Anarchism = self interest?
Feb 14 2006 21:03
This topic is worth its own thread - in the record shattering massive animal rights "mother of all" thread, this kind of comments were thrown about:
John. wrote:
JDMF wrote:
Lazy Riser wrote:
JDMF wrote:
so all this talk about solidarity and stuff is just "enlightened self interest"?Yep. There is no other kind of genuine self interest.
so your current anarchist politics is just self interests?
TBH I believe that as well pretty much. I mean I think it's not that relevant, but that's what I think
Quote:
you wouldn't do better for yourself just continuing to invest in the stock market?No - in capitalist society, or any hierarchy only a tiny proportion can end up at the top - you're very unlikely to
hat is the ROI of using your time on libcom vs. researching some interesting new opportunities in emerginig markets?
Quote:
And what about those who are not able to organise for themselves from seriously handicapped people to old, sick and children?This is easy to argue from a selfish POV - you or someone you care about could end up like this and so it's best to have the social provision there
Any comments?
I can see that this stems from some cool theory written by some well solid dude back in the days, but in the current level of class struggle militants are in fact working against their own immediate interests and getting themselves into a lot of trouble unnecessarily, spending a lot of time, effort, energy, stress and emotional involvement in political issues.
Now if someone can twist that into nice self interest thing, then lets hear it.
By saying all this I do NOT mean that political involvement is some kind of self sacrifice and martyrdom BS - of course there are elements of self interest involved because we are aiming to build a society which we see as best for all. But there is a cultural change of solidarity, mutual aid and generally giving a fuck which is essential to build any kind of class politics, which i dont think can be twisted into language of self interest.
Feb 14 2006 21:33
#2
I think this thread was so JDMF could have a straightener with Lazy Riser.
Feb 14 2006 22:05
#3
Quote:
yeah, everything can be twisted to seem as though its done out of self-interest, why do you help an old lady across the road-to assuage your conscience, same reason you rescue an animal from a lab or whatever, because it makes you feel good about yourself. Of course fighting for a world free from constraints and the profit motive is in your 'self-interest' because your fighting for a world which you perceive will be greater, freer and more enjoyable, does this make it something driven by 'self interest' i dont know, isnt it all semantics? Best way to escape an argument; 'semantics'.
It's not just a matter of semantics - it actually is a matter of self-interest (or, collective self-interest)
Feb 14 2006 22:12
#4
Vaneigemappreciationclub wrote:
why do you help an old lady across the road-to assuage your conscience
Because I want to live in the kind of society where if I need help crossing the road, someone will help me.
Feb 14 2006 22:47
#5
Jack wrote:
Vaneigemappreciationclub wrote:
why do you help an old lady across the road-to assuage your conscienceBecause I want to live in the kind of society where if I need help crossing the road, someone will help me.
some would call that self interest, some empathy, being considerate and so on - in other words, if it is not exclusively explained by the term "self interest" then it is just semantics?
Collective self interest - now there is a mouthful, i can see the point though and do not disagree, but for an individual in the current climate of low class activity how would it be according to your self interest to spend time and energy on these issues? People like John., Lazy Riser etc can do quite well within the confinements of capitalism surely?
Feb 14 2006 22:53
#6
JDMF wrote:
some would call that self interest, some empathy, being considerate and so on - in other words, if it is not exclusively explained by the term "self interest" then it is just semantics?
Yes, probably. I think I'm less into the self-interest thing than some of the others - altho the main reason I think socialism would be great is 'cause it'd be fucking sweet for me and those I care about. But I do think there are acts of genuine self-sacrifice that are right to be taken in the name of solidarity, that don't really accord with pure 'self interest'.
But I mean, none of us act out of a deep pure desire to have socialism to 'make the world a better place' - come on JDMF, remember those AR dickheads who moaned about you taking holidays. 
Feb 14 2006 23:04
#7
Jack wrote:
But I mean, none of us act out of a deep pure desire to have socialism to 'make the world a better place'
hey man, thats just another more lame way of saying "the main reason I think socialism would be great is 'cause it'd be fucking sweet for me and those I care about" 
Feb 14 2006 23:09
#8
Yea, but you do it because you want the world to be cool for yourself and people close to you, rather than because you feel sorry for poor people, right?
That was my point, I guess.
Feb 14 2006 23:29
#9
Jack wrote:
Vaneigemappreciationclub wrote:
why do you help an old lady across the road-to assuage your conscienceBecause I want to live in the kind of society where if I need help crossing the road, someone will help me.
