Re: anarchists and JFK Jr.

Gregory Alan Bolcer (
Sun, 25 Jul 1999 14:32:44 -0700

I don't dispute the history, Kragen. Anarchism was around
well before the 1920's. About the same time there
was the Vorticist movement in England and the US.

Over the past century many politico-philosophical movements have taken up the
anarchist label. There are two types, radicals and reactionaries
that believe the only means is the violent overthrow of the status quo.
The violence is the only common ground with communist ideals. The
major difference as Tom Whore points out--what gets put in place.
I think the violence-part has overshadowed the more elegant part
of anarchism. Anarchism does NOT equal chaos as some argue.
True anarchism is the commoditization of all political, economic,
and philosophical beliefs. Politics is simply the mechanism to
project power over long distances; anarchism simply says that
all cultural and social norms, mores, and societal structures
will all reach an equilibrium based on individuals having the
ability to project (all types of power) no further than beyond
their immediate milieu and vice-versa.


I was just poking fun at your seemingly oxymoronic label.

Kragen Sitaker wrote:
> Gregory Alan Bolcer writes:
> > > Historically, anarchism is a branch of socialism. While more
> >
> > That would be your opinion. The Anarchist brand of socialism
> > is often called 'fascism' and is quite at the other end of the
> > political spectrum. Anarchism believes in rugged individualism,
> > not collectivism.
> There is a political group that was quite strong in the US in the 1920s
> and 1930s, in Spain around the same time (where for a time they were
> winning a civil war, before being crushed by the fascist dictator
> Franco), and all over Europe in the late 1800s. Bakunin, Proudhon, and
> Goldman were among its leading lights. They called themselves
> "anarchists"; their beliefs originated in socialism. They were
> vehemently opposed to fascism and communism. They believed that both
> rugged-individualism and collectivism were deeply flawed.
> Lou Sacco, Bartolomeo Vanzetti, and William Burroughs are other names
> you might recognize from this group of people.
> People that believe the same things are still around, and they still
> call themselves anarchists, although there aren't as many of them. But
> there is a newer group whose beliefs are rooted in rugged individualism
> and capitalism, who also call themselves "anarchists". These are the
> folks you're calling "anarchists"; they have almost nothing in common
> with the other group of anarchists.
> The older group of "anarchists" (let's call them "class struggle
> anarchists") tend to view the newer group of "anarchists" (let's call
> them "anarcho-capitalists") with the same sort of disdain that hackers
> of the 1970s (RMS, L. Peter Deutsch, etc.) view the "hackers" of the
> Cult of the Dead Cow and the Legion of Doom.
> I believe nothing in the above paragraphs represents my opinion; I
> believe it all represents verifiable historical truth.
> --
> /* By Kragen Sitaker, */
> char b[2000],m[]={1,-80,-1,80};main(){int i,x=1000,s=2000,d=0;while(1+(i=
> getchar()))switch(i){case'f':b[x]=1;case'g':x=(x+m[d/2]+s)%s;d--;case'+':d+=2;
> case'-':d+=7;d%=8;}for(i=0;i!=s;i++)putchar(" #"[b[i]]);}