My "elaborate nonsense" video was basically poking fun at postmodernism in an obscure way.

I don't have a particular interest in postmodernism. In fact, I'm fairly critical of it. But I'm also curious about it and would not want to condemn it in whole due to my own ignorance of it.

What's with the sudden interest in Post Modernism?

Historically inaccurate*

Still, the vulgar social anarchists need to break out of their little bubble and come to a healthier "middle ground" that isn't so dogmatically antagonistic towards individualism. As far as I can tell, the Alliance of the Libertarian Left is the only group that is significantly making progress in this area. People like JackRiter are a perfect example of "vulgar" social anarchism, pushing the notion that only anarcho-communists are true anarchists (which is simply historically accurate as well as ridiculously dogmatic), while one's own conception of anarcho-communism is patently apologetic for if not indistinguishable from Marxism/Leninism. These errors need correction.

At the same time, I believe that an unfortunate portion of the "social anarchist" movement, particularly in terms of the anarcho-communists, is pervaded by too much ignorance of advances that have been made in economics and contains its own "vulgar" tendencies in which naive reformism is supported and state-socialism is given a free pass on the grounds that it is a "lesser evil". However, the "social anarchists" generally at least have a social conscience, which I can't say for most "anarcho-capitalists", who seem to think that everything can be summed up with pithy sophisms about "the market" and then "damn social concerns to hell" from that point onwards.

I think that the Alliance of the Libertarian Left is a necessary defection from the mainstream libertarian movement that reclaims 19th century libertarian traditions and modernizes them to be relevant to the contemporary world. The mainstream libertarian movement (as well as large segments of "anarcho-capitalism") essentially IS the "libertarian right", sometimes implicitly and sometimes explicitly, and the "libertarian right" has alienated the masses from becoming libertarians due to its tendency towards elitist and classist sentiments, apologia for corporate capitalism, knee-jerk anti-leftism and its general lack of a social concience. I hate to see such a good movement that started in the 19th century be dissolved into a bunch of conservatives who only oppose the government in the sense that they see it as competition to their own prefered forms of authoritarianism.

Just so everyone knows this officially, lest they think that I'm still an "anarcho-capitalist": yes, at this I'm more or less a contemporary mutualist, squarely within the tradition of American individualist anarchism, and yes, I have strong sympathies with "social" anarchism on "cultural" issues (I.E. I'm in line with causes and sensibilities such as anti-racism and anti-patriarchy). My laundry list of "antis" extends well beyond "anti-statism", and I believe that "thick" cultural values make libertarianism more balanced and sensible. I believe that, to an large and unfortunate extent, the contemporary libertarian movement is a failure that has been taken over by conservatives (both economically and culturally), and this includes various elements or people within "anarcho-capitalism".

A subscription? I'm honored. I mostly do poetry, although I plan to expand and cast my hand at political vlogs. Regardless, thank you for the sub.

I find it oddly hilarious.