That is pure self-interest.
I would help the old lady across the road because I like to think of myself as a kind person that helps old ladies across the road.
In a sense everything is self interest, I've done a few fairly brave things, but it was simply because I couldn't handle being the person who didn't carry out that particular action.
I know people who've done braver things to maintain the image they have of themselves, no one on this forum is likely to have done anything without any self interest firstly because I'm not convinced that is possible and secondly because the amount of navel gazing that goes on here there's no way that you aren't aware of yourselves. If you are not acting in your own self interest, then you are not fully aware, as far as I see it.
Feb 14 2006 23:47
#10
Self interest. Me and people like me are interested in not having a boss fuck us about, in co-operating to make our lives better, in not having to pay for every 'reform' or attack on people of the same class as us, we're self interested in not having our kids go through the sectarian shite we had to go through (oh maybe thats not 'classically' self interest as its about our kids) and as a result in helping create a social system based on yaddy yaddy yah... Well ye all know the rest don't ya?
Or no, here, wait - I'm a weally top bloke who cares about everyone and all the worlds cute wee bunny wabbits and finks it would be just nice to have a nicer world.
Feb 15 2006 00:10
#11
Boulcolonialboy wrote:
Or no, here, wait - I'm a weally top bloke who cares about everyone and all the worlds cute wee bunny wabbits and finks it would be just nice to have a nicer world.
If it wasn't for the bunny rabbits that post would be fantastic.
I'm not arguing that self-interest is an entirely bad thing or even a homogenous thing.
I'd rather someone helped the old lady across the street because it made them feel good about themselves.
Its ok if they help them across the street because they would want similar help.
Its not good if they do it for monetary reward, but I'll forgive Lazy Riser, he needs a bigger TV.
Feb 15 2006 08:38
#12
JDMF wrote:
Collective self interest - now there is a mouthful,
I do think that's the name of the game though.
As people have pointed out I think every human action is selfish (doing something nice cos you want to feel better, etc.). As humans are social beings selfishness isn't necessarily bad - often quite the contrary, IMO.
Quote:
i can see the point though and do not disagree, but for an individual in the current climate of low class activity how would it be according to your self interest to spend time and energy on these issues? People like John., Lazy Riser etc can do quite well within the confinements of capitalism surely?
Hmmm well TBH I do try to do as well as I can under capitalism, I just don't do very well!
Mostly cos I hate work + consequently am very lazy. Also, the "anarchist" stuff that I do - is pretty much entirely beneficial to me: low-grade 'activity' at work, and doing libcom. The first I benefit from, the second I enjoy, and so benefit from. Benefit more than if I say worked hard at my job. Jobs are shit cos really there aren't enough decent ones to go around. Even if I did really apply myself there's no guarantee I'll get anywhere.
Not that I wanna sound like lazy riser though 
edit - as for your sticking your head above the parapet thing, yeah of course that's how the system works, the first to stand up get fucked and so that discourages the others. I think though that we know what's in our long-term interest as a class (communism), and I know at least from my POV that refusing solidarity or refusing to stand up for my fellow workers I'd feel much worse than if I lost my job, cos workers' unity is the fundamental principle my life has become based on.
Feb 15 2006 08:42
#13
Jack wrote:
Yea, but you do it because you want the world to be cool for yourself and people close to you, rather than because you feel sorry for poor people, right?That was my point, I guess.
so you would be fine if you would have a libertarian communist society to yourself and people close to you, but couldn't give a fuck about some pensioner down the road you don't know, some immigrant bastard in dover detention centre and some guatemalan peasant?
Why not just move into some isolationist community then?
Same goes to Boulcolonialboy.
I guess you guys see only two options: either you are in this for self interest, or you like bunny rabbits, in which case i choose the latter.
reason why i dont believe those who say this is purely self interest, but suspect it is said just because it sounds nice in theory is:
1. the current investment of being a militant doesn't pay off. You use time, energy and risk some of the basics in your life by being a working class militant more than just "playing the game". The basic reason for scabs and conservative attitudes among workers is this elementary calculation of "return of investment" calculation like LR says.
Even Boulcolonialboy invests a lot of his personal time and energy into these things - can't see it being a good self interest based investment?
2. many members on this board have good education, go to some of the finest universities in the world and are clearly smart and have a lot of potential within the capitalist framework. Lets face it, the society is geared up for people like this. For few years you may have to do some shitty jobs, but sooner or later you land on one which sets you in a nice career path and you are on your way to earn 40+k per year in about 5-6 years time, some even more.
