Nader, a FellowTraveler

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

: Nader, a FellowTraveler
by Sabri Oncu
03 April 2002 23:31 UTC

> Yes, Sabri,
>
> You make a good point to relate Nader to today's
> anarchists.

It was not my intention at all.

^^^^^^^

Charles: Well, I was trying to push the discussion in an interesting direction. I was just thinking the discussion was on how left is Nader, so in defining the left to include anarchists, there was a slight implication of a comparison of Nader with the left anarchists, but I didn't mean to impute you with that intent.

^^^^^^^


 Moreover, if the left anarchists
hear what you said and think that I did that, they would view
this socialist friend of theirs a traitor, something I am not.
They have resisted the Nader and Public Citizen-Mike Dolan entry
into , and their attempt to take ownership of, the movement
during the Battle of Seattle from day one and there after.
Apparently, you don't like the anarchists, at least, not as much
as I do. I guess I gave away my feelings toward Nader here but
hey!


^^^^^^^^

Charles: Yes, I guess some anarchists would be insulted to be compared to Nader.

On the general issue, the main point I made was that anarchists are left to the extent they are anarcho-syndicalists. There are a lot of types of anarchists, naturally,  because by definition anarchists oppose centralization of ideology.  The class basis for a lot of anarchism is a radical liberal ( sorry) theory of politics. The American Revolution's focus on liberty, sons of liberty and all that, had contingents of libertarian anarchists, who were radical liberals. That tradition persists in the U.S. today.   But even some "left" anarchists may be somewhat unaware (if they deny it) of ideological affinities with liberalism, i.e. the sovereignty of the individual , etc.  SDS had anarchist and radical liberal aspects to its theory.




> I would classify anarchists similarly to liberals.
> They are left to the extent that they are for socialism
> as an ultimate target.  There is rightwing anarchism
> in the form of libertarianism. However, as you say in
> the here and now, left anarchists are resisting globalized
> imperialism through protests in the imperial center.

I don't think this classification, that is, classifying them
similarly to liberals, is fair. Apparently, you don't know who
Ilan Shalif is because if you did, you wouldn't dare to make such
a classification. If he heard what you said, he would have killed
you here in the cyberspace : ) It is like classifying Louis
similarly to liberals. I cannot believe this.

^^^^^^^^^

CB: Louis has done research on anarchism. Maybe he will give you some of his analysis .

You seem to be ignoring that I said some anarchists are left . To the extent that they are for socialism. Is Ilan Shalif for socialism ?

There is a very wide variety of anarchists, stretching from left to somewhat right. That follows internal logic of anarchism as resistence to authority foremost and in the general. This becomes identical with the sovereignty of the individual in some ways and in that regard overlaps liberal philosophy , with its emphasis on the priority and sovereignty of the individual.  There are a limited number of "moves"on the ideological spectrem.

^^^^^^^

When I was in Turkey, I visited some friends one day. One of them
is the son of a Marxist-Leninist shoemaker, who himself used to
be a member of a "Stalinist" party. He also played a major role
in the organization of this so-called N30 march in Turkey. His
father, the Marxist-Leninist shoemaker, who is in his seventies,
lives with my friend. That day, we were praising our anarchists
friends for their contributions to the movement and a few minutes
after we started our praising, the father couldn't resist saying
this:

"They are serving the capitalists."

I guess this is an instict of some socialists. Luckily, his
formerly "Stalinist" son thinks differently.


Sabri

^^^^^^^

CB: Not just Stalin. Marx and Bakunin (sp)