*(Bob Black: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Black )I originally was going to post a more specific thread concerning one of his essays, "Anarchism & Other Impediments To Anarchy" ( http://www.inspiracy.com/black/abolition/anarchism.html ), but figured this would be a better opportunity to post a more general thread of his works, & by proxy, Post-Left Anarchism ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-left_anarchy ).However, either or is fine by me; I was inspired to post this thread after reading the following penultimate paragraph of the aforementioned essay:
Anti-anarchists may well conclude that if there is to be hierarchy and coercion, let it be out in the open, clearly labeled as such. Unlike these pundits (the right-wing “libertarians,” the minarchists, for instance) I stubbornly persist in my opposition to the state. But not because, as anarchists so often thoughtlessly declaim, the state is not “necessary.” Ordinary people dismiss this anarchist assertion as ludicrous, and so they should. Obviously, in an industrialized class society like ours, the state is necessary. The point is that the state has created the conditions in which it is indeed necessary, by stripping individuals and face-to-face voluntary associations of their powers. More fundamentally, the state’s underpinnings (work, moralism, industrial technology, hierarchic organizations) are not necessary but rather antithetical to the satisfactions of real needs and desires. Unfortunately, most brands of anarchism endorse all these premises yet balk at their logical conclusion: the state.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
I kind of like industrial technology and hierarchical organizations, so count me out from abolition.
scineram: I kind of like industrial technology and hierarchical organizations, so count me out from abolition.
I am hoping in future works (or in works I have not yet read), he suggests alternatives to industrial technology & hirearchial organizations, as I felt he was a bit vauge in not providing said alterntatives (although, in the essay mentioned, this might've been a bit of a tangent to go through).
Hoping he is also finding alternatives to work, or does he expect anarchism to "rule" over the land of the dead?! this is purely non-sensical as an argument: how would work, industrial technology or (even) private hierarchic organisations entail the state??? all three are perfectly conceivable, and would most likely be present, in an anarcho-capitalist society...
Re/ moralism; it depends how you define the concept... if he conceives it as the state's imposition of its favourite set of moral values by means of law, sure - but that begs the question. In contrast, morality doesn't require the presence of a state but is rather undermined by it.
Nitroadict:Obviously, in an industrialized class society like ours, the state is necessary.
It's not that obvious to me. What does the state do for the industry? It doesn't create it, only interferes and taxes it.
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
M-la-maudite: Hoping he is also finding alternatives to work, or does he expect anarchism to "rule" over the land of the dead?! this is purely non-sensical as an argument: how would work, industrial technology or (even) private hierarchic organisations entail the state??? all three are perfectly conceivable, and would most likely be present, in an anarcho-capitalist society... Re/ moralism; it depends how you define the concept... if he conceives it as the state's imposition of its favourite set of moral values by means of law, sure - but that begs the question. In contrast, morality doesn't require the presence of a state but is rather undermined by it.
He addressed this an earlier, more well known article "The Abolition of Work" here: http://inspiracy.com/black/abolition/part1.html. A key thing to note (something I almost missed when I first read it), is that he does not advocate abolishing work in it's entirety, but converting what is typically done by work into more voluntary play.As for all three being perfectly coneivable in an anarcho-capitalist society (whatever that is; the term is muddled to me so you might want to define it here), it's not hard to see that Black might not agree with an "an-cap" society if he does not favor hierarchy, especially if he criticizes the invisible hirearchy that he percieves in the anarchism movement.
Natalie: Nitroadict:Obviously, in an industrialized class society like ours, the state is necessary. It's not that obvious to me. What does the state do for the industry? It doesn't create it, only interferes and taxes it.
I also think that statment is a little vauge, & could possibly hint at ideas Black may elabroate in future works. On one hand, I understand how The State most certaintly reinforces a class society, as a class society keeps the conflict view of society alive & well (you read more on that here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/barriers-broken.html ). As for what The State "does" for industry, this article better explains than I could: http://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/11/10/roderick-long/corporations-versus-the-market-or-whip-conflation-now/On the other hand, commerce & industry (of some form) would most certaintly need to happen even in a stateless society, so yea, I agree that it's not entirley obvious to me either.
