Chomsky is an anarchist, but at the same time is a pragmatist and believes that while we should organise the working class, as anarchists, he feels it is a mistake to destroy government social programs that protect the poor from the horrors of the "free-market" and corporate rule. His views are not really shared by many other anarchists, though I suspect many silently agree with him. With no social safety net at all, the poor might turn to fascism, or simply starve to death. Until we have counter-institutions in place, we need to keep government protections for the poor and needy around, so the logic goes.
> > I was an anarchist for many years until I read Trotsky and Lenin, so
> I'm used to defending it. Anarchist theory is impoverished compared to
> Marx, Trotsky and Lenin. Most of the theory is ripped off from Marx.
Good god.. are you insane? Are you aware of the mass-murder and human suffering of working-class people and ardent revolutionaries that Trotsky and Lenin were responsible for? At Kronstat they murdered members of their own Communist Party who disagreed with them, and many soldiers were switching sides.. no, not to the white army, but to the side of the Kronstat rebels. And then there was the Ukraine, where Lenin showed his trechery against Makhno, who helped the Bolsheviks fight the whites. How can you support a man (Lenin) who said such things as "Socialism is nothing more than state-capitalism." The Russian revolution was a real revolution, at first.. but it was destroyed by Communist Party. The USSR was a horrible place to live. Human will was crushed. You dont need to read capitalist propaganda to know this, but the testimonies of real people who were there, in Russia, while it was all happening. A persons zeal to fight capitalism must not justify any act of terror. The people would have been better off if the Bolsheviks never came to power in Russia and China and they had become social democracies.
To say that anarchist theory is ripped off from Marx suggests that:
1) You have so little faith in humanity that you do not think different people can come to _some_ simmilar conclusions, while diverging greatly on others.
2) You are a dogmatist who believes that the word of Marx is the word of God and anything that reminds you of it is obviously (to you) ripped off from it.
Think about what you are saying, man!
> This
> impoverishment translates into impoverishment in action. Most anarchists
> criticise Marx for being bourgeoise and Trotsky and Lenin for being
> statists and authoritarians (statism and authoritarianism which saved
> the revolution of course.)
Statism and authoritarianism ruined the revolution. It made communism equivilent to the most vile of evils. Remember that the USSR killed more people.. even it's own people... than Hitler ever did. China has done unimaginable horrors to it's own people too, as well as enslaving Tibet.
> Anarchism has its own pied pipers like
> "Prince" Kropotkin who supported WWI and opposed the Bolsheviks. Anyone
> who has read E.H. Carr's biography of Bakunin will know B nothing but a
> charlatan and a petty bourgeoise. Emma Goldman's autobio *Living My
> Life* reveals an intense egocentric personality. Anarchism is often just
> a rationalization of personal neuroses.
The same could be said for Marxism. There were clearly marxists who were insane, how else can one explain the savage mass-murder they inflicted on working class people, peasents, and members of their own parties? Never mind the clumsy, slavishly followed five-year plans, the environmental destruction, and the money wasted on military extravigance. The USSR only needed to blow up the US once, not 400 times.
> In my experience, anarchists would hold no truck with neo-liberalism
> and institutions like the WTO which seek to weaken the state where it
> acts so as to regulate the behaviour of capitalists but strengthen the
> repressive apparat of the state to oppress and curtail the freedom of
> the working class and the poor.
Surprise, surprise.. the whole world now knows that anarchists were the strongest opposition to the WTO, and upholders of the freedom of the working class and the poor. What do Marxist-Leninists do? They assume power over these people's lives and control them, if they get a chance.
> I don't read much about contemporary anarchists nor do I associate with
> them much anymore. People like Zerzen strike me not so much as
> anarchists but as nihilists same with the young people who follow him.
> They want to obliterate all authority as well as all social norms
> including science, philosophy, reason and rationality. Its terrible
> that the discontent of the youth is being funnelled into nihilistic
> movements.
> I'm all for dialogue with anarchists and working with them where
> possible. Unfortunately, there isn't much to dialogue about.
>
> Sam Pawlett
I think you are confusing lifestyle anarchism with workerist anarchism. While the two overlap, there are many anarcho-syndicalists, anarcho-communists, and platformist anarchists who organize and oppose capitalism with careful thought, reason, and democratic methods.
For more info on anarchism, see this web page:
http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/
- Jamal Hannah