humanispherian

humanispherian OP wrote

A desire to have better fights has really been the thing that has connected me to the anarchists I considered allies or accomplices. And "tension" is a good word, charged as it is in various ways, for what might be inescapably at the core of anarchism (with or without some reference to Bonanno's talk.)

I've ended up doing a bit of follow-up already in a Twitter thread, spurred by some annoying capitalist misreadings of anarchist history.

4

humanispherian OP wrote

Part of the reason for a "beyond good and evil" approach—which does not preclude identifying acts as undesirable for various more specific reason—is precisely that prejudices and conventions are at least as like to lead to slavery, torture or genocide as a more individualist approach. And, of course, Armand was fairly clear about what would replace the rejected elements:

We want, on the contrary, an individualism that radiates joy and benevolence, like a warm hearth. We want a sunlit individualism, even in the dead of winter. An individualism for disheveled and delirious Bacchantes, which expands and spreads and overflows, without priests and without masters, without borders and without shores. An individual that does not want to suffer or carry burdens, but does not want to make others suffer or to inflict burdens. An individualism that does not feel humiliated when called upon to heal the wounds it may have thoughtlessly caused along the way. Ah! What a rich, what a beautiful individualism that is!

3

humanispherian OP wrote

I think you're right in your understanding of prefiguration. I'm just at a funny place in my understanding of anarchism. "Constructing Anarchisms" is, for me, all about putting what I think I know to the test, so that I can perhaps talk a bit more confidently on the other side about some of these practical issues. A number of these questions suddenly have, for me, all sorts of new wrinkles to smooth out.

3

humanispherian OP wrote

The real difficulty with the Proudhonian material is that there is a whole toolkit to master and anarchists haven't done much of that work over the years. The theory of collective force is the rationale behind "property is theft," a notion that presumably nearly all anarchists agree with, but even those of us who are pretty committed to this kind of anarchist analysis may still feel like beginners when it comes to translating its terms into, say, the terms used by anarchist communists.

I'm honestly still wrestling with what prefiguration can really mean for anarchists, given the rather fluid nature of what we might hope to prefigure. It's a question I've been wrestling with in my notebooks lately, but I can't claim to have come to any very firm conclusions.

(And apologies for the delay in responding. It's been a heck of a week.)

3