Where is the "return of investment" for these people if we are only talking of self interest?
Let me put it to you in another way: i suspect you want communist for ALL, not just for you and your mates. I suspect that even if we had perfect isolated anarchit communist society, we would spend a lot of time doing solidarity with people struggling to get there, not because any roundabout way of wanting to defend our self interests, but simply because we want the nice things to all and not leave anyone behind, or close the door behind us. The couterargument is "internationalism" blah blah, reduced down to pure self interest again, but that sounds like a semantic twist to me.
Feb 15 2006 09:03
#14
I do think that no matter what the intellectual justifications for actions are from various posters here, the plain fact remains most will have, at the back of their minds, a sense of 'higher calling' (to use the most insulting terminology) - workers' unity as a principle, anti-racism, anti-sexism and all the other stuff associated with the anarchist set. Most of you did a lot of the pointless activistoid stuff before you wised up.
Having said that, I agree that the most logical, and certainly most effective justification for libertarian politics is enlightened self-interest.
Feb 15 2006 09:03
#15
I do think that no matter what the intellectual justifications for actions are from various posters here, the plain fact remains most will have, at the back of their minds, a sense of 'higher calling' (to use the most insulting terminology) - workers' unity as a principle, anti-racism, anti-sexism and all the other stuff associated with the anarchist set. Most of you did a lot of the pointless activistoid stuff before you wised up.
Having said that, I agree that the most logical, and certainly most effective justification for libertarian politics is enlightened self-interest.
Feb 15 2006 09:04
#16
double post
Feb 15 2006 09:28
#17
Saii wrote:
I do think that no matter what the intellectual justifications for actions are from various posters here, the plain fact remains most will have, at the back of their minds, a sense of 'higher calling' (to use the most insulting terminology) - workers' unity as a principle, anti-racism, anti-sexism and all the other stuff associated with the anarchist set.
But why? Because it'll benefit us! Capitalism doesn't.
Quote:
Most of you did a lot of the pointless activistoid stuff before you wised up.
Yeah, a lot of people find activistism beneficial. It can give meaning to their lives, put them in a social circle, help them make friends, etc. I don't see this as a counter example.
Quote:
Having said that, I agree that the most logical, and certainly most effective justification for libertarian politics is enlightened self-interest.
I prefer collective self-interest (or, specifically, long-term self-interest). But yeah I agree - if not that, what is the basis??
JDMF - I think you over-estimate capitalism. I might be smart, but I don't want to spend my life in a high-powered job working 60 hours a week to earn loads of money I can't enjoy.
Feb 15 2006 10:03
#18
Yes yes I know the framework, I'm talking about personal ideologies vrs direct self-interest here, and I think it's probably a little disingenuous to say that the reason people get into anti-racism stuff for example is always the kind of direct self-interest you're suggesting.
Lots of people are rarely if ever in a position where they clash over race. Doesn't stop them from supporting anti-racist stuff though, despite the fact they aren't personally going to benefit from that support and perhaps may even have a generally right-wing attitude. It could be said that they don't want to live in a society where racism exists, but that's a very indirect ideological step. If they have no intention of having kids, and no overarching political commitment to equality, where is the direct link?
The reason for using activism past is that I'm sure you weren't just doing it to get some mates. I have no doubt that you believed you were doing the right thing to help people other than yourself. Hell I've been at enough demos where people are saying 'we're saving the people of Iraq' when asked for their motives (Why? Were you asked to? Do the Iraqis know?)...
Feb 15 2006 10:09
#19
Hi
Quote:
People like John., Lazy Riser etc can do quite well within the confinements of capitalism surely?
Where’s my economic security? Where’s my political liberty? I made £170 last month, I’ll make even less this month. Capitalism is rubbish.
Love
LR
Feb 15 2006 10:50
#20
John. wrote:
JDMF - I think you over-estimate capitalism. I might be smart, but I don't want to spend my life in a high-powered job working 60 hours a week to earn loads of money I can't enjoy.
sop instead, in the name of self interest, you will do all that, plus risk your income and everything retaled to that with wokrplace militancy, use a lot of your personal time and energy for lib com politics and so on?
C'moon, its not too bad to say that you do it because you hate capitalism and dont want anyone to be victim of it? 
Feb 15 2006 10:59
#21
JDMF wrote:
I guess you guys see only two options: either you are in this for self interest, or you like bunny rabbits, in which case i choose the latter.
