Anarchist Strategy

[Idealism]

What is it? for the Marxist-leninists its the establishment of a vanguard party and the take over of the state by workers, but how do anarchists propose that an anarchists society should be established?

[tehpevis]

Have you heard of the Students for Democratic Society? From what I've heard, something similar to their organisation.

[Pirate Utopian]

Forget the vanguard party and there you go.

[Matina]

What is it? for the Marxist-leninists its the establishment of a vanguard party and the take over of the state by workersGrouping the most class conscious workers in a party, being non-sectarian to unions (anarchists are sectarian), being non-sectarian to the movement, employing violence only when we have the support for the proletariat and smashing the bourgeois state. That's the marxist method.

[Idealism]

Grouping the most class conscious workers in a party, being non-sectarian to unions (anarchists are sectarian), being non-sectarian to the movement, employing violence only when we have the support for the proletariat and smashing the bourgeois state. That's the marxist method.

i understand this (kind of), i just want to look at what anarchists offer as an alternative.

[Absolut]

From what Ive understood, anarchist theory is about organizing the people along the same principles that the society of tomorrow should be organized after. Seeing as anarchists want a decentralised and federalised society, where each commune (or factory, depending on who you talk to/read) has a total sovereignity and is under no authority other than its inhabitants, it would make sense for anarchists to organize after this fashion now, as much as possible at least.

[Jack]

You could read The Conquest of Bread.

[Idealism]

You could read The Conquest of Bread.


ive read it, just several years ago, and probably not carefully enough.

[Jack]

Well to sum it up as an anti-g20 marcher said: First we shoot the bankers, then we hang the politicians, then we come after the media. :laugh:

[tehpevis]

Well to sum it up as an anti-g20 marcher said: First we shoot the bankers, then we hang the politicians, then we come after the media. :laugh:
then, who's next? :D

[Jack]

Other capitalists.

I've gone from being all nicy nice about revolution, to now being a fan of the guillotine.

[Idealism]

Grouping the most class conscious workers in a party, being non-sectarian to unions (anarchists are sectarian), being non-sectarian to the movement, employing violence only when we have the support for the proletariat and smashing the bourgeois state. That's the marxist method.

how are anarchists sectarian towards unions, IWW?

[Jack]

He's just trying to insult us.

[RebelDog]

Grouping the most class conscious workers in a party, being non-sectarian to unions (anarchists are sectarian), being non-sectarian to the movement, employing violence only when we have the support for the proletariat and smashing the bourgeois state. That's the marxist method.

How more sectarian can a party be? Comply or die was the Bolshevik tradition. A party monopoly on violence, is that what you seek? Workers who engage in violence against the state and the capitalists are entirely legitimate without pricks like you to tell them what to do.

[Decolonize The Left]

Grouping the most class conscious workers in a party, being non-sectarian to unions (anarchists are sectarian), being non-sectarian to the movement, employing violence only when we have the support for the proletariat and smashing the bourgeois state.That's the marxist method.

(Emphasis added). You understand that this is a highly sectarian statement? :confused:

As for the OP:


What is it? for the Marxist-leninists its the establishment of a vanguard party and the take over of the state by workers, but how do anarchists propose that an anarchists society should be established?

My understanding of anarchist strategy is that it is highly similar to basic communist strategy:
- Resist further imposition of the capitalist system.
- Work towards improving the living conditions of the working class on a daily level.
- Work towards destroying the divisions between the working class.
- Spread and propagate an understanding of an anarchist/communist alternative.

And eventually destroy the capitalist system as well as the class system, thereby creating an egalitarian society with the working class in full control of the means of production.

Resist - Support - Organize

- August

[Idealism]

(Emphasis added). You understand that this is a highly sectarian statement? :confused:

As for the OP:



My understanding of anarchist strategy is that it is highly similar to basic communist strategy:
- Resist further imposition of the capitalist system.
- Work towards improving the living conditions of the working class on a daily level.
- Work towards destroying the divisions between the working class.
- Spread and propagate an understanding of an anarchist/communist alternative.

And eventually destroy the capitalist system as well as the class system, thereby creating an egalitarian society with the working class in full control of the means of production.