I've read some work of this guy.He's pretty delusional.He accuses anyone who does not believe in his anarchism i.e. who does not oppose the rational human social concept called work , of being a supporter of the state .He calls work an institution(?!) He lumps Libertarians in with all the Randians ,reaganites and conservatives(see his piece The Libertarian as Conservative).He is rabid in his hatred of wage labour,hierarchy,Capitalism and many other rational things.He's essentially the most extremist version of what 'Left Libertarians' generally argue for.I don't think I can denounce him enough.
some quotes from The Libertarian as Conservative to give you a favour of his ideas :
"A libertarian is just a Republican who takes drugs. "
"Libertarians serve the state all the better because they declaim against it. At bottom, they want what it wants. But you can’t want what the state wants without wanting the state, for what the state wants is the conditions in which it flourishes. My (unfriendly) approach to modern society is to regard it as an integrated totality. Silly doctrinaire theories which regard the state as a parasitic excrescence on society cannot explain its centuries-long persistence, its ongoing encroachment upon what was previously market terrain, or its acceptance by the overwhelming majority of people including its demonstrable victims."
"To my mind a right-wing anarchist is just a minarchist who’d abolish the state to his own satisfaction by calling it something else. But this incestuous family squabble is no affair of mine. Both camps call for partial or complete privatization of state functions but neither questions the functions themselves. They don’t denounce what the state does, they just object to who’s doing it"
"If one looks at the world without prejudice but with an eye to maximizing freedom, the major coercive institution is not the state, it’s work".
"Rather, the factory is an instrument of social control, the most effective ever devised to enforce the class chasm between the few who “make decisions” and the many who “implement them.” Industrial technology is much more the product than the source of workplace totalitarianism. Thus the revolt against work — reflected in absenteeism, sabotage, turnover, embezzlement, wildcat strikes, and goldbricking — has far more liberatory promise than the machinations of “libertarian” politicos and propagandists."
"Most work serves the predatory purposes of commerce and coercion and can be abolished outright. The rest can be automated away and/or transformed — by the experts, the workers who do it — into creative, playlike pastimes whose variety and conviviality will make extrinsic inducements like the capitalist carrot and the Communist stick equally obsolete".
"Murray Rothbard thinks egalitarianism is a revolt against nature, but his day is 24 hours long, just like everybody else’s. If you spend most of your waking life taking orders or kissing ass, if you get habituated to hierarchy, you will become passive-aggressive, sado-masochistic, servile and stupefied, and you will carry that load into every aspect of the balance of your life.".
"Libertarians are conservatives because they avowedly want to maintain most of this mess and so unwittingly perpetuate the rest of the racket".
I would read more of his works to find more fool's gold but instead I'd rather re-arrange my socks....
I don't really want to comment or read anything here.I have near zero in common with many of you.I may return periodically when there's something you need to know.
Near Mutualist/Libertarian Socialist.
He's currently working on the coercive properties of gravity and death.
Z.
Obviously, in an industrialized class society like ours, the state is necessary.
That's a marxist point of view. In a class society, the state is necessary because it is a tool for the dominant class, the bourgeoisie, to dominate the the proletariat. Therefore, if classes disapear (ie. there's no more wage system, no private property etc.), the state will disapear. And if you want classes to disapear, you have to expropriate them and the proletariat has to control the means of production.
No, thanks, I'm not in favor of "post-left libertarianism" then.
On of my teacher of economics is a "post-left libertarian". He thinks society could work without "work", but with ""voluntary action"", and in his ideal society, we would live like our ancestors 5000 years ago (I think the name for this ideology is primitivism). There wouldn't be any private property and wages, but rather everyone would do what he wants, and working (hunting, preparing meals, fishing...) would look like leisure, that's why he says he's against work.
My teachers are completly nuts. (i'm in college, yeah)
Talk about necroposting... I almost didn't remember posting this.
He is a Manichean. Than again, I suppose most forms of political philosophy, particulary on the left (even so called nihilists) could be easily concived as some form of gnosticism.
I will admit to eventually forgetting much about Black's work, and probably not by coincidence I would disagree with most of it by now, but I always remembered his general view regarding the abolition of work having a good general point in terms of modifying what is usually denoted as work into play. I don't think this can be ignored given that the video game industry is now the most popular form of pastime (alongside the Internet / computing), has proven to be a "recession proof" industry, & the effects of social networking increasingly making life more and more resemble an RPG.