Log in:  

Register

The morality and ethics of Anarchism

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Alpe d'Huez, Red Rick, Tonton, Pricey_sky, King Boonen

The morality and ethics of Anarchism

18 May 2016 03:01

Let's begin with an interpretation of the golden rule:

"This principle of treating others as one wishes to be treated oneself, what is it but the very same principle as equality, the fundamental principle of anarchism? And how can any one manage to believe himself an anarchist unless he practices it? We do not wish to be ruled. And by this very fact, do we not declare that we ourselves wish to rule nobody? We do not wish to be deceived, we wish always to be told nothing but the truth. And by this very fact, do we not de- clare that we ourselves do not wish to deceive anybody, that we promise to always tell the truth, nothing but the truth, the whole truth? We do not wish to have the fruits of our labor stolen from us. And by that very fact, do we not declare that we respect the fruits of others' labor? By what right indeed can we demand that we should be treated in one fashion, reserving it to ourselves to treat others in a fashion entirely different? Our sense of equality revolts at such an idea." Peter Kropotkin
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,280
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

18 May 2016 17:14

Starstruck wrote:Let's begin with an interpretation of the golden rule:

"This principle of treating others as one wishes to be treated oneself, what is it but the very same principle as equality, the fundamental principle of anarchism? And how can any one manage to believe himself an anarchist unless he practices it? We do not wish to be ruled. And by this very fact, do we not declare that we ourselves wish to rule nobody? We do not wish to be deceived, we wish always to be told nothing but the truth. And by this very fact, do we not de- clare that we ourselves do not wish to deceive anybody, that we promise to always tell the truth, nothing but the truth, the whole truth? We do not wish to have the fruits of our labor stolen from us. And by that very fact, do we not declare that we respect the fruits of others' labor? By what right indeed can we demand that we should be treated in one fashion, reserving it to ourselves to treat others in a fashion entirely different? Our sense of equality revolts at such an idea." Peter Kropotkin


In other words, people hate one another.
I don't mean to sound glib; I once took one of those on-line tests to determine my political point of view. Results showed I was both a socialist and an anarchist.
We've advanced a long way in terms of defining "equality," but we have a long way to go before it's achieved.
User avatar the delgados
Member
 
Posts: 1,030
Joined: 02 May 2009 02:38
Location: Toronto

18 May 2016 21:06

that's it......i hate everyone....just as i hate myself

just that.....i hate others more.......

Mark L
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

18 May 2016 21:09

....what's truth anyway.....but the response which garners the best result

Mark L
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

Re:

18 May 2016 21:23

ebandit wrote:....what's truth anyway.....but the response which garners the best result

Mark L


True that.
User avatar the delgados
Member
 
Posts: 1,030
Joined: 02 May 2009 02:38
Location: Toronto

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

20 May 2016 20:12

the delgados wrote:
Starstruck wrote:Let's begin with an interpretation of the golden rule:

"This principle of treating others as one wishes to be treated oneself, what is it but the very same principle as equality, the fundamental principle of anarchism? And how can any one manage to believe himself an anarchist unless he practices it? We do not wish to be ruled. And by this very fact, do we not declare that we ourselves wish to rule nobody? We do not wish to be deceived, we wish always to be told nothing but the truth. And by this very fact, do we not de- clare that we ourselves do not wish to deceive anybody, that we promise to always tell the truth, nothing but the truth, the whole truth? We do not wish to have the fruits of our labor stolen from us. And by that very fact, do we not declare that we respect the fruits of others' labor? By what right indeed can we demand that we should be treated in one fashion, reserving it to ourselves to treat others in a fashion entirely different? Our sense of equality revolts at such an idea." Peter Kropotkin


In other words, people hate one another.
I don't mean to sound glib; I once took one of those on-line tests to determine my political point of view. Results showed I was both a socialist and an anarchist.
We've advanced a long way in terms of defining "equality," but we have a long way to go before it's achieved.


it's a way of being in the world not an intellectual exercise.
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,280
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

21 May 2016 13:04

Fundamental freedoms were more perceptible in the old feudal monarchies (especially before the Enlightened Despotism) than under the subsequent regimes. The state was also less powerful, with a lot more counter-powers.

The anarchists should join the monarchists. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon said that "Monarchy was an anarchy +1"
Echoes
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,798
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:57

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

21 May 2016 15:09

Starstruck wrote:
the delgados wrote:
Starstruck wrote:Let's begin with an interpretation of the golden rule:

"This principle of treating others as one wishes to be treated oneself, what is it but the very same principle as equality, the fundamental principle of anarchism? And how can any one manage to believe himself an anarchist unless he practices it? We do not wish to be ruled. And by this very fact, do we not declare that we ourselves wish to rule nobody? We do not wish to be deceived, we wish always to be told nothing but the truth. And by this very fact, do we not de- clare that we ourselves do not wish to deceive anybody, that we promise to always tell the truth, nothing but the truth, the whole truth? We do not wish to have the fruits of our labor stolen from us. And by that very fact, do we not declare that we respect the fruits of others' labor? By what right indeed can we demand that we should be treated in one fashion, reserving it to ourselves to treat others in a fashion entirely different? Our sense of equality revolts at such an idea." Peter Kropotkin


In other words, people hate one another.
I don't mean to sound glib; I once took one of those on-line tests to determine my political point of view. Results showed I was both a socialist and an anarchist.
We've advanced a long way in terms of defining "equality," but we have a long way to go before it's achieved.


it's a way of being in the world not an intellectual exercise.


