Comments by "BlackFlagsNRoses" (@blackflagsnroses6013) on "Introduction to the History of Anarchism" video.

  1. Ruben Granz no it’s just an abstract philosophy. However Daoism indeed was an ancient belief that included anarchist principles. Ultimately one cannot have anarchy (absence of rulers) and monarchy (one ruler).
    6
  2. wyatt casper Godwin is accredited with being one of the first proponents of anarchist philosophy. Of course it wasn’t fully developed and is now known as philosophical anarchism. But to be fair Godwin argued for an early anarcho-collectivist or communist socioeconomic society and that as humanity becomes more learned and rationale the State shall wither away and be unnecessary. Godwin was one of the first proponents, and Proudhon gave a developed school and name to Anarchism.
    3
  3. Ain't no Slice not in practice. While the end result is Communism which is Stateless and egalitarian, they desire to get there by first consolidating political power by a proletariat control of the State. While this has developed into authoritarian regimes, there are also more decentralized and liberal forms of Marxism and State Socialism. In fact it seems Marx had no problem with a liberal worker’s democracy or republic as seen with his impressions of the Paris Commune. But at all times whether liberal or not the working class must maintain an authoritarian boot on the advocates of capitalism and exploiters of labor.
    3
  4. wyatt casper well one of Proudhon’s critics was an Anarcho-Communist Joseph DeJacque. He coined the term Libertarian while Proudhon coined Anarchism in its modern meaning. They were both libertarian socialists and anarchists with differing ideals on what constitutes an autonomous and egalitarian society. The communist thought communes and collective ownership were the way to go, Proudhon thought Mutualist markets. And true enough anarchist communism was a crude ideal and philosophical social science during this time, and it was Proudhon who would give greater influence and development to the fully realized schools that would become Anarcho Collectivism and Communism. They are all Anarchism and Libertarianism. This is where DeJacque disagreed with Proudhon though: In his polemic with Proudhon on women's emancipation, Déjacque urged Proudhon to push on 'as far as the abolition of the contract, the abolition not only of the sword and of capital, but of property and authority in all their forms,' and refuted the commercial and wages logic of the demand for a 'fair reward' for 'labour' (labour power). Déjacque asked: 'Am I thus... right to want, as with the system of contracts, to measure out to each — according to their accidental capacity to produce — what they are entitled to?' The answer given by Déjacque to this question is unambiguous: 'it is not the product of his or her labour that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature.' [...] For Déjacque, on the other hand, the communal state of affairs — the phalanstery 'without any hierarchy, without any authority' except that of the 'statistics book' — corresponded to 'natural exchange,' i.e. to the 'unlimited freedom of all production and consumption; the abolition of any sign of agricultural, individual, artistic or scientific property; the destruction of any individual holding of the products of work; the demonarchisation and the demonetarisation of manual and intellectual capital as well as capital in instruments, commerce and buildings." And while Collectivism surely isn’t Communism as it argues for the use of wages in labor notes, certain Anarcho-Collectivists say it’s a viable path towards Communism. And while different they are closely linked as it was Anarcho-Collectivists (itself influenced by Proudhon and Mutualism) who gave way towards and influenced Anarcho-Communism.
    1
  5. wyatt casper you seem to be too narrow in your anarchist ideals. I did not say Proudhon was a Free Market Anarchist, but a libertarian market socialist. Mutualism would sustain a market economy where labor would trade and exchange products and goods of reciprocal or equal value. And it is Mutualism that influenced Free Market Anarchists and Bukunin and Kropotkin and their respective schools. The difference between Mutualism and Free Market Anarchism is Mutualists emphasize worker associative organization and cooperative federations. The Market Anarchists don’t care whether someone joins an association or is independently self employed. While I did use wiki the passages I posted are real and available anywhere viable. I just chose the most convenient. The Anarcho-Communist ideals were in development in contemporary with Proudhon, as well as Marxism. Mutualism ultimately would help give form to proper Social Anarchist intellectual schools. And Godwin is recognized as a philosophical anarchist. Anarchism was an ideology that took several intellectual social sciences, philosophies, and figures to develop into Anarchism. Hence the several strains of Social and Individualist, Decentralized planning and Free Market all Libertarian Socialist. Proudhon developed the first proper school of Anarchism. But just as well ideals for the communist strain were in the air in contemporary with Proudhon. Even Marx, while not a Marxist, was a contemporary developing his ideals for a Communist society, which ultimately is defined as a stateless egalitarian society with common ownership of the means of production, even among the Marxists. Meaning the ideal of a Communist society was always stateless and therefore influential to the anti-Statist branch of socialism. Saying the philosophers that lead to Anarcho-Communism weren’t real anarchists is ignorant. You don’t get to discredit an entire school by dismissing it’s influence to the movement. Anarcho-Communism ultimately became the biggest strain of Anarchism. I don’t see the dogma in voluntary associations of communes collectively owning the means of production. It’s voluntary. I’m an Anarchist without hyphens so ultimately a libertarian world would see vast social experimentation of all the strains of Anarchism. Anarcho-Communists neighboring Collectivists, neighboring Mutualists, neighboring Free Market Anarchists etc... every autonomous society free to choose their way.
    1
  6. JC Rios well Anarchism is also known as libertarian socialism so... it’s always been the anti-authoritarian strain of socialism the difference is anarchists promote federations and confederations not of states but of decentralized worker’s syndicates or communes. It deals not in politics but in socioeconomics. The worker’s in direct ownership and industrial democracy from the bottom up and and elected delegates subject to immediate revocation. Whereas more Marxist forms are centralized powers and top-down bureaucracy. Though not all Marxism is socialism as there are also ideas of liberal worker’s republics and democracies.
    1