Resist - Support - Organize

- August

Oaky thank you that helped, but say you get a big enough anarchist following to overthrow the state, So the state is gone; how is private property eliminated? i remember seeing a really nice post about this somewhere; but i forgot which thread, and didnt pay much attention to t at the time.

[Matina]

How more sectarian can a party be? Comply or die was the Bolshevik tradition. A party monopoly on violence, is that what you seek? Workers who engage in violence against the state and the capitalists are entirely legitimate without pricks like you to tell them what to do.

A party can be sectarian. The sectarian parties are doomed to fail. By definition sectarianism is the attitude towards the workers and their organizations (unions etc). A genuine bolshevik party is not sectarian.

Also the Party doesn't have the monopoly on violence. If anyone wants to be violent, let them be, but if they use violence in times where this method is not suited, they are doomed to irrelevance.


how are anarchists sectarian towards unions, IWW?

Anarchists don't participate in unions which are described as "reformist" or "communist". The fact is though that they don't separate the rank and file from the leadership which is indeed reformist and a token of capitalism. By doing so they distance themselves from the mass of the workers in the said union and the leave them to the hands of the reformists.


He's just trying to insult us.

How is talking facts....insulting? Do anarchists work in "Unite" or any other union? Not really.


(Emphasis added). You understand that this is a highly sectarian statement? http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies/confused1.gif

It is a fact. Criticizing ideas is not sectarian. On the contrary it leads to the development of theory and understanding. This is a discussion forum last time a checked. I hope it encourages discussion between different ideologies...

[Decolonize The Left]

It is a fact. Criticizing ideas is not sectarian. On the contrary it leads to the development of theory and understanding. This is a discussion forum last time a checked. I hope it encourages discussion between different ideologies...

It can, and I too hope it does.

But when you make blanket statements about one ideology being sectarian, you are not helping healthy discussion - in fact, you are yourself engaging in highly sectarian attitudes by generalizing and dismissing an entire way of thinking based upon your prejudices (and they are prejudices, as you have supplied no evidence).

- August

[Decolonize The Left]

Oaky thank you that helped, but say you get a big enough anarchist following to overthrow the state, So the state is gone; how is private property eliminated? i remember seeing a really nice post about this somewhere; but i forgot which thread, and didnt pay much attention to t at the time.

Anarchists, and most revolutionary leftists, differentiate meanings of the term "private property."

In short, it can mean:
- Personal possessions (your clothes, computer, house, favorite painting)
- Land
- Means of production (factories, industry, farms, etc..)

Most revolutionary leftists seek to move the latter two (land, and the means of production) from the capitalist class to the working class. The first (personal possessions) are generally accepted as something we all need/want to maintain.

As for land and the means of production, these forms of private property are currently possessed and controlled by the capitalist class. Hence, with the destruction of capitalism, they would be transferred to the working class (through the dissolution of the state) and hence private property would be 'destroyed' in the sense that it would then belong to everyone and would no longer be private.

- August

[Matina]

It can, and I too hope it does.

But when you make blanket statements about one ideology being sectarian, you are not helping healthy discussion - in fact, you are yourself engaging in highly sectarian attitudes by generalizing and dismissing an entire way of thinking based upon your prejudices (and they are prejudices, as you have supplied no evidence).

Thanks for this August West. My "prejudices" though are not put forward without evidence. I am saying that the anarchists distance themselves from the workers movement(sectarian), by dismissing their organizations ie their unions. It is not a prejudice, it is a criticism, followed by an explanation.

I don't think this is more enraging than statements like : "Communists are state capitalists", "Authoritarian", " communists only do stuff in order to take power for themselves" etc. Even worse. These sectarian statements put forward by anarchists, are ever more unfounded and ever more sectarian. Of course you are not complaining about that, because you have your own "prejudices".

I don't think I made any sectarian comment by saying that anarchists are sectarian towards the movement of the workers and by backing that comment up with facts.

[Decolonize The Left]

Thanks for this August West. My "prejudices" though are not put forward without evidence.

You're welcome. Unfortunately, your comments are without evidence - at least in this thread.


I am saying that the anarchists distance themselves from the workers movement(sectarian), by dismissing their organizations ie their unions. It is not a prejudice, it is a criticism, followed by an explanation.

You are correct that this is a criticism - what I was saying is that it is an unfounded criticism.



