A Myth About Anarchy

[Nolan]

I'm a Marxist, but a lot of right-wingers have been telling me Anarchism is a far-right-wing ideology. So far I've just told them Anarchism is Marxism's closest relative and laughed in their faces. Then they tell me I'm "brainwashed." Where did this myth of Anarchy being right-wing come from? Is it because there's no government and they lump everything with "big government" on the left and "small government" on the right?

[RED DAVE]

Check this link out. It has a lot of information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

The connection between anarchism and the Right only dates back about 30 years. The earlier history of anarchism is left-wing. However, given thhe petit-bourgeois character of some anarchist thinkers, such as Stirner, it's not hard to make a superficial link.

[syndicat]

anarcho-capitalism is merely the more extreme variant of Right-liberal (laizze faire capitalist) thinking. It has no historical or philosophical connection to the main tradition of anarchism, which is a socialist political current that originated in the first international.

[Nolan]

Check this link out. It has a lot of information.


The connection between anarchism and the Right only dates back about 30 years. The earlier history of anarchism is left-wing. However, given thhe petit-bourgeois character of some anarchist thinkers, such as Stirner, it's not hard to make a superficial link.

Interesting... But I fail to see how a PDA and friends would function any differently than a government.

[syndicat]

private security agencies would be essentially gangs. it privatizes the core of state power...a return to feudalism. in reality of course, one of these defense agencies would become dominant. There would be an arms race among them, probably some little war, and then you have a military dictatorship.

[ls]

Agreed comrade, anarcho-syndicalism secretly means national-syndicalism and anarcho-communism secretly means anarcho-capitalism, it's an 'open secret' if you will. Durruti was in fact a fascist who loved corporations, Santillan was in fact the saviour of world communism. It's good to know this stuff comrade.

As for the myths about anarchism, there are a number of places it could come from - Fascists aren't exactly unaware that Bakunin and Proudhon hated Jews. They also aren't unaware that early forms of Fascism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_syndicalism) steal a lot of stuff from anarchism but leave out all the good bits.

[syndicat]

Agreed comrade, anarcho-syndicalism secretly means national-syndicalism and anarcho-communism secretly means anarcho-capitalism, it's an 'open secret' if you will. Durruti was in fact a fascist who loved corporations, Santillan was in fact the saviour of world communism. It's good to know this stuff comrade.


You're confused. anarcho-syndicalism does not advocate the private security forces of the anarcho-capitalists. On the contrary, it holds that in a revolutionary situation, the armed force must be with a militia controlled by the mass organizations of the working class. These would be subject to the democratic public popular power of the worker and neighborhood assembliies and the congresses of delegates based on the assemblies.

This is not the top-down, capitalist power proposed by the anarcho-capitalists.

As to Proudhon's anti-semitism, Proudhon was an individualist who had nothing to do with modern social anarchism, which began with the tendency around Anselmo Lorenzo and Bakunin in the first international, who defeated the influence of the Proudhonians. Proudhon was against unions, against direct action, against revolution. He was no social anarchist.

"National syndicalism" in Italy translates as "nationalist unionism"...a unionism that was defeated within the Syndicalist Union by the anarcho-syndicalists, who expelled the nationalists.

But Marxist-Leninist sectarians will make these kinds of fallacious "guilt by association" arguments, as you just did. These arguments only discredit those who make them.

[Sasha]

i think ls was being ironic..

[syndicat]

You may be right. if so, apologies to ls, but for us more literal minded, some hints would be helpful.

[Vendetta]

I'm a Marxist, but a lot of right-wingers have been telling me Anarchism is a far-right-wing ideology.

Ask them if they've ever heard of a little thing called the Spanish Civil War.

[The Essence Of Flame Is The Essence Of Change]

I'm a Marxist, but a lot of right-wingers have been telling me Anarchism is a far-right-wing ideology. So far I've just told them Anarchism is Marxism's closest relative and laughed in their faces. Then they tell me I'm "brainwashed."

