From Arminiush, 07 April 2006

Hi Chris,

It’s interesting how folks can get different things out of the same piece - not conflicting things, mind you, just get struck by different bits...

What I found the most interesting about this piece (and yes it’s old, but has not much effect on what drew me to it) was the lack of connection between the self-annointed intellectuals and the self- annointed activists, the perennial split between theory and praxis - which is part of another current thread we have, I suppose - AND it’s something that is true not just of A-obsessed Graeber’s anarchists but also of communists and socialists as *we* understand the terms. Ditto for his complaint that some of his ‘A’s are really just reformist liberals - perfectly true, but not just a problem for his sort, but for ALL of us in the sector, as we all know.

Another part I found interesting was the mention of ‘prefigurative strategies’, which (at least) some of us have been speaking of varieties of for many decades, whether in the political, economic (revolutionary industrial unions/workers’ councils, etc), social/lifestyle sphere (*revolutionary* coops/LETS, etc ), or local/community interests where people are organising themselves for themselves. Again, nothing specifically ‘A’ about it, tho a good thing. (I have to say I’ve seen him interviewed a couple of places, and he seems to have succumbed to the academic disease of a guru in search of acolytes- always unattractive, but for an ‘anarchist’[or socialist or communist]seems a bit absurd - but maybe just a wrong impression.)

I think one can get into difficulty ascribing to ‘anarchists’ any particular point of view, possibly even moreso than among ‘socialists’ or ‘communists’ , because they have never had (obviously) the sort of central bearing that most s & c folks, to a greater or lesser degree claim to use M&E to steer by.

As to ‘globalisation’, as it was then, a hopeful but inchoate development at which we looked with varying (sometimes day-to-day!) degrees of skepticism and hope - it is quite out of gas, as a result of the effects of this war and its antecedents and effects - or is it? When (in yet another current thread) Julian brings up the French events, my reaction, and from all that I’ve read, even in the most enthusiastic reports from our sector’s (mostly A) reports on it, is that it’s just the students in France, doing what they do, maybe with more success than usual, but will end as it always does, in blah, blah, blah, and no real change, nor mention of the root cause, capitalism (duh). But the fact is, capitalism, in it’s current post- imperialist phase of mega-reach into ALL areas of human (and natural) existence, great and small, IS the root cause, of these events in France, as well as (if I understand rightly) the various actions recently in the UK, and in various strike actions (regardless of their probable settlement) in Germany, etc, etc , thru a lot of the news stories today. So anti-globalisation probably is still waiting to erupt again, since none of its causes have gone away, only papered over for a while. It took our sector a bit by surprise the last time. Maybe we can have a response ready to turn it into an explicitly not just ‘anti-capitalism’, but FOR the kind of movement and society and consciousness that we are all striving for?

Ah, the dream...

For freesocialism,

Arminius

top