Ishkah

Ishkah OP wrote

Not the claim I was making:

The issue

I think it’s inarguable that some people will take a bunch of contradictory twists and turns down a list of more and more fringe ideologies, in pursuit of the most rigidly simplistic way of viewing the world, in searching for ‘answers’ to reduce anxiety in a seemingly chaotic world, to provide a navigable route in a world which can feel terrifyingly uncharted. In this way they come to believe they have the answers to almost all life’s questions. What is arguable is how common this phenomenon is depending on the ideology.

−2

Ishkah OP wrote (edited )

The primary meaning of vulgar is a kind of less complicated copy of an original idea/object where some of the original important nuance is lost. So with anarchists who treat insurrectionairy anarchism as the strategy which is of primary importance, I think some nuance is lost. Like what Cells of Fire said about people fetishizing illegalism and voluntarily going underground. Maybe they respected people who talked about having to go on the run to live by their principles after the cops got wind of who they were, but then the people who thought they were copying them mistakenly imagined they were following in their footsteps by going underground even when they didn't need to.

"You see, Ricks — they get lazy. There’s always a shitty decoy towards the end. But those decoys made decoys too, and got lazy themselves. And far enough down the line… There be monsters."

0

Ishkah OP wrote

I understood your point that all philosophies are going to have their bad actors and that we shouldn't equate the bad actors with the philosophy. I explained I fully agreed, and that that wasn't the point of the post, and that I value including disclaimers about social anarchists also.

I just valued preserving the integrity of a post-left anarchy reading list as a little time capsule for it's time, along with IMO vitally important disclaimers like Hakim Bey being a pedophile advocate, so for instance if anyone were to meet him they'd know not to let kids anywhere near him.

1

Ishkah OP wrote (edited )

Do you have an essay I can link specifically critiquing Berkman's pedophilia, I can't find one. Thanks in advance.

BTW I didn't list an essay by Marx, but I've added the other two disclaimers.

Edit: Oh yeah, I didn't cite an essay by Berkman. Feel free to link anyways tho.

Edit 2: Nor did I cite Bakunin lol, but I've just added him now as I don't think his critique of capitalism and the state was fundamentally racist.

3

Ishkah OP wrote

Right, but I would say you're using a secondary, less common definition of the left-right spectrum. It's fine to say anarchists aren't on the left-right spectrum by this classical definition, the way the word came about, or this secondary definition I've explained to you. But I still think it's valuable to attach anarchism to big tent leftist philosophies today because I think it simply is one by the primary definition of left-right spectrum and it's good to be explicit about it because it helps clarify where we stand and have a better chance of opening people up to anarchist philosophies.

2

Ishkah OP wrote

I had a really pleasant conversation with him, and an anti-civ dude even reached out to me asking to make the transcript into a zine. I honestly just like having broad ranging discussions, it was not an inquisition at all.

And now I'm writing a biography on Ted Kaczynski with minimal framing because I'm interested in his story for the way it intertwines with tons of other events, like being a professor at Berkeley during the height of the Vietnam war protests.

2

Ishkah OP wrote (edited )

I agree classical anarchism was not overall pro engaging with in tactical left unity with some mass movements. as well as doing our own thing. I think most anarchists today are and simply accept we're on the left as well in virtue of holding far-left positions on a spectrum of egalitarian and economic philosophies.

Thanks for the disclaimers about those authors anyways, I did know them I just forgot to add them as what was on my mind when making the list of disclaimers was people uncritically promoting these modern authors and then people meeting them today not knowing this stuff. I'll add them now.

2

Ishkah OP wrote (edited )

The post-left reading list was taken from a poster which is very popular in post-left spaces: click here

And I simply said "I feel the need to make special mention of the issues with 4 types of listed items", I wasn't suggesting people dismiss all the texts mentioned outright, just that I thought it important to make mention of the most serious issues so people don't go onto uncritically promote the authors without knowing this information. If you can think of a better way I could have phrased the disclaimer be my guest.

2

Ishkah OP wrote (edited )

Nothing I wrote relies on that interpretation of anticiv anarchy, I just noticed a trend among some people moving through green anarchist ideology down a rabbit hole of attempting to find a more and more rigid purist worldview. I acknowledged the route people take was often contradictory, like going from violent, to pacifist, to violent again.

1