to *continue* repeating the same old internal squabbles,
> or if we want to deal with what is specifically false about claims
> like McElroy's. As for "analysis," there's no point in making it
> anything spookier than it is. We all do some of it nearly everyday.
> To brush what is critical in our everyday lives aside, to subsume it
> in the dubious category of "common sense," seems a bit
> counterproductive. There's something a bit suspect about a "common
> sense" sufficient to living "in an anarchist way." To whom is it
> common? And is "common sense" the same as "good sense"? And are
> either/both somehow separate from "learning stuff"? Seems like a lot
> of sliding to refute something i didn't say...

Hmmm... Maybe "analysis" isn't really being defined well. If by analysis
you mean leaning from the past and making the optimal plan for the
future, I'm all game. If instead you mean keeping up with David Watson's
latest article, I'll pass. I gather that you mean the former, so we're
kosher.

"Common sense" is something that I'm not budging from, however. Taking
anarchy to mean the absence of hierarchies, everyone can operate on
common sense to come to their own conclusions on how to go about this.
It's common sense that if that I want an anarchist society, then I don't
lord it over people. It's simple reasoning.

> But since you brought it up, i'm sort of curious about this "praxis"
> which takes care of itself (without history? without analysis? with
> the "common sense" of my capitalist neighbors?) Can we ask what it
> does when it's dealing with global trade or post-N30 sectarianism?

Certainly. Praxis blocked the streets in Seattle, creating a wonderful
atomsphere for a few short hours. Common sense caused people ambivalent
about WTO to rebel against the cops that were invading their
neighborhood.

And we've seen the armchair quarterbacks with their "analysis" which
completely misses the whole essence of N30 week. It's one thing to talk
about it, but it's a beautiful thing to experience it. (Yes, I'm in
serious post-partem depression right now...)

Global trade? Get rid of capitalism. Sectarianism? You have to have an
ideology to be sectarian.

joshua h

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005