So I was thinking about Somalia. How come more anarchists aren't moving there, forming communes, and guarding it from violence?
There is basically no government to fuck with anarchists, and the only real threat would be from terrorist organizations (which can be denied access to the communes). There is abundant opportunity for our ideas to be practiced in Somalia. Somalia's problem is capitalism. We can fix that. We can welcome the locals into our communes (so long as they aren't trying to kill us).
So, fellow anarchists, is anybody else interested in Somalia? Or am I just crazy?
Apr 14 2012 15:50
Apr 14 2012 16:00
Apr 14 2012 16:42
Quote:
So, fellow anarchists, is anybody else interested in Somalia? Or am I just crazy?
Yeah, you're just crazy. Good luck getting killed.
Apr 14 2012 16:48
Yeah, a situation of ongoing civil war with various parties and factions vying to become the government or to control regional statelets has nothing to do with anarchist politics.
Apr 14 2012 16:52
This must be intentional flamebait.
Surely,
Apr 14 2012 17:58
If you want to start a commune there please feel free, and let us know how you get on.
Apr 14 2012 18:24
Perhaps you could ask for donations? I can't really make the trip myself but I'd be happy to donate you £1.25 for the journey? Godspeed comrade.
Apr 14 2012 19:34
Captain Fatbeard?
Apr 14 2012 21:55
Threads like this are the reason Bourgeois influences on anarchism should be force-fed to everyone who calls themselves an anarchist 
Apr 15 2012 11:57
Serge Forward wrote:
Threads like this are the reason Bourgeois influences on anarchism should be force-fed to everyone who calls themselves an anarchist
well that's not very anarchist is it. har harrr.
Apr 15 2012 14:26
Serge Forward wrote:
Threads like this are the reason Bourgeois influences on anarchism should be force-fed to everyone who calls themselves an anarchist
Thanks for bringing my attention to that text. I really enjoyed reading it.
From now on it shall be my revolutionary duty to force-feed it to the bestial bourgeoisie.
With love.
Apr 15 2012 19:34
Found in this thread.
Ravineman wrote:
revol68 wrote:
Ravineman wrote:
Well, in my opinion, the dictatorship of the proletariat is when the mass red army must protect communism in any way they can. After communism has become stable, the vanguard party can SLOWLY go away with time and eventually, the world won't need a vanguard party. This is just my opinion.what a lovely story, did your Uncle Joe read it to you as a child?
never mind, I don't believe in that anymore, thanks to you guys, I am a convinced anarchist.
Ravineman wrote:
the croydonian anarchist wrote:
Thats a pretty quick changing of mind. Im glad, because I was going to really take you to town with that. (sorry if thats macho)Yeah, well I had a rethinking of my views when I read the anarchist FAQs and some more stuff on this site
I wonder what Ravineman supposedly read in order to come up with this idea...
Apr 15 2012 20:06
I've come across US-style libertarians promoting Somalia as some sort of stateless success story. This sort of thing. And this.
Apr 15 2012 20:26
Well gee, where to start...
There are plenty of governing entities that are in place of a nation state that have a monopoly on violence, whether it's the UN-backed government, Al-Shabab, or the Puntland separatists.
Further, a bunch of Western anarchists going over to a developing region like that and trying to get them to follow Western anarchist ideology is unrealistic (in my view), social antagonisms and economic woes will force people there to find their own solutions, and this is not to say we can't help but we can't simply go there and form communes, dissent has to come from the people affected by the poor social/economic conditions.
May 2 2012 03:54
Wow, awesome thread !
Can comment on articles and discussions
Don't be silly theres lots of governments in somalia, its not anarchist at all.