I don't think this is more enraging than statements like : "Communists are state capitalists", "Authoritarian", " communists only do stuff in order to take power for themselves" etc. Even worse. These sectarian statements put forward by anarchists, are ever more unfounded and ever more sectarian.

You are correct that all those statements are sectarian to a degree. What I am trying to explain is that none of those statement represent an ideology, rather, they represent an individual.


Of course you are not complaining about that, because you have your own "prejudices".

Are you sure?


I don't think I made any sectarian comment by saying that anarchists are sectarian towards the movement of the workers and by backing that comment up with facts.

You have supplied no facts - if you want to do so, I'd be happy to read them and further discuss this issue. As I see it now, it's somewhat of a moot point as this post of mine should clarify my position.

- August

[Matina]

You have supplied no facts - if you want to do so, I'd be happy to read them and further discuss this issue. As I see it now, it's somewhat of a moot point as this post of mine should clarify my position.

Comment: Anarchists are sectarian towards workers organizations
Evidence: Because they distance themselves from the workers unions. The fact that they distance themselves from unions is a fact. Anarchists don't work within unions unless it is the IWW where they are a majority. Yes individual anarchists from time to time might find themselves in a union, but they don't do it consistently, en masse, as a strategy and collectively .

I hope this satisfies you. It is a known fact that anarchists don;t work in "reformist" unions as a strategy, collectively (with other members of their organization), en masse and consistently.Therefore my argument is proven.


You are correct that all those statements are sectarian to a degree. What I am trying to explain is that none of those statement represent an ideology, rather, they represent an individual.



Anarchists are not sectarian as an ideology for those statements, ie " You are all authoritarian" etc. They are sectarian for the reasons I mentioned above. Those are examples of individual anarchist sectarianism on this board, which you don't bother criticize , while you criticize me, for a statement which was followed by an explanation.

Anyways I won't argue this point anymore. I think that you understand what I am saying as well as I understand what you are saying. Let's end it at that.

[Chicano Shamrock]

Matina you are way off base. As an anarchist and a member of a very main stream union I think I prove you wrong by living. I have never tried to distance myself from "reformist" unions. What you are saying are not facts but assumptions you have made on the whim.

[Matina]

Matina you are way off base. As an anarchist and a member of a very main stream union I think I prove you wrong by living. I have never tried to distance myself from "reformist" unions. What you are saying are not facts but assumptions you have made on the whim.

Can you please read my post ? I said that while individual anarchists might work in unions, that is not done by anarchist organizations as a collective, over a long period of time and as a strategy.

[Chicano Shamrock]

Can you please read my post ? I said that while individual anarchists might work in unions, that is not done by anarchist organizations as a collective, over a long period of time and as a strategy.
Anarchists have a long tradition of being unionists. Haymarket riots? May Day? The Spanish Civil war? You can call us individuals if you like but to generalize and say anarchists aren't down with major unions is your assumption and not a fact. We realize there is a difference between a revolutionary union and a more top down union but aside from that your opinions are baseless.

[Matina]

Anarchists have a long tradition of being unionists. Haymarket riots? May Day? The Spanish Civil war? You can call us individuals if you like but to generalize and say anarchists aren't down with major unions is your assumption and not a fact. We realize there is a difference between a revolutionary union and a more top down union but aside from that your opinions are baseless. __________________

Exactly what I am saying! Just because a union is top-down that doesn't mean that revolutionaries shouldn't participate in them in order to win over the workers from the hands of the reformists. We understand that unions are reformist due to the leadership. But we separate the leadership from the rank and file. Unfortunately anarchists don't do that therefore they are sectarian to those unions, which are 99% of the unions around.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

But we separate the leadership from the rank and file. Unfortunately anarchists don't do that therefore they are sectarian to those unions, which are 99% of the unions around.


Your arse is for shitting out of not talking out of.

http://libertyandsolidarity.org/industry

[Jack]

I'm sorry we don't try and hijack organizations?

[revolution inaction]

I don't agree that most unions are workers organizations. In most cases they are not run by there membership in any meaningful sense and often take actions that are opposed to the interests of workers.

[tehpevis]

The old Unions should be thrown out and replaced with democratic worker's unions, as most of these around now are led by corrupt Bosses' men