Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:11:13 +0000
From: Iain McKay <iain.mckay-AT-zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Post-Left Anarchy: Leaving the Left Behind


hello all

Josh Robinson wrote: 
> >  ignoring or
> > downplaying its indelibly individualist foundation as irrelevant to
> > social struggles
> 
> would anyone else take issue with this claim about anarchism's
> 'indelibly individualist foundation'?

depends what is meant by "individualist". If it means respecting
individual liberty while building organisations based on 
self-management so the individual can operate as an equal 
with others to change the world by collective action, then
I would have no problem with it.

If it means glorifying an abstract individual and downplaying
the importance of collective struggle and organisation (or,
even worse, dismissing them as authoritarian), then yes I
would have an issue with it.

Marxists call us "individualists." Right-wing individualists
call us "collectivists". I think both are as correct as they
are wrong. 

Anyways, to stress "individualist" is nonsense. Anarchism is
far to rich to make such an assertion. It is, after all,
a theory of organisation, of how individuals can work
together while maintaining their individuality and freedom.

>From Stirner to Kropotkin, the need for co-operation to
ensure individuality is there. So maybe I would say 
"individualist foundations ensure collective struggle
and freedom."

sadly, some anarchists use "individualist" to eskew any form
of responsibility and co-operation. That in itself would be
grounds to avoid its use... :)

iain