Talk:Post-left anarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Philosophy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy and the history of ideas. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
[edit] discussion of the article
This page is still a huge mess. There is more on this page about stuff that isn't post-leftism than there is about post-leftism. If this entry was submitted to a teacher as a report on post-leftism, you'd not only get an "F" but would be kicked out of school. Come on people, at least do some reading and don't engage in "original" research like the paragraph on Crimethinc. 24.94.181.211 20:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
This page has lots of problems. I tried several weeks ago to remove a poorly written and false set of sentences, but one of the Wikipedia zealots restored the false information. First of all, Bookchin is not an anarchist, so that sentence needs to be changed. Secondly, post-leftism developed as a tendency AFTER Bookchin wrote his book SALA. SALA is NOT a response to post-leftism. And that book is commonly misunderstood to be an attack on some group of anarchists when it really is a rant directed at anybody who had ever criticized Bookchin. Chuck0 20:25, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm not too knowledgeable of the pros and cons about post-left anarchy, but perhaps someone should go in depth about the critiques post-left anarchists have against leftist anarchists and so forth. --Jazz Remington 01:56, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
A couple of comments.
1. After having read Bookchin's SALA I did not have the impression that it was first and foremost a polemic against his critics as it was about him, rightly or wrongly, deploring various individualist anarchist (Stirnerite), deep ecologist, quietist (taoist), etc tendencies that were leading the anarchism astray from the social anarchist spirit that had historically characterized it. Post-left anarchism may not have emerged as a label by then, however it does seem relevant to mention it as an important precursor to disputes between social anarchists and the post-leftists since much of the social anarchist position had been fairly well articulated there.
2. When I read Debord's "Society of the Spectacle" it struck me as a left-Marxist critique; it was heavily and centrally laced with Marxist ideas applied to the cultural (media/art/consumption) sphere. I noticed that both this post-left anarchist article and the Situationists article both tend to downplay the Marxist current in Situationist thought. regards- BernardL 14 Aug 2005 19:15
[edit] Right Wing Currents?
The following sentence was recently added to this article:
- However, these views have been criticised as a revival of right wing currents of anarchism such as Stirnerite individualism.
Since when was Max Stirner a right-winger? Who has made this criticism and can anyone cite a source? If there is no source, we should remove the claim. If there is a source, we should clarify the criticism. - Nihila 23:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- As no source has emerged, I've removed the claim in question. If anyone finds a reliable source, feel free to reinsert it w/ citation. - N1h1l 02:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This Needs Lots of Work
I guess I should put some work into improving this page, since it isn't much better than when I complained a year ago. Here is a list of improvements and a list of misconceptions about post-leftism. Chuck0 22:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Improvements
- This entry doesn't really explain what post-leftism is and what principal post-leftists actually argue. There are no quotes here from Jason McQuinn, Bob Black, Lawrence Jarach, or even myself. Crimethinc really isn't a post-leftist project, so I don't understand the mention here of Crimethinc.
- This entry needs to untangle itself from Murray Bookchin, whose book that is cited here really wasn't about post-leftism. Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism was mainly a response by Bookchin to his critics and his former comrades. It also continued his criticism of the radical ecology and deep ecology movements. Black's book in response to Bookchin was a response to Bookchin's career of trying to maintain ties between leftism and anarchism.
- This entry should explain that post-leftism is a 'critique of leftism, not a movement. Post-leftists are not trying to get people to join a new movement or a new form of anarchism.
Misconceptions
- This entry repeats sectarian nonsense about post-leftism being in bed with primitivism. Primitivism and post-leftism are two different things. Most post-leftists are on record as NOT being primitivists. I consider myself a post-leftist and I'm an IWW member. Does that tie together the IWW and post-leftism? No, of course not. This entry should represent what post-leftism is as articulated by its proponents. The disinformation about links to primitivism have no place in this entry.