Let me guess, you are from America?I have lost all faith to that continent really :(

Is it because there's no government and they lump everything with "big government" on the left and "small government" on the right?
Yes, pretty much this is how the political spectrum is divided there.I also hear the ''but communism means submitting to your society when anarchists just want individual freedom so the term anarcho-communism is flawed'' debate some times from Americans.:thumbdown:I just think Cold War propaganda is so ingrained into the modern american that they will dismiss any kind of leftist thought as a potential danger.

[Nolan]

Let me guess, you are from America?I have lost all faith to that continent really :(

Yes, pretty much this is how the political spectrum is divided there.I also hear the ''but communism means submitting to your society when anarchists just want individual freedom so the term anarcho-communism is flawed'' debate some times from Americans.:thumbdown:I just think Cold War propaganda is so ingrained into the modern american that they will dismiss any kind of leftist thought as a potential danger.

Yes, I live in Amerikkka (USA). There is hope in Mexico, I think....

A surprising number of people still think Russia is the Communist enemy. That's how much the government has messed them up here. I have never met a Marxist or Anarchist in person. :crying:

[Jimmie Higgins]

Well this idea stems from a recent attempt at redefining "right/left" by the right-wing (mostly libertarians) in the US. In a totally idealist way, US libertarians define the political spectrum based on false opposites or "more or less" government and "more or less" personal freedom. According to their re-definition fascism and USSR-style economies (state-capitalist) are the same while anarchy (capitalist or anti-capitalist) are the same. This is as silly as they way the US defines class in terms of income levels... "more or less" personal freedom assumes that the freedom of coronations and freedom for sweatshop workers are the same thing when in reality, freedom of big-business often means less freedom and protection for working people and vica-versa. And of course there are a million ways to refute the libertarian conception of "right/left" by using historical examples and quoting the actual right and left thinkers who developed or represent these ideologies... but then again, the people who think that Nazis are socialists and anarchists are right-wingers also likely believe that black helicopters are following them and that the US economy is controlled by Canada and Mexico:rolleyes:

----------------------

Does it seem like the American right-wing is extremely gullible when it comes to the difference between what something calls itself and the actual nature of the thing.

I can't tell you how many times I've tried explaining how NAZI-ism has nothing to do with the left only to get the response: "They are called national SOCIALISTS".

Of course, a little more understandably right-wingers (and unfortunately some on the left) consider North Korea "Socialist" yet somehow they never call it "Democratic" even though the same regime claims to be so in its name.

And now with "Anarcho-Capitalism" means anarchism is right-wing?! Totally a-historic.

[Nolan]

I can't tell you how many times I've tried explaining how NAZI-ism has nothing to do with the left only to get the response: "They are called national SOCIALISTS".


I get this A LOT. It's f-ing frustrating. And then they claim that the fact that Nazis use the word "comrade" and the raised fist salute is proof that we're the same.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I get this A LOT. It's f-ing frustrating. And then they claim that the fact that Nazis use the word "comrade" and the raised fist salute is proof that we're the same.So the US military is socialist because they call eachother "comrade" and used to salute like NAZIs along with every public school kid from 1900 to WWII!?



At a signal from the Principal the pupils, in ordered ranks, hands to the side, face the Flag. Another signal is given; every pupil gives the flag the military salute -- right hand lifted, palm downward, to a line with the forehead and close to it. Standing thus, all repeat together, slowly, “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.” At the words, “to my Flag,” the right hand is extended gracefully, palm upward, toward the Flag, and remains in this gesture till the end of the affirmation; whereupon all hands immediately drop to the side.

– From The Youth’s Companion, 65 (1892): 446–447.
Right wingers are like goldfish... they swim and are surprised when they hit the glass wall, then they turn around, forget, and hit the other glass wall. It's like the purposefully try not to learn history. I guess history has a left-wing bias.

[Nolan]

So the US military is socialist because they call eachother "comrade" and used to salute like NAZIs along with every public school kid from 1900 to WWII!?

Right wingers are like goldfish... they swim and are surprised when they hit the glass wall, then they turn around, forget, and hit the other glass wall. It's like the purposefully try not to learn history. I guess history has a left-wing bias.

