>> Michael Albert is not an anarchist.
>>
>> If you are going to make suggestions like this, it might help to know
>> some basics about anarchism and the contemporary anarchist movement.
>
> I recall looking at your blog (or by an anarchist by the name Chuck
> who sounded like you), and already noted this claim of yours. I merely
> disagree.
>
> Respectfully, I find your claims on this forum tend to have low
> credibility (and I do spend time checking them out). Particularly as
> you don't back up your claims -- and unfortunately you're taken as
> some representative of anarchism as a whole. And you do nothing to
> deflect that perception.
I see this list as a discussion forum, akin to having a discussion about politics with people at a party or a bar. Some people here have the time and motivation to provide citations. I do it when I want to.
I am not representative of anarchism as a whole. I am a well known and respected anarchist with 20 years of experience in that movement. I run the most popular anarchist website, so that kind of puts me in a good place to take the pulse of the anarchist movement.
As for Michael Albert--I had a go around about him with a few British anarchists who were under the erroneus impression that he is an anarchist. If Albert were an anarchist, that would be news to a great number of people. We know that he is very friendly towards anarchists and has worked with them over at Z. During the go round with the British anarchists, we found that he had written one article about anarchism. Writing an article about a political tendency doesn't make you a member of that tendency. In Albert's case, he is an activist and writer who is active in various movements, so he has cause to express his opinions about anarchism.
>> It might help if Angelus explained what he means by "ideology-critique."
>> Is this some kind of academic thing I'm unfamiliar with?
> I googled it before I posted, to get a basic idea. So you responded to
> him in a brusque manner, without knowing what it means?
Well, he was the one who was challenging me. I'm just wondering if this is a specific concept or if he is just using the phrase in a way that I don't understand.
> For an anarchist source on how to listen to people you're criticizing,
> google up prof Mark Lance's talk on Unwelcome Guests, where he talks
> about how part of honest communication is actually LISTENING to
> people.
Why is this relevant? I have excellent listening skills. In this case, I have good reading skills, but there is always the problem of people misunderstanding each other.
Chuck