the three elements of anarchism

here are the three main elements which are involved in an anarchist revolution:

1. spreading ideas:
this includes online activism. it includes spreading ideas through websites like youtube and various forums (political and non-political). this requires for everyone to go from forum to forum and spread their ideas little by little. it's more than just going to a forum and posting a comment, it requires one to become active in each forum so one can have much influence.
this kind of activism also includes each person making connections with other anarchists over the web in order to create networks so it is easier to communicate and spread information.
another way to spread our ideas is through protests and pampflets. ever notice that every time you go to a protest you walk out with like 20 pampflets?
it's useful to create anarchist groups, like workers unions, syndicates, book stores (and other stores), etc., which work with an anarchic structure.

2. destruction of the system:
this is basically atacking the system in the most direct manner possible. one good example is the Battle of Seattle of 1999, in which banks and places like Old Navy, GAP, and starbucks were attacked. basically destruction of property. the current Greek riots are also great examples.
the destruction of small shops is useless and kind of goes against the anarchist principle. their private property is legitimate because it is not far from what one would call possesions. as soon as the general change in consciousness starts, these small shops would take up an anarchist way of handling things. attacking small shops takes our attanetion and evergy away, which should be used against the real enemy; the large corporations and the state.

3. the creation of a new system:
this consists of taking over the workplace, the factories, hospotals, schools, univercities and libraries. small shops would also tend to be run anarchically as consciousness shifts. private property must belong to those who use it. this is simmilar to what happened in Spain in the 30s.
the students must democratize schools and universities. participatory democracy must rule education. we want to go to school to learn, not so they can control us. we should chose our teachers and pay them ourselves with the money which would be used to pay taxes.
we must also help those who come out of bad economic conditions to get education. the students must form groups which dedicate themselves in teaching and learning. our knowledge dictates our future, so knowledge is very important.
factories must be controlled by the workers. the workers produce the goods so they should be the ones who own them. they should run the workplace democratically. same with stores.
we must occupy abandoned buildings and make use of them. we must use them for housing and for production. no one should eb left without a home, since there are more than enough homes for everyone.

these three elements pertain to the first stage of anarchism, which consists in creating consciousness and destroying the chains of history, class difference, culture, religion, etc.
after the first stage, whcih could last a whole generation, there will start the second stage, in which anarchist ideas would come into practice. here some places would addopt anarcho-communism, some anarcho-syndicalism, some anarcho-capitalism, mutualism, etc.
the third stage would follow the second stage, and here these ideas would become more complex and come to some kind fo synthesis.

Their should be a strong emphasis on activism NOT online, and not conventional activism either. Something UNIQUE and DIFFERENT, en mass or by yourself, as long as it gets the message across.



"the destruction of small shops is useless and kind of goes against the anarchist principle. their private property is legitimate because it is not far from what one would call possesions."

I believe the destruction of small (local, independent, etc) shops is wrong as well, but no private property is legitimate. I just don't want a working family to suffer the damage that an exploitative corporation deserves.



"private property must belong to those who use it"

True. But therefore, ceasing to be private property.



"the students must democratize schools and universities. participatory democracy must rule education. we want to go to school to learn, not so they can control us. we should chose our teachers and pay them ourselves with the money which would be used to pay taxes."

This is VERY important. I see this happening more and more, and it recently happened with a school near Solpacvoicis (Christopher) and I. However, I don't believe in choosing our teachers (that's like choosing your masters, your presidents). You should not have to PAY to LEARN, either directly (as you noted) or indirectly (taxes). Upattinas (I might go here) and the Massachusetts Free School (Solpacvoicis/Chris goes there) are democratic schools -- no direct teachers, for all people are natural learners. Also, look up unschooling (revolutionary schooling).



"we must occupy abandoned buildings and make use of them. we must use them for housing and for production. no one should be left without a home, since there are more than enough homes for everyone."

This doesn't necessarily have to be in section 3, you can do this NOW. My radical friends and I do this all the time, it's called squatting -- we might set up a free store out of an abandoned warehouse.



"here some places would adopt anarcho-communism, some anarcho-syndicalism, some anarcho-capitalism, mutualism, etc."

