anti-reformism, hypocrisy & Nirvana fallacies

[highervis]

There are documented examples of how they prey on minorities, are frequently run by pedophiles and consist of a large amount of pedophiles, run child sex slave rings, etc. unimaginably horrible stuff under the guise of a supposed social safety-net.

[highervis]

What you might be overlooking though is that state so-called welfare can be predatory and detrimental to poor and working people not just beneficial. A big example which is rarely discussed on the left (as far as I know) is the CPS (Child Protective Service).

[TasinAkiwo]

I have been struggling with a good solution to problems like these. For instance on healthcare, I think that state healthcare is the best thing we are going to get right now, but how do I advocate state healthcare without throwing my lot in with some party or representative? How do we deal with finding solutions to problems today without losing ground on the long term struggle? And as you said, new problems arise, I can already see people blaming migrants for problems with universal healthcare.

[blahblahblah8183]

do anarchists, etc. oppose "state" policies like welfare, food stamps, decent housing? how bout taxes, which fund such services?

[IamMrAwesome]

@blahblahblah

We oppose the means of how they operate, but not the socialist idea that people are entitled to such things.

Instead of thinking "Well, the poor need some help, so lets give them food stamps." we think, "Well, why are people poor? What can be done to fix it?" and instead of giving them food stamps, we offer them the ability to collectively work together to produce food for the community.

Obviously the same does not apply to other programs, but the idea is simple.

...Continued...

[IamMrAwesome]

...Continued....

If you want better roads, organize and fix them.

Taxes are only needed because capitalism perpetuates the idea that people need incentive to work, and that cash is the only incentive people want.

[thorsmitersaw]

"Fuck off idiot", nice rebuttal. I am not about joining a class of parasites. And if your solution to duty to a certain class is to make EVERYONE subject ot ALL others, make EVERYONE duty bound to all other men, then you do not preach abolitionism... you preach slavery being made universal.

[TasinAkiwo]

Your right to swing your fist stops at another man's nose. Is this slavery? Or do you agree that you don't have the right to cause harm to someone else just because you have the ability or desire to?

Capitalism is nothing more than thieves and parasites at the top leeching the wealth of society from those who actually do the work necessary for society to operate. A system in which this does not happen isn't slavery, but the utmost amount of freedom.

[thorsmitersaw]

I never made a statement that claimed I have a right to harm others.

How do you define capitalism? You do realize that like socialism, it has about a billion freaking definitions, some thicker than others, right?

If by capitalism you mean a political system in which wealth is aggregated to a few through state violence then yes I am opposed to capitalism as anyone else.

[TasinAkiwo]

That is an inherent part of capitalism but it is not the only part I am opposed to. I am opposed to the qualitative difference in power between the capitalist class and the working class, which manifests itself most obviously in the hierarchy of the capitalist enterprise. Another way to say this is that I am opposed to the idea that one has to sell ones life to another in order to survive. Capitalists are no more necessary to run society than a tape worm is to run your digestive system.

[thorsmitersaw]

The immense bargaining power that many capital owners have is derived through state erected barriers to others obtaining the same capital in any manner. It creates an artificial oligopoly condition.

I do not oppose a man performing labor for another in exchange for items or services but I am opposed to the fact that all alternatives are restricted or explicitly illegal. And the 'oligoposony' conditions Brad Spangler has discussed before.

[TasinAkiwo]

Still doesn't deal with the qualitative difference in power.

Also, you are right about capitalists deriving their power from the state. Tell me though, has there ever been a time in history in which capitalists have not used the state to maintain their oligarchy? Capitalism and the state are inseparable. In order to kill one you have to kill both.

[thorsmitersaw]

"qualitative difference in power" - elaborate

How can you tell me this: "you are right about capitalists deriving their power from the state" and then follow it with this: "a time in history in which capitalists have not used the state to maintain their oligarchy?" and then declare holders of capital (a form of property whose distinction is shaky at best) must die? By your words the state is what must be destroyed, if you truly believe that it is the medium which they obtain abusive power

[thorsmitersaw]

Not that i am apologizing for many cpaital owners who utilize state vilence to acheive their ends. But the position is illogical. Anyone who utilizes state (or other) violence to achieve their ends in this manner is guilty of extortion.

