2 Comments

My experience mirrors yours. I have considered myself an Anarchist since my teens in the '60s. I have been active most of my life organising, propagandising, direct action and being arrested many times for my troubles. In the past few years I have been called a bigot, a fascist and a nazi more times than I care to remember. Apparently adherence to objectivity, evidence and material reality are now reactionary. Last year at my local May Day march, in opposition to the plethora of Ukraine flags I carried a placard that said "No Ta NATO". I was told by a IWW member that I was a Putinist, others told me I was not welcome at the gathering. Opposition to war was not to be tolerated. I despair at the condition of a movement that I had so much hope for and invested so much time and emotion on.

Expand full comment

Could not agree more, with just about all you say here - ESPECIALLY the importance of flexibility in thought and the maturity to recognise that you (and I) do not have all the answers and may not get it all right.

I've never been in any "movement", but I have been increasingly interested in anarchism (agorism, voluntaryism) since about 2012. One of the reasons that I don't call myself an anarchist is because I don't like "isms". In my opinion any kind of rigidity of thought tends to lead to the type of tribalism that you describe (alternatively known as manipulation by divide and conquer tactics).

The most important and worrying of the topics you cover is WW3. A couple of TV-watching people have asked me recently, "Do you think we're going to be in World War 3 soon?" My reply is, "I'm not going to be in World War 3. We can all think for ourselves and we all have choices. If people choose not to fight, and not to follow a flag, World War 3 can't happen. Let the 'leaders' fight among themselves."

Expand full comment