Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

3

thelemotta wrote

Basically, you summarized my principal critique of Platformism and Especifism. I'm diving into all post-left, post-civ and decolonization readings to heal my mind (i have hopes for my recovery).

The debate around morals here really catch my eye, because those anarchists (Plat's and Especifistas) actually believes in an universal proletariat moral.. And this just sounds not right.

3

autonomous_hippopotamus wrote

Yeah, that frustrates me too. The plats ignore all the philosophical questions that individualists and egoists talk about, and then just declare that individualists/egoists aren't anarchists at all and write them out of history.

It doesn't make much sense, since you can be a communist, and believe in working class organization, and also be an individualist with egoist ethics. Platformists and Syndicalists are basically "workerists" they think the working class is a great trancedant class with a "historic mission" that working class culture is inherently progressive, democratic, etc. It is just lazy thinking.

3

thelemotta wrote

Some of them just do not elaborate on the consequences of the limited platformism theory, but the fearsome majority of them are trapped in the Ideology. In such a way that they think, like we talk, be the true repository of Anarchism, talking about much of discipline and unity of praxis (not a bad thing if u do not take yourself to serious).

What led me to think anarchist was precisely non-anarchist philosophers and writers, Thoreau, for instance. What I can not stand is the policing they do, for example in 2013 in a big rally some especifistas begun to command some 'hooligans' (students and anarchopunks) to stop randomizing targets and focusing on show the population the struggle and lalala. Afterwards some people begun to throw rocks in a bus full of passengers demanding people to get off the bus to burn it, then some especifistas showed up to educate the 'hooligan mass'.