[TasinAkiwo]

1st: I never said capitalists must die, but that capitalism must die.

2nd: Yes, I do think that the state must be destroyed. My argument is that if one destroys the state but keeps the capitalist economic structure, or the reverse, one will inevitably end up with the other re-emerging.

[thorsmitersaw]

this is ludicrous. when will you admit you have no love for the man but see him as a weight upon your great utilitarian scale to be pushed aside shot murdered or otherwise enslaved in order to achieve your horrible equality

[Rockerboy2007]

What if reforms are not going to be implemented ever again by the capitalists today or in the future? They have learned their lesson of the 20th century reforms that reduced their profits and gave workers rights. So I don't think they are ever going to fall into the same trap again. So reformism though it may have worked in the past, is not going to work now because times have changed. The only solution is to replace the demolish the current system completely

[KenCat1337]

Viva la evolucion. ;]

[thorsmitersaw]

viva la set-anarchim-back-200years-thr­ough-reformist-bullshit

[23discordians]

I am a communist, I oppose force

[vdmerwe]

I am a communist, I'm an idiot.

[Rockerboy2007]

I am a communist, I am a forced wage slave

[brainpolice2]

Ben is correct. The problem is that you're not actually reducing anything, you're feeding the beast.

[Irtidad]

Well, I don't think anarchists should oppose reforms, but at the same time I don't think it should be the focus of anarchist activity. Building new institutions is what distinguishes anarchists from other leftist social movements.

[deliciousmorton]

nice vid.

[Konradwhite34]

Do you need a LAW to think???? Please dont be so STUPID???

I WOULD BE SILENT RIGHT NOW IF I WHERE IN YOUR SHOES!!!!

I WILL NOT SAY THIS AGAIN!!!!!!!

KONRAD

[NewTet]

The above quote is preceded by the following observation:

"They [the workers] ought, therefore, not to be exclusively absorbed in these unavoidable guerilla fights incessantly springing up from the never ceasing encroachments of capital or changes of the market." --K.Marx in "Value, Price and Profit" (1865).

[NewTet]

In re. 1:18 I often like to quote the following:

"They [the workers] ought to understand that, with all the miseries it imposes upon them, the present system simultaneously engenders the material conditions and the social forms necessary for an economical reconstruction of society. Instead of the conservative motto, 'A fair day's wage for a fair day's work!' they ought to inscribe on their banner the revolutionary watchword, 'Abolition of the wages system!'" --K.Marx, 1865

[CapitalistsEatBabies]

One reform that I could get behind would be what I call "socialism for needs; capitalism for wants." The commodification of things like land, water, food, housing, health care, etc., is not only shameful, it is also inefficient.

Since capitalism isn't going anywhere as long as capitalists have a state to protect it, we could at least shame them into limiting themselves to non-essential consumer goods and letting the people control the necessities of life. That's how reforms are won: by shaming.

[mr1001nights]

That's like saying "you'll be wage slavery-corporate capitalism supporter burdening us all unless you stop consuming products in our capitalist system, or accepting ur paycheck from capitalists"

Furthermore, someone in this context could ask you "how can you demand that taxation that relieves wage slavery be eliminated when you yourself contribute to this wage slavery?"

You miss the limited nature of our choices. We must often choose between the lesser of 2 evils.

[jackriter]

We shouldn't oppose reforms, but we should not participate in movements for simple reforms.

[JTravisRolko]

And to those who support democracy, yet oppose the state: democracy eats the state from the inside out.

[JTravisRolko]

Furthermore, we don't even know how anarchistic our ends can be since we've never experienced anything like anarchy on a large scale. So identical means and ends are impossible.

And when anti-reform anarchists say "only stray from principles for what you NEED", the word "need", to me, includes democracy, health care, ending war, regulations on the market, etc.