JDMF that was a joke. The aim was to say that anarchists act from self-interest. As all acts are based upon self-interest it is not particularly damaging to worldwide social revolution if people actually feel they get something out of it.
JDMF wrote:
2. many members on this board have good education, go to some of the finest universities in the world
Really? I thought they went to Goldsmiths 
Lazy Riser how on earth did you earn so little. We're going to be advertising some part-time vacancies soon, it might not be up ypour alley though.
JDMF wrote:
have a lot of potential within the capitalist framework.
This is true, but as John. pointed out, most anarchists can't stomach those kinds of jobs. I was tempted to get my mate to sort me out with a job at Deutschebank but if you want to earn the money you have to be part of the scene. It costs money to have a job like that and it takes over your life. I for one couldn't stomach it. I think that's why so many people on the board are working in education. Its a job that is neutral or even positive.
Quote:
Where is the "return of investment" for these people if we are only talking of self interest?
The pleasure of knowing that they are fighting for what is right. It made you happy to picket the Dunnes Store, even though it had another purpose it still made you personally happy to do it. I'm not taking anything away from your actions, personally I think if someone's self interest is tied up with social revolution then what does it matter, as I said before its better than simply trying to get a bigger TV.
Feb 15 2006 11:03
#22
Hi
Quote:
its not too bad to say that you do it because you hate capitalism and dont want anyone to be victim of it?
Indeed. Some even do it because the Lord Jesus will open the gates of heaven in return for their infinite compassion. I wouldn’t go out of my way to persecute anyone for their motivations as long as they don’t inconvenience me unduly.
Love
LR
Feb 15 2006 11:10
#23
Hi
Quote:
Lazy Riser how on earth did you earn so little
Once you get out of the cities, jobs are like hen's teeth. Also, I'm still too asset rich to sign on and, like I said somewhere else, employers aren't interested in taking on people who can afford to loose their jobs.
Finally, I'm a self employed business development analyst, my ship will come in soon. Think “Cornelius Castoriadis”, only younger, less smart and less middle class.
I’m going to throw myself upon the mercy of the state in May if I don’t land some cash.
Love
LR
Feb 15 2006 11:55
#24
Self-interest, yeah. I don't buy this thing some people have of equating self-interest with selfishness though. Acting in one's own interest and acting with no regard for others are two completely different things and they rarely coincide, IMO.
Feb 15 2006 11:59
#25
madashell wrote:
Acting in one's own interest and acting with no regard for others are two completely different things and they rarely coincide, IMO.
Well yeah but then that's semantics. The definition of selfishness is "Acting in one's own interest", not "acting with no regard for others".
Feb 15 2006 12:10
#26
Do you guys have a word of the day that I don't know about?
semantics has been in every other post for a while.
Selfishness is acting in one's own interests without regard for others.
self-interest is not necessarily selfishness.
If someone gets their kicks from being selfless, then when they act in a self-less way then they are still being selfless even if it is motivated by self-interest.
Feb 15 2006 12:16
#27
Jef Costello wrote:
semantics has been in every other post for a while.Selfishness is acting in one's own interests without regard for others
Says who?
Dictionary.com gives it as:
Quote:
Concerned chiefly or only with oneself
Feb 15 2006 12:20
#28
Selfish:
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary wrote:
Concerned chiefly with one's own personal advantage or welfare to the exclusion of regard for others...
Feb 15 2006 12:22
#29
hmmm okay. People aren't mostly "selfish" fundamentally then, cos most would probably die for their child/loved one at some point...
Feb 15 2006 12:28
#30
John. wrote:
hmmm okay. People aren't mostly "selfish" fundamentally then, cos most would probably die for their child/loved one at some point...
People are often selfish but they are not fundamentally selfish.
They do however act in their own best interests, even if those interests may not be the same as those of others.
For example, I've risked getting a severe kicking for a girlfriend but another guy walking along the street wouldn't have. Doesn't mean he's selfish and I wasn't.
yeah, everything can be twisted to seem as though its done out of self-interest, why do you help an old lady across the road-to assuage your conscience, same reason you rescue an animal from a lab or whatever, because it makes you feel good about yourself. Of course fighting for a world free from constraints and the profit motive is in your 'self-interest' because your fighting for a world which you perceive will be greater, freer and more enjoyable, does this make it something driven by 'self interest' i dont know, isnt it all semantics? Best way to escape an argument; 'semantics'.