Comments for radicalarchives

Comment on Revolutionary Anarchist #3 (1973) by The Weekly Archive Worker: Zur Kritik des Schulsports « Entdinglichung

The Weekly Archive Worker: Zur Kritik des Schulsports « Entdinglichung — Thu, 10 May 2012 08:12:08 +0000

[...] Revolutionary Anarchist, Nr. 3 [...]

Comment on Buck-Morss on Adorno and the Spanish Civil War (1977) by Poumasticifation « Poumista

Poumasticifation « Poumista — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:37:30 +0000

[...] Adorno, Sidney Webb and Spain. The National Health Service: created by Bevan, killed by Cameron. Selma James at Occupy London. Interview with the Social Democrats, USA – Part 1 and Part 2. How the left turned against the Jews (including how Tony Cliff refused to fight fascism). When Bayard Rustin went abject. Greece and the heritage of 1821. Why default Stalinism is still a problem. Share this:EmailFacebookTwitterStumbleUponDiggRedditLinkedInPrintLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Published in: [...]

Comment on Spencer Sunshine: “Nietzsche and the Anarchists” (2005) by Anarchy and Posthumanism Part 2: The Anarchist as Ubermensch « Nth Mind

Anarchy and Posthumanism Part 2: The Anarchist as Ubermensch « Nth Mind — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 12:40:33 +0000

[...] a critical/philosophical position arguably finds its first full bloom in the ideas of Nietzsche. As Spencer Sunshine has [...]

Comment on Buck-Morss on Adorno and the Spanish Civil War (1977) by radicalarchives

radicalarchives — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:13:37 +0000

no, it refers to Adorno. you can find the page on googlebooks if you want to read the whole passage in context: http://books.google.com/books?id=6AHWwhfIlHcC&q=spanish+civil+war#v=snippet&q=spanish%20civil%20war&f=false

Comment on Buck-Morss on Adorno and the Spanish Civil War (1977) by Poumista

Poumista — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:09:22 +0000

Is the “he” here Sidney Webb?

Comment on Murray Bookchin: anarchism is “simply not a social theory” (2002) by Robert Graham

Robert Graham — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 04:54:13 +0000

Sorry, but it’s Bookchin who conflated the two, in the very quote set forth above, when he writes that anarchists are “individualists whose concepts of autonomy originate in a strong commitment to personal liberty,” which is to say that anarchists are extreme liberals (although it wasn’t Bookchin who described anarchism as “liberalism gone mad”). Bookchin then takes a leap, claiming that anarchist/liberal notions of autonomy lead to “a radical celebration of Nietzsche’s all-absorbing will.” In other words, anarchism/liberalism = Nietzschean individualism (Bookchin’s formulation, not mine). Anyone who has read Bakunin would see that he developed a critique of Kantian liberalism, which he argued was based on abstract notions of the self and individual autonomy (a critique that Bookchin used to refer to, before he rejected anarchism; anyone familiar with anarchist history, as Bookchin claimed to be, would know that Bakunin’s critique of liberalism was far more influential among anarchists than the liberalism which Bakunin rejected, or the Nietzcshean individualism which came later, but which Bookchin conflates in the very passage set forth above).

Comment on Murray Bookchin: anarchism is “simply not a social theory” (2002) by radicalarchives

radicalarchives — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 16:43:12 +0000

true, but you also seem to imply that liberalism = Nietzschean individualism, which could not be further from the truth, either.

Comment on Murray Bookchin: anarchism is “simply not a social theory” (2002) by Robert Graham

Robert Graham — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:37:38 +0000

Bookchin’s analysis of anarchism after he renounced anarchism is historically inaccurate and philosophically flawed. The idea that anarchism is liberalism gone made is untenable. The vast majority of anarchists have considered themselves socialists, not Nietzschean individualists. It’s not hard to find in Bookchin’s own anarchist writings refutations of every single claim he made in this article. John Clark’s essay, “Bridging the Unbridgeable Chasm: On Bookchin’s Critique of the Anarchist Tradition,” at http://www.anarchiststudies.org/node/231, does a good job dissecting Bookchin’s “critique” of anarchism.

Comment on Murray Bookchin: anarchism vs anarcho-syndicalism (1992) by A few pints « Poumista

A few pints « Poumista — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:46:23 +0000

[...] on EU. Richard Gott on the Falklands. Socialism and democracy. Michael Foot the extremist. Anarchism and syndicalism. Advertisement GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); [...]

Comment on Murray Bookchin: anarchism vs anarcho-syndicalism (1992) by Poumista

Poumista — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 09:02:49 +0000

We don’t mind: please feel free to carry on with the Bookchin!