What exactly are "self-styled" anarchists?

[Trystan]

Reactionary journos use this "self-styled" label all the time. I'm wondering what it means. So who better to ask than our OI contingent here on RevLeft.

[Hit The North]

In my experience, a "self-styled anarchist" (or "self-styled" anything else, for that matter) is usually a wanker.

[StalinFanboy]

It's usually used as a term to mock the philosophy of anarchism. It's basically saying that you can't really be an anarchist, because there's no theory behind it, and it's just kids running around calling themselves anarchists.

[Killfacer]

In my experience, a "self-styled anarchist" (or "self-styled" anything else, for that matter) is usually a wanker.

That's ridiculous. It's just an attempt by the media to undermine anarchists. Remember in greece the refered to tha anarchists as "a group of dissefected youths" and attempted to make them all seem like a group of trouble making thugs.

It's a way to have a dig at anarchists.

[Raúl Duke]

Some self-styled "anarchist" don't have a clue about anarchism.

[Killfacer]

Some self-styled "anarchist" don't have a clue about anarchism.

:rolleyes: No one calls themselves a self styled anarchist. It's no different to when people refer to revleft as a place for deluded idealist teenagers.

[Pogue]

The press tries to besmirch revolutionary ideologies, bears like to shit in the woods and the Pope likes to be a Catholic.

[AvanteRedGarde]

What exactly is an anarchist?

The definition of anarchism is contented; without clear unanimous meaning. People don't call themselves "self-styled anarchists," but do refer to themselves as "anarchists." Hence, they would literally be self styled anarchists.

It sounds a bit confusing, but once you look closely at the vague revolutionary 'anarchist' ideal and its historical and current failings it comes together. Like I said, what are 'anarchists' exactly.

IMO either the current approach of anarchism should be changed in a way that allows it to actually become and impetus, inspiration and guiding ideology of the revolutionary struggle of the world's oppressed (that is to say its definition and understandings surrounding the word should be changed) or 'anarchism' should be rejected as a failed project, one that was never able to make demonstrable steps in accomplishing its righteous ideal.

[Edit Note: I was dealing more with the phrase 'self styled anarchist' coming from the 'left,' not the right.]

[Jazzratt]

"Self-styled" in this case is used to indicate that a person's anarchism is ersatz and self declared. It's used both by reactionary journalists and, as has been indicated here, revolutionary lefties depending on context. "Self-styled" generally carries connotations of vanity and falseness.

[trivas7]

In my experience, a "self-styled anarchist" (or "self-styled" anything else, for that matter) is usually a wanker.
"Wanker" is an anglicism for exactly what, Bob? :D

[Hit The North]

Triv, you, of all people, should know. :p

[Raúl Duke]

:rolleyes: No one calls themselves a self styled anarchist. It's no different to when people refer to revleft as a place for deluded idealist teenagers.

What I meant is that there's people who call themselves anarchists and are exactly not anarchists...

Like some primitivists (calling themselves anarchist-primitivists), etc.

[Killfacer]

What exactly is an anarchist?

The definition of anarchism is contented; without clear unanimous meaning. People don't call themselves "self-styled anarchists," but do refer to themselves as "anarchists." Hence, they would literally be self styled anarchists.

It sounds a bit confusing, but once you look closely at the vague revolutionary 'anarchist' ideal and its historical and current failings it comes together. Like I said, what are 'anarchists' exactly.

IMO either the current approach of anarchism should be changed in a way that allows it to actually become and impetus, inspiration and guiding ideology of the revolutionary struggle of the world's oppressed (that is to say its definition and understandings surrounding the word should be changed) or 'anarchism' should be rejected as a failed project, one that was never able to make demonstrable steps in accomplishing its righteous ideal.

[Edit Note: I was dealing more with the phrase 'self styled anarchist' coming from the 'left,' not the right.]

What a load of gobbledegook (did i spell it right?!). What are you on about? Anarchism has no more failed than any of the other left wing ideologies.

[Trystan]

Actually it has indeed failed a lot less.

[Hit The North]

Actually it has indeed failed a lot less. But not succeeded more.

[AvanteRedGarde]

Name an anarchist revolution that was able to defend itself for more than a few months.

That's right, any revolution with a fighting chance at survival has been necessarily 'statist,' and thus not really a revolution. Is that how the logic goes?

I can name fifteen revolutions that were able to improve the lives of those it championed. Granted, not all of them are 'communist' revolutions nor did any of them make it all the way towards communism/anarchism, but not a single one has in any way, shape or formed been prominently influenced by "Anarchism."

[PRC-UTE]

it means they dress themeselves in the morning, rather than let their mom or the missus or do it for them.

[Killfacer]

Name an anarchist revolution that was able to defend itself for more than a few months.

That's right, any revolution with a fighting chance at survival has been necessarily 'statist,' and thus not really a revolution. Is that how the logic goes?

I can name fifteen revolutions that were able to improve the lives of those it championed. Granted, not all of them are 'communist' revolutions nor did any of them make it all the way towards communism/anarchism, but not a single one has in any way, shape or formed been prominently influenced by "Anarchism."

Name a communist revolution which in defending itself hasn't betrayed it's socialist roots. I can think of one, cuba.

The history of the revolutionary left is like a who's who of failure.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Name an anarchist revolution that was able to defend itself for more than a few months.


The Spanish Anarchists maintained their control over areas of Spain from 1936 to 39.




I can name fifteen revolutions that were able to improve the lives of those it championed. Granted, not all of them are 'communist' revolutions nor did any of them make it all the way towards communism/anarchism, but not a single one has in any way, shape or formed been prominently influenced by "Anarchism."

The Zapatista Revolution I think you'll find is based on Anarchist principles.

[Jack]

This: http://www.libcom.org/blog/why-anarchism-always-self-described-09122008

[Jack]

I can name fifteen revolutions that were able to improve the lives of those it championed. Granted, not all of them are 'communist' revolutions nor did any of them make it all the way towards communism/anarchism, but not a single one has in any way, shape or formed been prominently influenced by "Anarchism."

Right on! Pol Pot brought freedom to Cambodians!