Without the state

Buying green bananas

A great story from Ronni Bennett. I remember it from her fotolog site, but it is stil worth repeating.

Moving on...

The world you are in
The world you imagine
The world that is becoming.

You start from where you are, dream a bit, apply the dream to the present and watch the outcomes and keep correcting. You won't ever get exactly where you wanted to go, but it is the best you can possibly hope for.

From a comment on this post at Samizdata - which considering the usual drivel is remarkably sensible...

Doesn't it seem familar though?

we are forming the structure of the new society within the shell of the old.

- but I don't think the Wobblies would go down well on Samizdata do you?

 

Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism

A new blog from Kevin Carson looks interesting, with a refreshing take on the apologists for the corporate state living at the ASI and increasingly it seems at Samizdata. I've added a link to my blog roll under the Politics head.

More on Ayn Rand

From this at City Comforts and following the links trail back it seems that I was right in my characterisation of Randism (is that the right term?) here.

I remain suspicious of anyone who claims to have the one and only answer.

UPDATE: The Adam Smith Institute are holding a seminar on Ayn Rand, which prompts a nicely waspish comment. Take note of Mr Smithson Morton since I don't suppose you will be seeing his name at the ASI again.

Peter Kropotkin

I have always been interested in Peter Kropotkin. This is partly because I was always uneasy with the idea of the 'dicatatorship of the proletariat' (even in my days as a card carrying member of the 'loony left') but also because of the way in which his writing surfaced in unlikely areas, for example as an influence on Ebenezer Howard, the creator of the new towns movement and to a degree therefore on planning in general.

Planning in the UK has always been multi-dimensional. (Foley, D, 1960, 'British Town Planning: One Ideology or Three?',.British Journal of Sociology 11 (3) - not available on-line) It has never been the exclusive preserve of petty bureaucrats, (although they do exist) and has always included people with a strong utopian - in the best sense of the word - outlook. It probably isn't so strange therefore to see Kropotkin (via Fields Factories and Workshops and Mutual Aid) influencing the British planning system. (see here and here for print versions)

I have just got a copy of his collected pamphlets (published as Anarchism: a collection of revolutionary writings) and was very taken with this passage from The Spirit of Revolt which seemed to have strong resonances for today in both the UK and the US :

The machinery of government, entrusted with the maintenance of the existing order, continues to function, but at every turn of its deteriorated gears it slips and stops. Its working becomes more and more difficult, and the dissatisfaction ca\used by its defects grows continuously. Every day gives rise to a new demand. “Reform this,” “Reform that,” is heard from all sides. “War, finance, taxes, courts, police, everything must be remodelled, reorganised, established on a new basis,” say the reformers. And yet all know that it is impossible to make things over, to remodel anything at all because everything is interrelated; everything would have to be remade at once; and how can society be remodelled when it is divided into two openly hostile camps? To satisfy the discontented would be only to create new malcontents.

Incapable of undertaking reforms, since this would mean paving the way for revolution, and at the same time to impotent to be frankly reactionary, the governing bodies apply themselves to half measures which can satisfy nobody, and only cause new dissatisfaction. The mediocrities who, in such transition periods, undertake to steer the ship of State, think of but one thing: to enrich themselves against the coming debacle. Attacked from all sides they defend themselves awkwardly, they evade, they commit blunder upon blunder, and they soon succeed in cutting the last rope of salvation; they drown the prestige of the government in ridicule, caused by their own incapacity.(pp36-37)

Kropotkin was incidently the founder of the long standing anarchist newspaper Freedom.

Left libertarianism

It is a commonly asserted myth that left libertarianism is an oxymoron. Those who make such claims are however either ignorant of history or deliberately misleading their readers. This fudging is of course part of the same dishonourable tradition that uses terms like progressive, socialist and communist interchangeably. (For an analysis of one example look here )

As Colin Ward points out, the anarchist journal ‘Le Libertaire’ was founded in 1895, with anarchists using the term as a synomym for anarchism for over a century. It is not till the 1970s that the term was appropriated by the likes of Friedman and Nozick – largely it seems because of the connotations acquired by the term liberal in the US.

It is similarly false to argue, as Rand and others do, that American libertarianism is founded in an individualist, selfish ethic. There are countless examples to the contrary in The Voluntary City.

