I have recently stumbled into a few videos online with pro-capitalist arguments, decrying socialist ideas and encouraging free markets to take full form. The one thing I have found listening to them, whether their arguments have any legitimate points within, is their selective examples and, at times, complete disfiguration of facts. One such video was an argument about why socialism did not work by a man (who I know nothing about beyond this) called Daniel Hannan. I haven’t written in a while, so what better way to get back into it than by questioning this random guy’s points?
Continue reading “David Hannan’s Arguments Against Socialism”
The more varying anarchist literature and essays I read (which is, admittedly, not even that much overall), the more I realise that, beyond the central theme of “opposing” all forms of authority and hierarchy, anarchism only has one other uniting feature – it can’t really decide or agree on much more than that. One such field is that of technology, with anarcho-primitivists and crypto-anarchists essentially being on opposite ends of that particular spectrum.
Continue reading “Anarchism and the Neutrality of Technology”
When I refer to the language used in academic circles as a “barrier”, I don’t intend it to be entirely negative. As someone who has graduated from university and has taken an avid interest in probably too many topics beyond my formal studies, I have no trouble understanding the complexity that oft times permeates academic prose, and I am somewhat exaggerating my point by throwing some relatively mild examples right here because I am guilty of the same. But another may read the same text and be overwhelmed by it, which is problematic when the ideas you are expressing are of great import to the wider populace.
Continue reading “The Language of Academia as A Barrier”
Admittedly, I thought I had read more books than the ones on this list, but alas it is much smaller than anticipated when I compiled it. I wasn’t expecting anything huge, and 16 books is still a reasonable feat, in my view, but I can’t help but feel a tinge of disappointment that I didn’t get through more. I would, however, suggest that finishing university and keeping up with news events and analysis probably makes up for that. Nevertheless, these are the books I read this past year, with a few thoughts looking back on them and links to piece that refer to them.
Continue reading “My 2019 Reading List”
Whenever the word radical is used in any context, it almost always has a relatively negative overtone. The word, like many in political discourse, arguably has no legitimate definition anymore. Synonymous with disorder, dramatic change, intense, etc. we allocate it to people and events that don’t fit the current norm. I contend that it should be the opposite, and that what we have considered the “norm” throughout time is what’s really been radical.
Continue reading “Rethinking the Definition of Radical”
One of the few things I’m currently in uncertain disagreement with regarding anarchism is the idea of private property. In many cases, it is quite simple, but in others, like housing, and data, there are some discrepancies that it would be wrong to not address. Seeing as I have probably written more about anarchism in the past few days than I have since I started the site, now seems to be a good time to discuss them.
Continue reading “Private Property: Housing”
I finished two books today. The first was The ABC of Anarchism by Alexander Berkman, which I’ve referenced in a few of my recent posts – well worth reading if you want to understand anarchist (specifically communist anarchism) ideas. The second, which was half the size and a much quicker read – hence finishing it within a few hours of the day – was Why I Am Not A Feminist: A Feminist Manifesto by Jessa Crispin. The title intrigued me, and rightfully so – it was also fascinating, although I admit it threw me in the deep end on feminist writing and thought. Both books had some rather similar suggestions and themes, which I thought were worth discussing.
Continue reading “Free Speech, Understanding, and Growth: Anarchism and Feminism”
I have slowly been reading through Alexander Berkman’s The ABC of Anarchism and it’s been quite interesting thus far. Reading the chapter on the reformer and politician, however, I come across one of the few disagreements with his ideas. It’s a relatively small point, but he condemns the reformer for essentially not being radical enough, suggesting that only major movements or revolution could make the necessary changes. I do agree, to an extent, but reforms shouldn’t be so easily dismissed.
Continue reading “In Defence of Reforms”
I’ve recently started reading The ABC of Anarchism (originally Now and After and What Is Communist Anarchism) by Alexander Berkman, and while a lot of the references made do show the age of the book, published in 1929, there are still many relevant observations and similarities to the modern age. The main one, with its many facets, is that capitalism hasn’t really changed much over the years, other than finding more efficient methods of concentrating even more wealth into fewer hands.
Continue reading “Capitalism Hasn’t Changed”
The word anarchy, like a lot of words, has multiple meanings, some of them complete opposites. Chaos and disorder were the definitions of anarchy I grew up with, and was a word I always thought sounded cool for fantasy stories – the climactic, often violent scenes that defined the story as the protagonist(s) world (literally or figuratively) was thrown into disarray. It’s been used to define warzones and protests, a single word that carries a lot of weight. But as someone interested in anarchist ideas – the sort of anarchist ideas that preceded the chaos definition – I see very little to support people painting it as synonymous with violence.
Continue reading “Anarchism and Violence”