"Being" in the world requires some amount of intellectual exercise, no?
User avatar the delgados
Member
 
Posts: 1,030
Joined: 02 May 2009 02:38
Location: Toronto

21 May 2016 16:31

Anti-facists attack a police car and thow a molotov cocktail into it while 2 police were still in the car. There is a video at the bottom of the article. The attackers are well known to the police but nothing is done to stop their violence.

http://www.lemonde.fr/police-justice/article/2016/05/20/voiture-de-police-incendiee-quatre-suspects-seront-presentes-a-un-juge_4923604_1653578.html
"This comment qualifies as a shining example of the "anyone who disagrees with my perspective is a dolt" leftist, intolerant mish-mash of shallow thinking." - Scott SoCal
User avatar frenchfry
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,279
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 14:28
Location: Bourgogne

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

21 May 2016 22:40

"Being" in the world requires some amount of intellectual exercise, no?


Of course but the most moral/ethical people I've ever known aren't trying to be Aristotle either. Usually they're very simple humans.
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,280
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

22 May 2016 00:08

aphronesis
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,914
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Re:

22 May 2016 06:59

aphronesis wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zh1ckXXJr-Y


hahaha, so much for equality. psst your lability is showing.
Some people don't need all the neurotic intellectualizing to get on with it.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/03/france-terrorism-tarnac-anarchists
http://www.academia.edu/23773911/The_Experiment_of_Friendship_Anarchist_affinity_in_the_wake_of_Michel_Foucault

We're talking about some basic stuff here, not to say simplicity is simple but it doesn't consist of a million words either.
http://naturebatslast.podbean.com/e/nature-bats-last-%e2%80%93-032216/
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,280
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

22 May 2016 14:55

So writing for the guardian or a Concordia degree aren't intellectual exercises? Your romanticised phenomenological sublime is a little more complicated and contradictory than you make it out to be.
aphronesis
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,914
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Re:

22 May 2016 15:22

aphronesis wrote:So writing for the guardian or a Concordia degree aren't intellectual exercises? Your romanticised phenomenological sublime is a little more complicated and contradictory than you make it out to be.


Those French intellectuals didn't last long before trouble found them. The long rambling about friendship is a lot of words. Then I provided an example of people that just did it, for decades.
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,280
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

22 May 2016 15:27

Situationists?

Music only through the speakers. No heads.
aphronesis
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,914
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Re:

22 May 2016 15:56

aphronesis wrote:Situationists?

Music only through the speakers. No heads.


https://libcom.org/thought/situationists-an-introduction
Resisting any attempts to file their ideas into a static ideology, situationism, the SI called attention to the priority of real life, real live activity, which continually experiments and corrects itself, instead of just constantly reiterating a few supposedly eternal truths like the ideologies of Trotskyism, Leninism, Maoism or even anarchism. Static ideologies, however true they may be, tend, like everything else in capitalist society, to rigidify and become fetishised, just one more thing to passively consume.


"Music only through the speakers. No heads." That depends on the music, if it's that noise you often like to play you're on your own. :p

While the plebs. are arguing theory...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/18/richest-62-billionaires-wealthy-half-world-population-combined
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,280
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

23 May 2016 03:26

Starstruck wrote:
"Being" in the world requires some amount of intellectual exercise, no?


Of course but the most moral/ethical people I've ever known aren't trying to be Aristotle either. Usually they're very simple humans.


I can assure you I'm a very simple human being. According to some, I'm "simple' in more than one sense of the word.
I'm too simple to argue against.
I've spent many years earning a living trying to help others achieve some semblance of equality, but I've learned that some are either a) too busy trying to earn enough money to put a roof over their head rather than keep up with politics; or b) too stupid to listen.
I love the idea of anarchy in the true sense of the definition.
But yeah...
User avatar the delgados
Member
 
Posts: 1,030
Joined: 02 May 2009 02:38
Location: Toronto

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

23 May 2016 15:06

"I'm an anarchist and a conservative in measures that are yet to define"

Words by Michel Audiard in Henri Verneuil's masterpiece "Le président", based on the novel by Georges Simenon and pronounced by the great Jean Gabin.

Sort of relate to the George Orwell sally: "I'm an anarchist Tory".

Basically it means an anarchist that does not need the state to respect traditional family value, good neighbourliness, craftsmanship, etc.

I'm kinda close to that. The other Simenon novel "La veuve Couderc" turned into a great film by Pierre Granier-Deferre conveys that spirit very well.
Echoes
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,798
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:57

Re: The morality and ethics of Anarchism

23 May 2016 15:30

Echoes wrote:"I'm an anarchist and a conservative in measures that are yet to define"

Words by Michel Audiard in Henri Verneuil's masterpiece "Le président", based on the novel by Georges Simenon and pronounced by the great Jean Gabin.

