Chuck0 wrote:
> >I believe Joe makes the mistake of assuming that there would be
> >anarchist enclaves and non-anarchist enclaves after the revolution. This
> >is of course, not a goal. Anarchists have been pointing out for some
> >time that the human species has incredible tendencies towards mutual aid
> >and cooperation. The goal of an anarchist revolution is not to create a
> >society of anarchists. It's to get rid of government, capitalism, and
> >other coercive stuff so that the each person has control over their
> >lives.
kelley:
> power exists in judgments on others--the enforcement of informal norms.
> basic principle of social life. the sooner we figure that out, the better.
> and, the sooner we figure out that we can't live without norms, the better.
> either extreme puts any movement toward our goals in peril, i believe.
> ...
Yes, but are norms the same as State power? They don't appear to be to me. Anarchy does not equal anomie -- or maybe it does, but this hasn't been demonstrated.
I find these construals of anarchism very odd among people who appear to know so much -- first primitivism, and now total social breakdown. And no reasoned support of either construal, so far. (Asking Chuck to write the menus of the restaurants of Anarchia is not what I'm talking about.)
It seems to me if you believe that you have to hold a gun to someone's head to get high technology, a rather Hobbesian view, I think, you'd at least refer me to Hobbes. I wonder what you would think of this guy Marx who talked about the withering-away of the State.
-- Gordon