Share

Some days ago on a site on Tor (http://tor.eff.org) internal network somebody called libertarians (ancaps) market fundamentalists. This description made sense to me, since I've seen them arguing everywhere that the market is the ultimate source of freedom, happiness, etc. But I also see anarchists and socialists in general mostly talking about the means of production not being owned collectively by the workers. The difference between anarchists and other socialists is that anarchists view the State as a tool of the capitalist class. If you think about it, isn't that labor fundamentalism? When anarchists talk about other things, for example, racism, they blame capitalism for it, as if capitalism is the source of every problem there is. I hate capitalism too, but I think it's stupid to blame capitalism for everything.
Anarchism is too negative. You can find criticisms of almost everything. For example, school, work, etc. But, instead of creating altenatives, anarchists criticise the possibility to create alternatives and continue to participate in the system. Anarchists have created relatively few projects, for example, Food Not Bombs. But, since critising everything is so common in anarchism, it's easy to find people who think that FNB has nothing to do with anarchism, since it doesn't serve the interests of the working class. Well, I already know that asking these people what exactly to do is worthless. The answer always will be "organise workers" or something like that.
Another funny thing about anarchists is participating in demonstrations, knowing that the State doesn't like that and knowing that they can be beaten by cops. I watched video on YouTube where some Russian anarchists had some confrontation with cops and they were shouting "follow your law". What's the point of it? Showing non-anarchists that the State is evil because it doesn't follow it's own law? Law is not a fucking deity, it can't protect you.
There is also anarcho-primitivism (which I like), but it isn't considered "true" anarchism. Why? Common argument is "people will die without technology". This allows "true" anarchist to dismiss anarcho-primitivism altogether. But anarcho-primitivism isn't simply about living in the wild. Extreme alienation exists in this world, especially in rich countries. It's not common to find anyone worried about this, except anarcho-primitivists.
Yeah, I know that anarchism has extended to opposition to authority in general, but we probably have to thank about this to individualist anarchists, since it has nothing to with the fucking labor. Still, I've seen some users even on this board say that they would happily execute pedophiles (and probably other people they don't like, too). This makes me worried.
I think that you can't change the system without changing people. Leninists had their revolutions by convincing people that they're oppressed. And what happened? They became the new ruling class. People were too stupid to understand that they simply gave the power away and didn't gain anything themselves. Today people are still stupid. But times have changed and the old method (merely showing the people that inequality exists) won't work. OK, maybe you think that people are not stupid? In that case we would be living in anarchy already. We have a chicken and egg problem here. Which came first - stupidity or the State? Anyway, you can't stop the chicken (stupidity) from laying new eggs by destroying the egg (the State).