Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:02:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Anarcho domain purity
From: Larry Bekich <LBekich-AT-MNSi.Net>


on 8/25/00 6:30 PM, Shawn P. Wilbur wrote:

> A few thoughts on this thread, from the owner/operator of something like a
> "commercial anarchist site":
> 
> I think the concern with "anarchist commercialism" is a little
> wrongheaded. I'm willing to say that anarchism, to be at all consistent,
> pretty much has to be anti-capitalist. I'm not so certain that commerce is
> anti-anarchist. And i am absolutely convinced that, here in the
> non-anarchist situations in which we find ourselves, something like
> "anarchist commerce" is something we should *not* shy away
> from. 

Yes, I believe you're right.


> I think the negative concentration on "purity" (whether our own or other
> folks') doesn't help much.... For example, the concern that an
> anarchist operation be "non-profit" may not amount to much specific. ... i
> haven't been making even
> expenses. No profits in the business, and even in years where there were
> "profits" they hardly amounted to much of a living wage. ...
 

When I raised the notion of "Anarchist.Com" explaining itself as being
non-profit or whatever, I wasn't suggesting an anarchist concern NEED to be
non-profit to satisfy my "lofty" criteria, but I simply desired some
clarification of what the economic order is at Anarchist.Com.  For an entity
to boldly call itself "anarchist.com" begs for some position statement, at
least in my mind.

If the owners had called their site "buybookshere.com" and sold anarchist
titles, I would probably applaud it for raising the profile of anarchism and
"being brave."

So why should I be MORE upset with a business that calls itself
Anarchist.Com?  I guess because I have an expectation that the people behind
it are "anarchist" to some degree--and that the name invites that kind of
scrutiny.

Certainly independent owners who are scraping by don't deserve the wrath of
"anarcho-purists." Nor should they be condemned if they are extremely
profitable.


> Perhaps there is
> something like a "cold war consensus" between many folks, anarchists and
> non-anarchists alike, to think of anarchism as something extreme or
> impossible, "outside" in some sense the daily lives of most of us. A lot
> of what i hear makes anarchism seem like nothing that has ever happened,
> when perhaps it's more like the thing that is always almost happening, but
> which we miss out on because we think it has to come from someplace better
> like a bolt from the blue.

Excellent point.


> "Purity" is the great temptation of an essentially fundamentalist culture...
> 
> When i was at the point, a few years back, of declaring my generally
> libertarian/communitarian politics to be "anarchist," it was particularly
> the "practical anarchy" of folks like Chuck and the Spunk Library crowd
> that struck me. 
>... we might do ourselves a favor by
> moving away from the internal inquisitions .. and attempts to police some sort
>of uniform "image of
> anarchism," and focus on finding the practical, concrete points at which
> there's some anarchy in our lives, and try to make more of it.
> 
> Me, i bought a bookstore, and then started a little libertarian publishing
> operation, and made a point not to downplay the fact that i'm an
> anarchist ... In the meantime, i do what i can to support other
> folks in the community - most of whom aren't anarchist, but maybe would be
> if anarchism ever looked more practicable.
> 
> Certainly, we need sometimes to march in the street. And, certainly,
> sometimes we need to hash out among ourselves what we think
> "anarchism" can, and has, and should stand for. But just as certainly, a
> priority for us now, in the midst of a world that's pretty rotten for a
> lot of us, is to settle down, concentrate on our daily lives and find some
> anarchistic levers and some likely, local spots to use them.


Great note Shawn.  You've made me examine WHY I had trouble with
Anarchist.Com in the first place, and my main issue is that my expectations
are high for something that calls itself that.

Is that fair or even reasonable?  Perhaps not.  But I have to say I have a
fascination in seeing how Anarchist.Com evolves ...


Ciao, -------> Larry