Anarchism

[matt b]

oh bullshit...

if you're such an expert then define anarchism in your own words or shut the fuck up yourself!

....but you wont cos theres every chance youve got it all wrong

so how about you do you and I'll do me yeah ?

Can't you go and bother another discussion forum? Or have you been banned from all of them now?

 

[crackerjack]

A question, though: Why do people hate Thatcher so much? Several reasons, I guess. But a lot of the things which New Labour did after her were much more right-wing politically...

Because she used mass unemployment as a political tool. For that alone she deserves to burn in hell.

 

[baboon2004]

A question, though: Why do people hate Thatcher so much? Several reasons, I guess. But a lot of the things which New Labour did after her were much more right-wing politically...

Could go into specific reasons, but I think a very pertinent fact is that, pre-Falklands, her opinion poll ratings were lower than Dubya's ever got, which is quite astonishing. Lowest in UK/US history, I think I'm right in saying.

As to what - vicious attacks on unions/miners/by extension whole communities, not alleviating effects of mass unemployment, sick divide and conquer tactics with respect to working class people, starting the cult of privatisation against reason, poll tax, reduction of social expenditure, and, more abstractly, denial of society and an excessive emphasis upon individual greed over community, opposition to everything good and beautiful.

Probably lots more stuff.

Maybe New Labour just were't as good at being destructively right-wing as Thatcher.

 

[Mr BoShambles]

The need to use coercive violence surely suggests that an organisaiton is non-democratic and hierarchical?

But are the internal relations of the state (as an organisational structure) defined by coercive violence? I don’t think this is the case. Politicians and bureaucrats (in 'Western' democratic states) are sacked for not towing the party line; sacked for “under-performance” or as scapegoats in the face of public pressure etc. etc. They are rarely attacked, or threatened with violence, by their colleagues or superiors within the system. Instead, state violence is projected outwards and – to some degree (how much?) – defines its institutionalised relationships with the masses (via the police), and with foreign states (via the armed forces).

There are of course degrees of hierarchy.

Agreed. States when taken apart are actually networks – systems embedded in systems – and therefore internal decision-making processes are complicated. Yes ultimate authority radiates from the core – i.e. they are top-down hierarchical networks. But since decisions are taken at all levels, and are not always subject to continuous monitoring, the state also exhibits de-centralised features. All state employees can, to varying degrees, take autonomous action.

Comparing anarchist and criminal modes of social organisation seems a little moot without some kind of description or definition of anarchist modes of social organisation.

Fair point. My limited experience of anarchism in action was with an anti-arms campaign group trying to shut a bomb factory down in Brighton. The group, in theory, was against hierarchy and for consensus decision making (involving long and often tedious meetings). This was true to a point. But I found that some people clearly exercised greater influence/power over the proceedings, based on age, experience, perceived commitment to the cause etc. So an inmplicit internal hierarchy did exist. No one in the group threatened others with violence or the sack for non compliance. But informal coercive mechanisms definitely existed: marginalisation of ideas; ostracism from the group - i.e. made to feel unwelcome.

 

[crackerjack]

But a lot of the things which New Labour did after her were much more right-wing politically...

I don't buy this btw. Obviously their economic policies have been neoliberal and Thatcherite, but it would be absurd to say they were more rightwing than Thatcher just cos they privatised some of the few remaining state bodies left untouched by the Tories. And I trust you don't mean Iraq, which simnply happened on their watch and would most certainly have been done by the Tories too.

What precisely did you have in mind?

 

[baboon2004]

Fair point. My limited experience of anarchism in action was with an anti-arms campaign group trying to shut a bomb factory down in Brighton. The group, in theory, was against hierarchy and for consensus decision making (involving long and often tedious meetings). This was true to a point. But I found that some people clearly exercised greater influence/power over the proceedings, based on age, experience, perceived commitment to the cause etc. So an inmplicit internal hierarchy did exist. No one in the group threatened others with violence or the sack for non compliance. But informal coercive mechanisms definitely existed: marginalisation of ideas; ostracism from the group - i.e. made to feel unwelcome.

Think this is incredibly interesting - anarchy as increasing bureaucracy (longer meetings). And the existence of hierachies within a purportedly non-hierachical structure - then again, if this was organised on genuinely meritocratic terms, would such an informal hierachy be bad (this is now sounding like a 'deferral to tribal elders' recommendation?

 

[Mr. Tea]

A question, though: Why do people hate Thatcher so much? Several reasons, I guess. But a lot of the things which New Labour did after her were much more right-wing politically...

Economically, yes. Socially, less so. To the extent that they can be disentangled, I suppose.

Edit: let's not forget that Nu Labour introduced the minimum wage, pumped billions into the NHS and state schools (though with mixed results to show for this, in fairness), set CO2 emission reduction targets that go far beyond the standard EU Kyoto Protocol targets and helped broker a peace deal in Northern Ireland by, amongst other things, making major concessions to Republican paramilitaries. Would the Tories - let alone Thatcher's Tories - have done any of that?

