What Liberals Could Learn From Anarchists

otherlander

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jan-08-09 01:44 PM
Original message

What Liberals Could Learn From Anarchists

I was hesitant to post this thread because I worried that, if it did not sink like a stone, it would turn into another cycle of endless infighting. And that's the first thing I want to talk about. It seems that every time two of you liberals have a disagreement, it becomes a vicious fight.

(And I say "you liberals," when I am among liberals, but it is also "you anarchists" when I am among anarchists, and "you pacifists" when I am among pacifists. The only group with which I allow "you" and "me" to become "Us" is Madwomen. We Madwomen are a proud tribe.)

Now, sometimes I spend time with liberals, and sometimes I spend time with anarchists. Some circles of anarchists get infiltrated by police, and others seem to fill up with bored people who want to destroy things but have no real interest in contributing anything useful. But the anarchist circles I spend time in tend not to attract those types. There's less infighting among my anarchist friends than there is among the liberals I know, even though anarchists, almost by definition, are more anti-authoritarian. I think it is because capitalism is a system of competition, which liberals seek to reform, and anarchists seek to abolish entirely and replace with a system of peer-to-peer cooperation. So here's a question for you: Are you, liberals, simply working together for political causes, or are you on the same side as human beings? The anarchists definitley believe that they are on the same side as human beings. They consider each other comrades. If I called one of you my comrade, you would probably laugh at me, not trying to be mean, but assuming that it was a joke. Well, it's not. The anarchists I know discuss their disagreements more civily, because they assume that ultimatley, they are on the same side of some greater struggle. It might benefit you to do the same.

Another thing: I've heard liberals say, "We were going to have a rally but we couldn't get a permit." Anarchists say, "We knew we were going to get rubber bullets shot at us but we decided to have a protest anyway." I don't say that you should imitate their property-destruction tactics, but non-violently facing down hostile authorities is an admirable thing to do.

And among liberals, I have talked about our personal lives, and I have talked about global politics. Among anarchists, I have talked about underlying philosophies that connect the two. A benefit of this more holistic approach to world events: the poverty of some, the comfortable alienation of others- is that, in discussions of how we can most effectivley help each other, differences in privelege must be acknowledged. When someone brings up the effects of racism, they are taken seriously, and there is talk about how we can be good allies against a biased system. There is no cry of, "Shut up! You're being divisive!"

Now, if you're still reading this, thank you for not responding angrilly to the title alone without considering the rest of the post. I don't want you to get the wrong idea. I don't want you to think that this should be a simple, one-way change. I also think that anarchists could learn a few things from pacifists, about teaching ordinary people how to use their own power, rather than just resisting the "Powerful Few". And I think that the pacifists who I spend time with, mostly Christians, could learn a few things from atheists. And what if the gay-rights movement could learn the community organizing skills of housing rights activists? And what if all the organizations of the homeless suddenly took up the anti-disablist movement's slogan of, "NOTHING ABOUT US WITHOUT US!"? See, I'm no Buddhist, but I do think that we really need to awaken from the illusion of our seperateness.