Mutualism (market socialism, a form of anarchism) is fine by me if people REALLY do want to buy things even though I'm not an individualist. But "Anarcho" Capitalism!? Are you serious?!



lol All and all, I liked this post.. But anarcho capitalism!? Capitalism!? lol

i think all of these three elements should be practiced together as intensely as possible. you should practice online anarchism as well as offline anarchism, and you should destroy the system as much as create a new one.
private property is legitimate as long as it doesnt create alienation. as long as the people really feel that they are chosing to work where they work because they want to work there (not just for money), it's fine. the problem is when people start to lose motivation or when they give in the a master. it's all about maintaining consciousness. it is true that a democratic workplace creates more consciousness than one in which someone runs the shop. usually though, stores would tend to be democratic during the first phase of anarchism.

i guess you are right about schools, although i do think that teachers are important. you can have a teacher or two inside a class and still have a democratic workplace. you could have a debate and get someone who knows a lot about the topic to enter the debate. at first, during the first phase of anarchism, i think this kind of democratic schooling would be predominant. i think people would have a democratic class and they would get people who know a lot about the topic to help out introduce ideas. these people could do it for free, who knows. they might be the parents of the students who go to class from time to time and teach.
these days though, with the internet, learning is quite easy.
now that i think about it, this kid of education might remain after the first phase of anarchism.
i found a wiki article. i will post it here for other people to read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_school

about squatting, there's an anarchist chinese restaurant very near my house. it's like a 10 minute walk. i have no clue when it's open though. who knows if it still functions, but it has an anarchist wildcat painted at the front.

and yes, in the end some places would addopt a capitalist system, maybe. i dont know if this would actually be in phase one of phase three, but i see it happeneing. eventually people would ask for technological progress, which can ether be managed by the state or by an association of markets.
i dont think it would be dangerous though, not with the huge shift in consciousness that would occur. people would grow up in an anarchist society, and they would have this anarcho-skinhead attitude. "how much money does the boss of this corporation make". "i dunno man, like $1000 an hour". "fucking shit, lets beat em up".

but seriously now, i will do some further research on the whole democratic schools thing, im very interested. i will try to talk to my friends about it and see what they think, maybe we can incorporate this at our school, which is already small and relatively democratic. these people are all reds, so who knows.

"you should practice online anarchism as well as offline anarchism, and you should destroy the system as much as create a new one."

I entirely agree.



"private property is legitimate as long as it doesnt create alienation. as long as the people really feel that they are chosing to work where they work because they want to work there (not just for money), it's fine."

There are a few people with jobs working for private corporations who aren't exactly "alienated", it doesn't mean that hoarding property that should belong to all of us is legitimate.



"it's all about maintaining consciousness."

lol




"usually though, stores would tend to be democratic during the first phase of anarchism."

Usually? When has this happened? lol
The few times that this has happened in large scale, it "usually" stayed democratic and not top-down dictatorships.



"i found a wiki article. i will post it here for other people to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_school"

Yeah, Christopher goes to a free school. My friends and I are creating a free school resource center (for unschoolers).



"and yes, in the end some places would addopt a capitalist system, maybe. i dont know if this would actually be in phase one of phase three, but i see it happeneing."

First of all, I really don't think anarchism will come in three "phases" like a robotic program or a government plan to bomb a country.. lol Secondly, areas that adopted capitalist systems would be directly AGAINST anarchist philosophy, so I don't see how it fits into your "anarchist phases"?



"eventually people would ask for technological progress, which can ether be managed by the state or by an association of markets."
I always want technological progress, I don't need a top-down dictatorship and private property to get it.



"people would grow up in an anarchist society, and they would have this anarcho-skinhead attitude. "how much money does the boss of this corporation make". "i dunno man, like $1000 an hour". "fucking shit, lets beat em up"

First of all, there are no bosses in an anarchist society. Second of all, they would most likely NOT have this "anarcho-skinhead attitude" (my friend's a skinhead, there's no such thing). There wouldn't be corporations, there wouldn't be bosses (and many say that money would be abolished in the longrun). I always considered the anarchist's "consciousness" that you speak of MUCH different than "fucking shit, I dunno like let's beat em up". Anarchism is a philosophy of sharing, love, life and liberation.