 

[vimothy]

A formal hierarchical structure would not necessarily be bad either... But power produces certain affects, whether one is nominally an anarchist or otherwise.

 

[DannyL]

I haven't read Stirner but I suspect there was more to him than justifications for trolling message boards.

 

[josef k.]

Economically, yes. Socially, less so. To the extent that they can be disentangled, I suppose.

Edit: let's not forget that Nu Labour introduced the minimum wage, pumped billions into the NHS and public schools (though with mixed results to show for this, in fairness), set CO2 emission reduction targets that go far beyond the standard EU Kyoto Protocol targets and helped broker a peace deal in Northern Ireland by, amongst other things, making major concessions to Republican paramilitaries. Would the Tories - let alone Thatcher's Tories - have done any of that?

I find it extremely depressing that British politics is split between these two depressing parties.

 

[crackerjack]

Nu Labour introduced the minimum wage, pumped billions into ... and public schools

You may wish to clarify this for UK readers.

 

[craner]

I'm getting the feeling that the Left and liberal response to Thatcher's death is going to be really fucking vile.

 

[matt b]

I haven't read Stirner but I suspect there was more to him than justifications for trolling message boards.

Type in "pollywog" as a display name search over at ilxor and you will find that mr dobalina can use any topic as an opportunity to troll.

Can't remember the various names he's had here in order to do a search. Probably for the best.

 

[crackerjack]

I'm getting the feeling that the Left and liberal response to Thatcher's death is going to be really fucking vile.

More vile than a state funeral would be?

Edit: let's not forget that Nu Labour introduced the minimum wage, pumped billions into the NHS and public schools (though with mixed results to show for this, in fairness), set CO2 emission reduction targets that go far beyond the standard EU Kyoto Protocol targets and helped broker a peace deal in Northern Ireland by, amongst other things, making major concessions to Republican paramilitaries. Would the Tories - let alone Thatcher's Tories - have done any of that?

They also scrapped the upper limit on National Insurance, effectively a massive tax hike on the middle-class, and introduced a 10p starting rate, before abolishing it iin a fit of madness.

 

[scottdisco]

Economically, yes. Socially, less so. To the extent that they can be disentangled, I suppose.

Edit: let's not forget that Nu Labour introduced the minimum wage, pumped billions into the NHS and public schools (though with mixed results to show for this, in fairness), set CO2 emission reduction targets that go far beyond the standard EU Kyoto Protocol targets and helped broker a peace deal in Northern Ireland by, amongst other things, making major concessions to Republican paramilitaries. Would the Tories - let alone Thatcher's Tories - have done any of that?

certainly one reason why Nu Lab poured a lot into public spending was related to the chronic under-investment in services that their predecessors were guilty of.

also i love this broken Britain meme - you'll have read many commentators on it - that some Tories promulgate.
the spectacle of Thatcher's direct descendants, and their populist media allies, making political capital out of this, contains almost exquisite levels of shamelessness.

great thread!

 

[scottdisco]

I'm getting the feeling that the Left and liberal response to Thatcher's death is going to be really fucking vile.

Facebook groups about it appear to have large numbers flocking to their side.

 

[baboon2004]

I'm getting the feeling that the Left and liberal response to Thatcher's death is going to be really fucking vile.

Why do you say vile? I think it's a bit fucked up if it's not possible to celebrate the end of something/someone bad. It seems almost apologist/revisionist. As long as people keep sight of the fact that in itself her death changes nothing, and the problems she helped to intensify still exist and thrive, then why not celebrate and use it as a moment to highlight her legacy and inform people who were too young to have lived through it?

Ffs, the woman was friends with, and apologised for, Pinochet. She deserves precisely zero respect.

 

[Mr. Tea]

I find it extremely depressing that British politics is split between these two depressing parties.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not cheerleading for Labour - I just think it's fair to say the country is probably in a better state now that it would be if we'd had 30 years of continuous Tory rule. Now there's a thought, eh?

But yes, the lack of any realistic alternative to these two is depressing, certainly.

 

[crackerjack]

Ffs, the woman was friends with, and apologised for, Pinochet. She deserves precisely zero respect.

and publicly boasted about how intransigent she was over sanctions against apartheid

 

[matt b]

it'll be a (daft) counter weight to the sort of shite we'll be hearing for months- it was bad enough last time she was ill:

Immaculate as ever, Baroness Thatcher leaves hospital after collapsing over the fruit jelly

The mail, is of course no stranger to 'glad s/he's dead' stories:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ad-says-rape-victim-won-historic-259-000.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-389679/Im-glad-al-Zarqawi-dead-says-Ken-Bigleys-brother.html