“From Anarchy To The Right Wing”

I thought this was a rather telling little incident about my psyche, and the crowd I hang around with over here.

I came across a blog earlier today, and in its description it said “my passion is politics – State and Federal and covers all spectrums, from right-wingers to anarchists”. And my immediate reaction was ‘well, that’s a rather narrow spectrum’. Because after all, the difference between right wing to an-cap is pretty small!

And it was only a few minutes down the track – literally it took a few minutes – that I realised “ooooh, she meant anarchy in a left wing way”.

Considering all the anarchists I know over here (rather surprising how many of them there are – and how, well, normal and meek they come across!) would definatly recoil in horror at the thought of being classified as of the left,  it just came as a brief shock to me to remember that most people think anarchy is a left wing concept.

Why this is I have no idea. The few left-anarchists I know are just confused (the whole “f**k the government! Power to the Individual! Government provided taxpayer funded services for all – wait, what?!?) crowd and all that obviously makes no logical sense: you can’t have a redistributive state without a big government. Similarly, you can’t crush business without an state doing so, which kinda defeats the whole point.

But yes,  anyway, was just a funny little reminder of how outside the libertarian bubble people view ideology.


Tags: ,

11 Responses to ““From Anarchy To The Right Wing””

  1. Jake the Muss Says:

    You can have a redistributive society without a big government though Tim.

    I have no problem with that so long as they allow people the right to leave and keep their collectives as voluntary organisations. Kind of like Karl Hess, after he worked for Barry Goldwater, but before he decided to go back to anarcho capitalism.

    Left wing v right wing is essentially useless anyway. Anyone who uses it simply becomes stupider for having said it. I myself have just lost 10 IQ points for having brought it up, even thought I brought it up only to attack it.

  2. Tim Andrews Says:

    Yes I agree with you on the whole collective thing, and I actually started typing that up in the blog, I just couldn’t be bothered.

    Hmm. So, how’s life now that you have a negative IQ? This a world first?

  3. Jake the Muss Says:

    I finally understand why you view things the way you do. Explains a lot really.

  4. Daniel Zachary Jones Says:

    Tim: Where you accuse the left anarchists of advocating big government, the left similarily accuses the right of advocating the power of capital. You should read chomsky, who is firmly in the Liberal tradition, but is on the left.

    How can this be resolved? How does the left anarchist and libertarian socialists concieve of social organisation?

    The first thing to note is that they believe in democracy at the point of production. Now the left conception of this is less big brother stalin, and more the little linux penguin. Open source is an example of freely associative democratic planning that takes place at the point of production…. Read more

    The other thing to note is that, on issues of justice, left anarchists and libertarian socialists, think that justice being an aspect of the state is completely contrary to notions of justice. The whole equation is around the wrong way in the western tradition of justice. It is authority which is the subject of justice, not the individual. ……..and so authority must justify itself where it exists to individuals.

    If you agree with me this far, then that is precisely why I believe the capitalist class would need to be dismantled , because it is a form of authority which does not justify itself to individuals.

  5. Daniel Zachary Jones Says:

    LOL at that ‘read more’ in the middle of the above comment! I copy and paste from google.

  6. Daniel Zachary Jones Says:

    errr…. from facebook. Sorry. 😦

  7. John Humphreys Says:

    Absolutely right Tim. 🙂

    Daniel — Chomsky never faces the inherent contradiction at the heart of his philosophy. You say that left-anarchists want democracy at point of production. A fine idea perhaps. But what if somebody doesn’t want to do it that way? How will you force them to comply?

    As for hating capital and capitalists… that makes no sense. All systems have capital. The only question is whether people interact voluntarily or involuntarily.

    It’s fine to be against a “capitalist” life-style (whatever that means), so long as you’re willing to tolerate other people who disagree with you. Anarchy is all about tolerance of diversity, and allowing any actions that are voluntary… even actions you don’t like.

  8. Peter Neiger Says:

    I think the terminology in these arguments often get mixed and people end up talking at each other, especially the left v right dynamic. Agorist anarchists are considered “left” but do not in any way argue for a democracy at the means of production.

    I think there is a difference between capitalism and consumerism. Most people who hate consumerism and the accumulation of “unnecessary” items automatically attribute the blame to capitalism and then use the two terms interchangeably.

    Anarchists (well, true anarchists) do not fit anywhere on the left/right spectrum. They reject the spectrum because it is a representation of a person’s belief on what the right application of violence against innocent people is. A true anarchist does not advocate violence (or threat of violence) against anyone. All actions should be voluntary.

    It is unfortunate that the term anarchy has been hijacked and distorted. I believe that is the reason why agorist, voluntarist and other such words are coming into fashion within the anarchist movement. It has become a PR battle.

  9. Peter Neiger Says:

    Tim: It is good to see that you view us anarchists as “normal and meek”… I don’t know what is normally expected.

  10. Francois Tremblay Says:

    “The few left-anarchists I know are just confused”

    You need to start reading my blog, I guess…

  11. Francois Tremblay Says:

    By the way, there’s no such thing as “right wing anarchism.” You “classical liberals” are nowadays classified as neocons or Libertarians, in the US. Libertarian (not big-L Libertarian as the term has been co-opted in the US, but libertarian in the traditional sense) socialists like me do not recognize your ideology as having anything to do with Anarchism.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: