From: "Harald Beyer-Arnesen" <haraldba-AT-online.no>
Subject: Re: AUT: Tariq Ali: change the world by taking power
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:17:28 +0100



<<I've got to disagree with Chuck here; no need to make this kind of
generalization.  And no need to think that anarchists don't have
the brutal thug potential either.  (I'm sure we can pick characters
and moments from history to prove that point too.) >>

That anarchists have "the brutal thug potential" no less than
others, is precisly *the whole point*. That is *the* classical
anarchist argument against the illusion that the state can
become a means of the working classes emancipation. If it
was based on that anarchists were some kind of saints, the
argument would not have been valid. It is a question of structures/
socio-material relations, not personal traits. Although 'brutal
thug' is hardly either the point here, rather the reproduction
of power relations, not at least within a context where
capitalist relations in general also have to be reproduced.
This also to maintain the power of the state to impose
reforms. You cannot use the state as means of reform
without at the same time imposing obedience - in the final
instance at the point of the gun -, without reproducing
the hierarchical structured socio-material relations and
the whole psycology that comes with it.
        There is also an almost incredibly degree of historical
amnesia surrounding this whole issue. Always the excepetion.
The same old illusionists games dressed up as realistic. The
same old lines, increasingly without any founding, ever
more farsical and with less ambitions. And the seasons turns.
        Far more enters into this whole question. ...

I people just had left it to: I think this one will be a better
'thug' the other one. That some times proves true. In the
mean while we could go on and focus on our 'own agenda'
that cannot be imposed from above ...

Harald






     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---