[MD] Anarchism, Marx and Who Voted to be Ruled?

[David M]

Hi Arlo

New book on anarchy you might like:

http://www.amazon.com/Infinitely-Demanding-Commitment-Politics-Resistance/dp/1844671216/ref=sr_1_1/103-3477987-6255029?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179524655&sr=8-1

God save the queen.....

David M

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ARLO J BENSINGER JR" <ajb102 at psu.edu>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:04 PM
Subject: [MD] Anarchism, Marx and Who Voted to be Ruled?


> [Micah has asked]
> When did they hold the vote on whether people needed to be ruled?
>
> [Arlo had answered]
> What a great question!
>
> Of course, Marx believed that the overthrow of the bourgeoisie would begin
> atemporary time of transitional rule by a Party speaking for the workers
> (thecommunist party), but that this would eventually disappear as 
> communities
> wouldorganize into self-governing "communes" (to simplify a bit) with 
> little to
> no"authoritative" government. In other words, people who "vote" that they
> "didnot need to be ruled".
>
> "The "first phase" [of the communist revolution] would eventually give way 
> to
> a"higher phase" in which class differences were eliminated, and a state 
> was
> nolonger needed." (Wikipedia on Communism)
>
> Many consider this a pipe-dream, given the seemingly insurmountable 
> obstacle
> ofhuman greed, ambition and desire for power (and they may be right). But
> takesolace knowing that Marx, like you, decried the final need for a 
> "state"
> aswell.
>
> [SA]
> An individualist program sounds like 'My way or the highway'. ... When we 
> have
> all these 'My Way or the Highway' individuals walking around, is that the
> stereotypical 'Wild, Wild, West'?
>
> [Ron]
> I thought too if individualism was pushed to extreme the "anarchist" label
> could be dusted off and thrown around.
>
> [Arlo]
> Anyone who cites the Sex Pistols should have a beer bought for them. First 
> one
> is on me, Ron.
>
> "Anarchists are those who advocate the absence of the state, arguing that
> common sense would allow for people to come together in agreement to form 
> a
> functional society allowing for the participants to freely develop their 
> own
> sense of morality, ethics or principled behaviour." (Wikipedia)
>
> This certainly sounds like something both Micah and Marx would endorse. 
> And
> quite frankly it sounds here surprisingly MOQish, doesn't it? I mean, the
> "state" is not the "social level", under Anarchism people still engage
> socially. Its not a "every man on his own deserted island" idea.
>
> One question jumps out, and that is how reasonable is this "utopia"? If 
> man's
> basic nature is towards greed and power, and Pirsig is right that the 
> social
> level is (in part) a way to excise authority in forcing man to behave
> "civilly", wouldn't Anarchism quickly devolve into the "Wild, Wild West" 
> as SA
> mentions?
>
> Wouldn't "might makes right" become the norm? Isn't that why we created a
> socialized police force and a socialized judiciary system in the first 
> place?
> (And why people like Platt aren't Anarchists, they only play one on TV.)
>
> And then there are the sub-anarchies, anarcho-communism and 
> anarcho-capitalism.
> Here Marx and Micah would likely split ways, as anarcho-communism 
> "advocates
> the abolition of the State and capitalism in favor of a horizontal network 
> of
> voluntary associations, workers' councils and/or commons through which 
> everyone
> will be free to satisfy their needs", while anarcho-capitalism "advocates 
> the
> elimination of the state; the provision of law enforcement, courts, 
> national
> defense, and all other security services by voluntarily-funded competitors 
> in a
> free market rather than by taxation; the complete deregulation of 
> nonintrusive
> personal and economic activities; and a self-regulated market." 
> (Wikipedia)
>
> Aside from the "property" issue, do not both of these presume more about 
> human
> nature than appears evident today? Who would protect the anarcho-whatever
> nation from the hordes of immigrants or terroristic destruction? With no 
> police
> or judiciary, would we hunt down killers with angry mobs a ala Wild, Wild 
> West?
> (Which might be fun, I've always wanted to be in a posse.)
>
> If you read the entry on anarcho-capitalism, however, it contains a key
> difference from modern capitalism, not simply the abolition of taxation. 
> With
> the abolition of all government, including a treasury, human enterprise 
> takes
> on a more "guild" system of production. Without "money" to mediate labor 
> and
> reward, there is no factory lines, no mass production, just butchers, 
> bakers
> and candlestick makers, with each trading his/her "goods" for other 
> "goods", a
> al a barter economy.
>
> Just some thoughts, as I crank up my Never Mind the Bollocks CD.
>
>
>
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>