On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 06:11:43PM -0000, xorcist@sigaint.org wrote: We should probably imagine 10 year time frame, not 6 weeks :)
I think more on the scale of 100 years, but yeah. 10 would be wonderful.
But even though it's difficult, without a core of belligerently principled and strongly persistent fellow souls, you'll be a one man band, and that's no fun :/
Well, I dunno. I play a little guitar. I think it'd be a blast to be able able to rattle off some harmonica, and thump a pair of kick drums simultaneously. But I get your point.
An interim step could perhaps be "direct democracy" - some variant on Swiss style democracy.
Indeed. I don't often use the word "anarchist" in most discussions with people, unless the forum is such that I have good reason to believe they'll understand the real meaning of it. "Direct democracy" is an OK term. Most will appreciate it. Personally, I dislike it, because I am not that much of a fan of democracy the way most people think of it. i.e. Everyone is entitled to vote. I don't agree. One needs a license to drive a car. One needs a license to own a firearm. Rightly so. Exercising those rights can have real consequences for the public, and it seems prudent to make sure people have the information they need to be responsible. If voting TRULY mattered, if it was POWERFUL, you'd NEED a license for it. I feel this is a nuance most fail to grasp. "Anti-authoritarianism" is another OK term. Except I don't like labeling things "anti" .. you set up defining what you're AGAINST, rather than what you're FOR. Sets the wrong tone, in my estimation. It is, to me, very telling that we don't even have really appropriate terminology.. that is how deeply ingrained the authoritarian alpha/beta thing goes. And, as Chomsky would point out, if one lacks the language for something, it becomes very difficult to think properly about it. An old flame of mine likes to just drop the "anarcho" and call herself a Syndicalist. When people ask, she describes the free association of people into syndicates. She was fond of pointing out that it sounds bad-ass to people to "join a syndicate" .. calling up "romantic images" of joining outlaw crime syndicates, or such. I'm rather sure that wouldn't scale the way we want either. In certain contexts, all of these terms can be useful and effective.. but the lack of a single banner or anthem that most of the "fringe" can unite under is a real problem. And it isn't JUST a matter of terminology. The scattered, fragmented voice of the Occupy movement speaks to that problem. So many people know .. no.. more importantly FEEL.. deeply, truly feel that there is something wrong with our society. They can taste the plastic. The problem is, none of us can really KNOW what we want in its place, because we've never tasted anything else, except maybe in fantasy, or dreams.. perhaps a few fleeting few moments where one manages to escape the world, just for a moment, and catches the scent. One woman dreams of steak.. some older gent a bit of ice cream. The young kid wants a pizza. And we quibble over which one we should have.. and in the meantime, we're forced to subsist on the cafeteria slop. Its baffling to me now, but I remember being an ideologue. But for the life of me I can't remember what the fuck I was thinking.