As Colin Ward puts it:

“The 19^th century American individualists were busy creating communes, cooperatives, alternative schools, local currencies and schemes for mutual banking. They were busy social inventors exploring the potential of autonomy, including women’s liberation and black equality.”

It may be that the dominant usage will remain that of the right, in which case those of us of other persuasions may have to find a new coinage. This would be a pity since, to quote Ward yet again:

“The American libertarians of the 20^th century are academics rather than social activists, and their inventiveness seems to be limited to providing an ideology for untrammelled market capitalism.”

To lose the link between activism and libertarianism would be to lose its core being, leaving it a cold abstract theory with little connection with the real world – something more and more apparent on the Adam Smith Institute Blog and Samizdata, where the ideology is becoming more important than the reality of the issue.

For more information on libertarianism of the left go to Mutualist.org

Mutualism

Mutualists, like other classical anarchists, originally considered themselves libertarian socialists. That is, they believed in the labor theory of value, and they believed that the laborer was entitled to the full product of his labor.

Some mutualists have abandoned the labor theory of value, and prefer to avoid the term "socialist." But they still retain some cultural attitudes, for the most part, that set them off from the libertarian right. Most of them view mutualism as an alternative to capitalism, and believe that capitalism as it exists is a statist system with exploitative features.

Many groups today share mutualist ideas, without embracing the full libertarian socialist heritage of classical anarchism. We welcome cooperation with all of them, where we share common goals, to reduce exploitation and centralization and increase freedom.

Right-libertarians and anarcho-capitalists, while arguably not part of the genuine historical tradition of anarchism, sometimes share mutualist ideas. Many of the more intellectually honest members of the libertarian right acknowledge the largely exploitative nature of the present capitalist system, and share the mutualist belief that its exploitative nature is the result of state intervention on behalf of capital and other privileged groups. We welcome cooperation with them also, where we have areas of agreement.

From the Mutualist FAQ

Logic and real life

In his day Enoch Powell was often lauded as highly logical, although the conclusions and the positions he took were often markedly at odds with reality. Logic is however a dangerous tool. The old acronym GIGO [Garbage in, garbage out) applies to its use every bit as much as to computer programming.

I was reminded of Powell when I read the rather nasty post by David Carr (on Samizdata.net) to which I have already made reference. There is the same rigorous progress to a logical conclusion from preposterous starting points. Powell was of course not always wrong, but his pursuit of logical rigour at the expense of rationality led him to some bizarre places.

Powell was not the first or the last politician to be caught between the concept and the act, the purity of the idea and the twist and turns of real life, but in his case the gift for abstraction was so advanced that the gap yawned wider than for most. This created in him a sense of danger, a tension that communicated which was more than his argument always did. As a speaker in the Commons he often seemed to deploy a fiercely private logic, yet his carefully articulated, pedantic performances could make irrelevance sound prophetic. Few could always remember what he said, but they were always impressed by the intensity with which he said it.
Norman Shrapnel

The comments on Carr's post are, with some exceptions, in the same vein but are worth reading nevertheless as a warning of that gap between 'the purity of the idea and real life'. (In a couple of cases the comments are so far adrift from reality that I wonder how the writers ever find their way to the front door.)

 

Life in Blogistan

It is very much easier to be intolerant, angry, jealous and resentful than it is to be generous, patient, kind and considerate. Without question it takes far more thought, and far more work, to treat others from the standpoint of these virtues than from that of those vices, which is why the latter are so prevalent.

A.C. Grayling
    --The Guardian    9 March, 2002

[via the Daily Philosophical Quotation list]

Gorillas hold 'wake' for group's leader.

Pro-hunt campaigners usually argue (those who don't hide behind the masquerade of pest control) that they have a right to hunt and any restriction is an infringement of their personal liberty. Implicit in that claim of course is the idea that animals cannot have rights, that they have no independent moral standing. To those people I simply say read this:

After Babs the gorilla died at age 30, keepers at Brookfield Zoo decided to allow surviving gorillas to mourn the most influential female in their social family.

A wonderful story by  Keith Laumer, puts a nice twist on this discussion - make sure you read right to the end.

[Gorillas via Rebecca's Pocket]