Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

ziq wrote

I think anarchism is a far more useful descriptor than 'liberty + arian'. Liberty can mean anything to anyone. Anarchy is very specifically anti-hierarchy.

1

DissidentRage wrote

Perhaps, but it also implies the source of inspiration. I draw more inspiration from Marx than Kropotkin, and garden variety communists have set an unfortunate precedent of authoritarianism, which is where we differ from them. There's not really another established descriptor here* unless we just referred to ourselves as Luxemburgists, which I personally don't really consider the best solution because her influence wasn't given the opportunity to mature thanks to the socdems.

*Perhaps there is a better descriptor but I'm not as well-versed as other leftists because I wasn't exposed to leftist thought at all up until a few years ago, and since then I've been precluded from studying it as thoroughly as others because of life stuff.

1

ziq wrote

What's wrong with 'anarchism'? Anarchists haven't put people in gulags, caused famines, invaded other lands, created nuclear wastelands, forced millions to work in factories or created ultra capitalist dictators.

1

DissidentRage wrote

Oh, at what point did I actually argue that I had an active problem with anarchism, or try to justify atrocities committed by state capitalists? Being sectarian this early in the game serves nobody but the bourgeoisie.

1

ziq wrote

I'm talking about the word 'anarchism' vs 'libertarian' and demonstrating that it's an uncorrupted word.