You must log in or register to comment.

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Anarchists are a special type of people who are not a people.

This is not a non-being in the sense of non-existence, but a non-being in the sense of becoming.

Because our practices prefigure the future, they are an insertion of another time, a future, into the present. In this way, we are a people-to-come, in the present.

In this way, anarchists are not a movement, but they are movement. Fluid, sensitive to context, and unstructured by mediating forms.


subrosa wrote

Descartes, reasoning unconsciously according to the prejudices of the old metaphysics, and seeking an unshakable foundation for philosophy, an aliquid inconcussum, as it was said, imagined that he had found it in the self, and posited this principle: I think, therefore I am; Cogito, ergo sum. Descartes did not realize that his base, supposedly immobile, was mobility itself. Cogito, I think—these words express movement; and the conclusion, according to the original sense of the verb to be, sum, ειναι, ou חיח, (haïah), is still movement. He should have said: Moveor, ergo fio, I move, therefore I become!

Proudhon being a smartass.


Tequila_Wolf wrote

I feel like I should read Proudhon even if only so that I can use him to shit on Marxism.


cyb3rd4ndy OP wrote

Prepare for a long journey and a lot of Shawn Wilbur translations.


Tequila_Wolf wrote

Yeah this does highlight that I don't even know what is out there. Sounds like it is going to be a frustratingly slow process.


tuesday wrote

I've been thinking about this nonstop since reading it.


crime wrote

This smacks of queerness, and I love this conception of anarchists as constantly becoming. Complements my queer anarchism and experience real nicely. Well put.