Question regarding "emphasizing the individual"

[Karl Marx's Camel]

In Wikipeida,

anarchism
anarcho-syndicalism
anarcho-socialism
anarcho-communism
christian anarchism
individualist anarchism
libertarian socialism

Are under 'Ideologies emphasizing the individual'


Do you agree or disagree with the notion that these ideologies emhasize the individual?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology#Ideo...he_collectivity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology#Ideologies_emphazing_the_collectivity)

[Donnie]

No. Its quiet a common occurrence to believe that anarchism is riddled with individualism when it is actually more collective

In the booklet I have called "The Role of the Revolutionary Organisation" produced by the Anarchist Federation it explains about the myth of individual action in anarchism, I will explain briefly what it says.

"It is quiet commons sense to think that anarchism is based on collective action rather than individualism. Many people think that individualism is the bedrock of anarchism when it is actually the opposite. That is not to say, of course, that social anarchists, especially anarchist communists (like my self) are opposed to individuality- far from it- but that in capitalist society individualism is at best an excuse by some to selfishly indulge themselves and at worst an ideology which encourages the most horrendous competitiveness and exploitation. Capitalism fears collective action.

The individual can be compared to the finger of a hand. On it's own it is not particularly strong or effective but in unison with the other fingers it becomes a fist. The working class, in whatever context whether community or workplace, is more easily dominated and exploited when it is divided and, because divided, powerless. When it organises itself collectively, it has the potential to act in a concerted manner against capital. The workplace provides opportunities for individual action such as sabotage, absenteeism and "theft" (me) but these activities, even when organised clandestinely, can be more effective when done collectively."

We do emphasize on individual freedom although we believe things can only be achieved collectively."

As the Anarchist Federation says:” Why not take the individual decision to take collective action with the Anarchist Federation?”

[coda]

I'm always wary of getting accurate information from Wiki. That section mentioned a few different tendencies and classified them into one. Particularly Max Stirner is what is called "Egoist", which put the self above society. Proudhon is a "Mutualist" a grass-roots free-market,mutual aid advocate, Ben Tucker is a little of both Egoist and Free-market Godwin is usually referred to as the 'father' of anarchism, because he was the first to lay the germ of the theory out in writing. Robert Anton Wilson, most notably known in writing as Hakim Bey, whom I know a lot about because he lives near me, though a recluse, is an Ontological anarchist and little bit "out there" in the mystical arena.

What I am seeing more and more of is indivudual "lifestyle" anarchism, which I mentioned a few days ago. a bohemian type lifestyle -- very content to live in a commune, sharing & teaching DIY skills and doing a lot of Food not Bombs, animal liberations, etc. and other lifestyle activism, but basically rejecting the whole class struggle. the basic attitude seems to be non-involvement with the rest of the world -- "We'll do our thing and don't bother us.. and you do your thing.. and we won't bother you."

Anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism are collective class struggle oriented.

[Donnie]

What I am seeing more and more of is indivudual "lifestyle" anarchism, which I mentioned a few days ago. a bohemian type lifestyle -- very content to live in a commune, sharing & teaching DIY skills and doing a lot of Food not Bombs, animal liberations, etc. and other lifestyle activism, but basically rejecting the whole class struggle. the basic attitude seems to be non-involvement with the rest of the world -- "We'll do our thing and don't bother us.. and you do your thing.. and we won't bother you."
I agree with you on this, there is a dominant movement of "lifestyle" anarchism especially in the anti-globalization movement.
When I was up at the G8 summit I only came across a few people who were essentially class struggle anarchists. It was more Eco/lifestyle anarchism. But at least they were resisting capital and the state although I did not see any idea's of raising consciousness among the workers in the surrounding area of where I was staying. It was like "we know the theory, now let’s get on with it" kind of thing. But the workers in the surrounding area in the G8 may not know the theory and so how can they participate if they have not been introduced to the theory?

It’s also dominated with “poyist” (as I like to call them), which just added to the “crusty” effect of the G8 camp which I was staying at. I had a go at Poi and nearly battered my self to death may I add. :/

[coda]

What is "Poyist"?

[Donnie]

It's my made up word for people who do "Poi". Poi is normally played by crusty’s. Basically its two bean bags on a string and you swing them around you're body and around you and it looks good when you do it but if you're like me and are pretty “challenged” at skillful stuff it doesn't look good. I ended up asking for a go and swinging the thing round me and it kept whacking me in the body and around the head. People sometimes light their "Poi" and do them in the dark and so all there is this just swinging fire balls whizzing round the person it looks really good. If I had have been drunk at the time I would have probably ended up trying it and ended up at the AE with burns on my face.

But Poi is the thing I have begun to associate with lifestyle anarchists. Although their maybe some class struggle anarchists out there who do Poi as well.