> Eric wrote:
>
>> How come opponents of BB and anarchism never take it seriously (or,
> in shag's terms, respect it)?
>
> The problem is rooted in the ambiguity of the very term "anarchism".
>
> On the one hand, there's "Anarchism" properly speaking, a historical tendency within the labor movement tracing its roots back to the Bakunin wing of the First International, and later theoretically elaborated by thinkers like Kropotkin, and reaching its organizational and political zenith in the Spanish CNT-FAI. This is basically the "Anarchism" dealt with in Daniel Guerin's book, with which Noam Chomsky identifies. This represents something like a defineable trend within the left, and it can be analyzed as such.
^^^^^^^^ CB: In the US , the anarchist tradition goes back to the Indigenous Peoples who did not have states.
Then there are the Haymarket anarchists whom we honor on May Day,
May Day parade and strikes
In October 1884, a convention held by the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions unanimously set May 1, 1886, as the date by which the eight-hour work day would become standard.[9] As the chosen date approached, U.S. labor unions prepared for a general strike in support of the eight-hour day.[10]
On Saturday, May 1, rallies were held throughout the United States. There were an estimated 10,000 demonstrators in New York City[11] and 11,000 in Detroit.[12] In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, some 10,000 workers turned out.[12] The movement's center was in Chicago, where an estimated 40,000 workers went on strike.[13] Albert Parsons was an anarchist and founder of the International Working People's Association (IWPA). Parsons, with his wife Lucy and their children, led a march of 80,000 people down Michigan Avenue.[13] Another 10,000 men employed in the lumber yards held a separate march in Chicago.[14] Estimates of the number of striking workers across the U.S. range from 300,000[13] to half a million.[14]