[kathleenlotus]

the state has purposly seperated our control over health, food and helping each other, it has seperated us from our fellow people and disempowered us. I think we need to gradually take back control of our health and have community lead hospitals and grow are own food. Im sure the way forward is to take a proactive but gradual (sneaky) approach. Thanks for another fab video !!

[JTravisRolko]

Both Lenin and Emma Goldman had stateless, socialist intent, yet went about it in roughly opposite ways. We should definitely hold identical means and ends to be ideal, but to strictly follow that priniciple would be suicide. You couldn't walk on state-owned sidewalks, you couldn't rent or buy from any capitalist - not food, shelter, health care, etc., you couldn't even live in a co-op if you thought it was the slightest bit unfair. It's a fucking childish position.

[abortabraham]

Its tough for me to take the reformist stance on anything, its like giving someone candy then trying to explain to them that the person who gave them candy is actually bad even though you voted for him, it just digs the hole deeper. As far as things like youtube and milking the current system, obviously we don't have much of a choice if we want to reach people. Utilizing "free" services is a balancing act, my presence here doesn't legitimize youtube, but that can't be said for systems of change.

[abortabraham]

The risk you run for voting on "socialist reforms" is that socialism will take the fall for capitalist shortcomings, and the clock get rewound on the American experiment. I've considered voting for pro-capitalist Christian conservative republicans, maybe Palin, just so capitalism can fail harder. Not really, but you get the point. Austrians are blaming socialism/government, 'real' anarchists are blaming capitalism, I have to side with those who say "let capitalism faceplant". Reform is tempting.

[Chomskyan]

Well said, Jonathan.

Just like to add though, I just don't see why it has to be a choice BETWEEN reform and building alternatives, when we are perfectly capable of doing BOTH at the SAME time, in a perfectly consistent manner.

[vdmerwe]

in my experiences, there are two images which help understand the anti-reformist and reformist sides.

chomsky compares the state to a cage; but argues that no-one would remove the cage from a nation if there was a siberian tiger pacing around outside.

[vdmerwe]

ow, i've also heard the allegory of the state and a dog-owner or work-master. everytime we somehow encourage it to do something for us - perhaps pass pro-union legislation or legalize gay marriage - we are not only legitimising our own submission, but it means that the state now has a percievedd high-ground, and we have a debt to them.

[JTravisRolko]

"we are not only legitimising our own submission, but it means that the state now has a percievedd high-ground, and we have a debt to them."

In my time arguing with anti-reform anarchists, this is one thing I still don't get. What do you mean by "legitimise"? Legitimise to who?

The state is torturing its population, but if its willing to give me things like money for college or health care, I'll take those things and fucking kill it with them.

[vdmerwe]

if the slave asks his owner for a raise its an acceptance of submission.

punch colonel crackah in the face and break your chains.

[JTravisRolko]

"its an acceptance of submission."

Why? To who? Not to me.

[vdmerwe]

This is not my own belief, understand, but if you look for instance at LaughingManOX's interviews with 1001, then you can see his effective fear of ever co-operating with the state system.

[thorsmitersaw]

Chomsky is turning you all into defacto minarchists. This sort of collusion and non opposition to utilizing state (criminal violence) is what grows its power and influence. It was a major reason for the seperation of american individualist anarhcism form european anarchism in the 19th century

[mr1001nights]

"u seem to have abstracted ur thinking away from real life examples&struggles. U use youtube, which is a corporation. Why? If youtube imposes some oppressive measure, the advocates of deregulated capitalism like u who always talk against corporations would certainly favor someone fighting against it, even though utube is a corporation and the framework is not ideal. As I said in the video, unless u suffer the consequences of antireformism, you don't have the moral authority to advocate it"

[vdmerwe]

Chomsky is not an anarchist. He's a pseudo-libertarian leftist. But you are wrong for implicating all european anarchists.

There are mutualists and syndicalists who remain completely opposed to reformism.

[thorsmitersaw]

Yea, I am probably generalizing/stereotyping.

[vdmerwe]

woooo first