They're worse than goldfish. I think goldfish eventually come to understand the concept of a "tank."

[Red Saxon]

Anarchism transcends the political right and the political left, although it's really only moral or effective in the political left.

Anarcho-Capitalism = suck
Anarcho-Socialism = win

[Ravachol]

It also helps to know there is no such thing as 'anarcho-capitalism'. Anarchism is more than just anti-statism. The critique of opressive power-relations inherent to anarchism extends beyond the state to the concept of private owernership of the means of production as well. Secondly, Anarcho-Capitalists do no seek to abolish the state, they merely seek to full privatise it's functions. They don't wish to abolish the concept of the state, they merely wish to transfer it's ownership. At least statist-communists wish to implement some form of democracy as far as this control is concerned whereas Anarcho-Capitalists do not.

[Red Saxon]

Secondly, Anarcho-Capitalists do no seek to abolish the state, they merely seek to full privatise it's functions. So they're actually left-fascists then?

[Nolan]

I guess history has a left-wing bias.

Not in any American high school.

[Ravachol]

So they're actually left-fascists then?

No, they aren't left-wing at all. Why would they be left-wing? They're the biggest adherents of private property around. That makes them solidly right-wing.


I get this A LOT. It's f-ing frustrating. And then they claim that the fact that Nazis use the word "comrade" and the raised fist salute is proof that we're the same.

Funny since those 'socialists' didn't argue in favor of abolition of private ownership of the means of production. Also very interesting to note those 'socialists' were financed by almost all of the German big industry, ranging from AG Krupps to Atlanta Chemie and BMW. Those damn commies! :rolleyes:

Only political infantiles call the Nazis left-wing based on such superficialities as the name of the ideology. The Nazi economic system was solidly corporatist which favored big business and that's that.

[Nolan]

Another question - why do anarcho-capitalists constantly claim the American "Wild West" was a successful implementation of anarcho-capitalism? I have a hard time understanding why anyone would look up to that period.

[jake williams]

Another question - why do anarcho-capitalists constantly claim the American "Wild West" was a successful implementation of anarcho-capitalism? I have a hard time understanding why anyone would look up to that period.
Because they're pro-genocide. That's what living in a colonial settler state means, from here to Palestine.

[The Count]

Another question - why do anarcho-capitalists constantly claim the American "Wild West" was a successful implementation of anarcho-capitalism? I have a hard time understanding why anyone would look up to that period.
Anarcho-Capitalists, with all the BS rhetoric removed, believe that whoever has the most money, and the biggest gang of thugs should be in control. I can see why they would look towards emulating the Wild West; another superb example of an Anarcho-Capitalist utopia is Somalia.

[h0m0revolutionary]

Anarcho-Capitalists, with all the BS rhetoric removed, believe that whoever has the most money, and the biggest gang of thugs should be in control. I can see why they would look towards emulating the Wild West; another superb example of an Anarcho-Capitalist utopia is Somalia.

Yeah it's the same old rubbish regarding the government as an amoral mechanism that impedes economic growth, rather than a tool with which economic growth and of course the smooth functioning of capitalism is protected - as we know it to be.

I've recently heard Singapore is their big utopia. It was amazing to read up about actually, you wouldn't believe the amount of anti-union laws they have. 0_o

[Red Saxon]

Another question - why do anarcho-capitalists constantly claim the American "Wild West" was a successful implementation of anarcho-capitalism? I have a hard time understanding why anyone would look up to that period.They believe in Gang rule, which eliminates the idea of anarchy entirely.

[Nolan]

I just saw the move "The Postman" and I think that's how anarcho-capitalism would end up.

[Comrade Anarchist]

The myth comes from the fact that anarchism is two fold. On the left you have anarcho-communists and collectivists with leaders like bakunin, kropotkin, etc. On the right you have anarcho-capitalism with leaders like rothbard, and rand. the most widely practiced forms of anarchism are leftist or post left forms but they are not shown, and instead you see libertarianism from the right on tv, in elections, books, and etc.