>Anarchism is fundamentally opposed to the state. It advocates direct
>action and non-compliance with authority. It is anti-capitalist and
>socialist/communist in a libertarian sense, which means that
>anarchism can be close to leftism, but I would argue that anarchism
>is not part of leftism.
I just read this in a piece on the European Social Forum by Linden Farrer:
>Instead, the ESF and WSF should see
>themselves as an embryonic form of direct, grassroots
>democracy, capable of forging ahead in gaining power through
>undermining the legitimacy of existing structures of power,
>distributing this power as widely and diffusely as possible.
[...]
>For the anti-capitalist movement to achieve real change it
>will have to do so through a confrontational approach to
>liberal democracy. This could involve the setting up of
>social forums throughout Europe, at local levels, creating
>direct links with local communities in struggle. These,
>organised in a federal structure - but respecting local
>autonomy - would undermine and ultimately make obsolete the
>earth-destroying, authoritarian and oppressive governmental
>structures that currently control the planet.
Do you (or any other anarchists around) agree with this? Instead of engaging with the state and other institutions of power, can people just opt out and build around?
Doug