And yes, democratic schools are very good but they tend to be private schools that are expensive (and private, ha). Free schools are truly free (like how they should be) and democratic. They do have staff, but the teachers are not "voted in" and compulsory. I might go to the Upattinas school which is a democratic school if I get financial aid. My friends and I may set one up in Philly, NJ, NY or DC with a free store

"There are a few people with jobs working for private corporations who aren't exactly "alienated", it doesn't mean that hoarding property that should belong to all of us is legitimate. "

well, i guess in the end, if you look at it very deeply, private property is illegitimate. morally, it is wrong, but what can you do so it works? i mean, private property can offer a great deal of technological progress as we have seen. i dont know if collective property can do this. a collective society is probably more beneficial if it is built on certain ideas like buddhism or philosophy in general. this is a very conservative idea, and i dont know how much societies will achieve this. for example, if you have a collectivist society which is made of fundamentalist christians, it will definately not be benefitial. if it is built on theravada buddhism, i think it will be most beneficial, since theravada buddhism is a philosophy which involves questioning more than faith. this kidn of philosphy gets rid of ignorance, which fundamentalist christians create ignorance.
although both theravada buddhism and fundamentalist christianity are conservative, theravada buddhism is a kind of conservative which allows for people to question and debate, which christianity doesnt.

"First of all, there are no bosses in an anarchist society. Second of all, they would most likely NOT have this "anarcho-skinhead attitude" (my friend's a skinhead, there's no such thing). There wouldn't be corporations, there wouldn't be bosses (and many say that money would be abolished in the longrun). I always considered the anarchist's "consciousness" that you speak of MUCH different than "fucking shit, I dunno like let's beat em up". Anarchism is a philosophy of sharing, love, life and liberation. "

you have to understand that there isnt a definate anarchism. there are levels of it. something can be more anarchistic or less anarchistic. there will be some inequalities i think. it's inevitable. not all societies will adopt anarchism.
anarchist consciousness is kind of like i described it in a way, at least towards authority. if someone has a lot fo power, i think it's legitimate to overthrow him. of cousre people woudln't have that attitude towards their fellow workers.

god0fmusic wrote:

well, i guess in the end, if you look at it very deeply, private property is illegitimate. morally, it is wrong, but what can you do so it works? i mean, private property can offer a great deal of technological progress as we have seen. i dont know if collective property can do this. a collective society is probably more beneficial if it is built on certain ideas like buddhism or philosophy in general. this is a very conservative idea, and i dont know how much societies will achieve this. for example, if you have a collectivist society which is made of fundamentalist christians, it will definately not be benefitial. if it is built on theravada buddhism, i think it will be most beneficial, since theravada buddhism is a philosophy which involves questioning more than faith. this kidn of philosphy gets rid of ignorance, which fundamentalist christians create ignorance.
although both theravada buddhism and fundamentalist christianity are conservative, theravada buddhism is a kind of conservative which allows for people to question and debate, which christianity doesnt.

If you say "it will always exist", it will -- if black men and women said "oh, we'd never be free" before the civil rights movements, they'd never be free. Whether or not you incorporate religion into collective property isn't a factor, and shared property can offer a "great deal of technological progress" as well..

Just because we've progressed with private property, it doesn't mean it's private property that's causing the progression.. You can progress in a JAIL CELL -- let's not give credit to what you progressed in.

god0fmusic wrote:

you have to understand that there isnt a definate anarchism. there are levels of it. something can be more anarchistic or less anarchistic. there will be some inequalities i think. it's inevitable. not all societies will adopt anarchism.
anarchist consciousness is kind of like i described it in a way, at least towards authority. if someone has a lot fo power, i think it's legitimate to overthrow him. of cousre people woudln't have that attitude towards their fellow workers.

Don't put hierarchy/levels/phases into anarchism. Again, if you say inequality is inevitable it WILL be. And no, anarchists should never sound unintelligent, eve towards authority.

actually what you say is pretty much true, so it's useless arguing against it.

i think i've reached the point where i need to go back to my studies, lol.