Sort of relate to the George Orwell sally: "I'm an anarchist Tory".

Basically it means an anarchist that does not need the state to respect traditional family value, good neighbourliness, craftsmanship, etc.

I'm kinda close to that. The other Simenon novel "La veuve Couderc" turned into a great film by Pierre Granier-Deferre conveys that spirit very well.

Kind of like how an atheist doesn't need religion to respect traditional family value, good neighbourliness, craftsmanship, etc.
"This comment qualifies as a shining example of the "anyone who disagrees with my perspective is a dolt" leftist, intolerant mish-mash of shallow thinking." - Scott SoCal
User avatar frenchfry
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,279
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 14:28
Location: Bourgogne

25 May 2016 02:41

"On the night of Jan. 15, 1919, a group of the Freikorps—hastily formed militias made up mostly of right-wing veterans of World War I—escorted Rosa Luxemburg, a petite, 50-year-old with a slight limp, to the Eden Hotel in Berlin, the headquarters of the Guards Cavalry Rifle Division.

“Are you Frau Rosa Luxemburg?” Capt. Waldemar Pabst asked when she arrived at his office upstairs.

“You decide for yourself,” she answered.

“According to the photograph, you must be,” he said.

“If you say so,” she said softly.

Pabst told her she would be taken to Moabit Prison. On the way out of the hotel, a waiting crowd, which had shouted insults like “whore” as she was brought in under arrest, whistled and spat. A soldier, Otto Runge, was allegedly paid 50 marks to be the first to hit her. Shouting, “She’s not getting out alive,” he slammed the butt of his rifle into the back of her head. Luxemburg collapsed. Blood poured from her nose and mouth. Runge struck a second time. Someone said, “That’s enough.” Soldiers dragged Luxemburg to a waiting car. One of her shoes was left behind. A soldier hit her again. As the car sped away, Lt. Kurt Vogel fired his pistol into her head. The soldiers tossed Luxemburg’s corpse into the Landwehr Canal."

The political, cultural and judicial system in a capitalist state is centered around the protection of property rights. And, as Adam Smith pointed out, when civil government “is instituted for the security of property, [it] is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.” The capitalist system is gamed from the start. And this makes Luxemburg extremely relevant as corporate capital, now freed from all constraints, reconfigures our global economy, including the United States’, into a ruthless form of neofeudalism.

Democracy, in this late stage of capitalism, has been replaced with a system of legalized bribery. All branches of government, including the courts, along with the systems of entertainment and news, are wholly owned subsidiaries of the corporate state. Electoral politics are elaborate puppet shows. Wall Street and the militarists, whether Trump or Clinton, win.

“Capitalist accumulation requires for its movement to be surrounded by non-capitalist areas,” Luxemburg wrote. And capitalism “can continue only so long as it is provided with such a milieu.”

Luxemburg, in another understanding important to those caught up in the pressures of a single election cycle, viewed electoral campaigns, like union organizing, as a process of educating the public about the nature of capitalism. These activities, divorced from “revolutionary consciousness”—from the ultimate goal of overthrowing capitalism—were, she said, “a labor of Sisyphus.”

We who seek to build radical third-party movements must recognize that it is not about taking power now. It is about taking power, at best, a decade from now. Revolutions, Luxemburg reminded us, take time.



In an understanding that eludes many Bernie Sanders supporters, Luxemburg also grasped that socialism and imperialism were incompatible. She would have excoriated Sanders’ ostrichlike refusal to confront American imperialism. Imperialism, she understood, not only empowers a war machine and enriches arms merchants and global capitalists. It is accompanied by a poisonous ideology—what social critic Dwight Macdonald called the “psychosis of permanent war”—that makes socialism impossible.

A population finally rises up against a decayed system not because of revolutionary consciousness, but because, as Luxemburg pointed out, it has no other choice. It is the obtuseness of the old regime, not the work of revolutionaries, that triggers revolt. And, as she pointed out, all revolutions are in some sense failures, events that begin, rather than culminate, a process of social transformation.



“Revolutions,” she continued, “cannot be made at command. Nor is this at all the task of the party. Our duty is only at all times to speak out plainly without fear or trembling; that is, to hold clearly before the masses their tasks in the given historical moment, and to proclaim the political program of action and the slogans which result from the situation. The concern with whether and when the revolutionary mass movement takes up with them must be left confidently to history itself. Even though socialism may at first appear as a voice crying in the wilderness, it yet provides for itself a moral and political position the fruits of which it later, when the hour of historical fulfillment strikes, garners with compound interest.”

http://www.truthdig.com/report/page3/reform_or_revolution_20160522.

Hannah Arendt also covers some of this ground and the last themes--although from a greater historical distance than Luxemburg and less overtly engaged stance than Hedges. Still her contrast of reform (bureaucratic)/revolution sticks to many US voters today.
Last edited by aphronesis on 25 May 2016 04:08, edited 1 time in total.
aphronesis
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,914
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: King Boonen, Maaaaaaaarten and 7 guests

Back to top