Specifismo.

[Chuck0]

I'm failing to understand what it so new about "specifismo." I've been 
arguing for a strategy like this for many years, as have many anarchists. It 
sounds like something related to "practical anarchism" and "ecumenical 
anarchism" which have been focuses of my work for many years. I think the 
anarchist emphasis on practical daily struggles, creating counter 
institutions, and long term resistance to the state and capitalism, is what 
sets anarchism apart from vanguardist socialism.

If Albert and other leftists are finally accepting anarchist ideas and 
methodology, that sounds good to me.

Chuck0

Matthew X wrote:
> 
> To: anarchy_africa at yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [anarchy_africa] 
> Anarcho-socialism?
> 
> I'm pretty new to the list, so I don't know how much of this has been 
> said before, but I have a couple things to add on the issue of 
> sectarianism. First, I think some Latin American anarchists, under the 
> banner of specifismo, have begun to fashion an anarchist practice that 
> avoids sectarianism. It posits that since not everyone has the same 
> structural position in the world, not everyone needs to organize 
> themselves along the same lines. Not everyone fits the "worker" mold- 
> the unemployed, the marginalized, etc. Also, it encourages anarchists to 
> both organize as anarchists within anarchist organizations and become 
> deeply involved, as anarchists, within worthwhile social movements that 
> are not explicitly anarchist (such as the landless movement in Brazil, 
> Sem Terra). Brazilian anarchists are organizing a promising new 
> federation only open to those who accept specifismo, precisely because, 
> I think, sectarianism was a problem in previous attempts at federation. 
> Although more has been written in anarchist 
> journalshttp://www.ainfos.ca/02/feb/ainfos00489.html
> (He has also written very interesting articles about the history of 
> nonwestern anarchism and the World Social Forum in Brazil
> http://www.geocities.com/ringfingers/nonwesternweb.html
> http://www.zmag.org/content/VisionStrategy/AdamsWSF.cfm)
> Second, I think it is very crucial for anarchists to affirm a 
> multiplicity of analysis, organizations and visions of a future world. 
> There is no reason why one ultra-specific set of analyses must be 
> accepted by everyone, as long as everyone is united in fundamental 
> opposition the state, capitalism and all other forms of hierarchy and 
> oppresssion. A multiplicity of anarchist styles, emphases and organizing 
> practices would seem necessary for people's unique situations and 
> creativity to be recognized and valorized. Similarly, there is no reason 
> to insist that one single social structure or set of social structures 
> must dominate a post-revolutionary world (the cause of much 
> sectarianism). It would seem to be an implicit principle of a consistent 
> anarchism that, during and after any anarchist revolution worth the 
> name, each community will be able to decide what kind of nonhierarchical 
> social organization they would like to make use of, and what kind of 
> federations they'd like to be involved in. As the (not expliciAnyway, 
> just a couple thoughts.
> Jesse
> "robbo203 <RRobincox at aol.com>" <RRobincox at aol.com> wrote:Hi everyone
> 
> One reason - possibly a major one - why the non-market anti-statist
> sector has made such little headway, has to do with the ingrained,
> almost institutionalised, sectarianism that has afflicted this
> sector. Lets face it, most of us belong to, or are associated with,
> tiny little groups , some even tinier than others, with little or no
> cooperation going on between them. Its as if some Inverse (or should
> I say, "perverse") Law of Political Affinity operates in some cases:
> the degree of political hostility shown towards one another increases
> in proportion to the narrowness of the ideological gap between one
> another. Which of course, is a very sad state of affairs: this is
> precisely what helps to keep our sector small and ineffectual and
> more intent upon gazing at its navel than changing the world
> Perhaps the major sectarian divide is between "socialists"
> and "anarchists". Clearly, there are many "anarchists"
> and "socialists" who do not fall within the non-market anti-statist
> sector and obviously the question of co-operation with such
> individuals and groups is fundamentally problematic. That said,
> there are a diverse range of anarchist and socialist groups who
> clearly do fall within the non-market anti-socialist sector and it is
> with such groups and individuals that I am concerned.
> It seems to me that one of the ways in which sectarianism is
> perpetuated is through the labeling and pidgeonholing of our
> respective positions. That being so we can perhaps help to bring
> about a more inclusive and colloborative approach by redefining our
> basic orientation. Which is why I would like to recommend the term
> anarcho-socialism (or, alternatively, anarcho-communism)for general
> usgae in preference to terms such as "anarchism" or "socialism".
> It seems to me that this more effectively highlights the fact, as far
> as "socialists" in our sector are concerned, that the kind
> of "socialist" society we are after will be one in which there will
> be no government or state (the "executive committee of the ruling
> class") - as suggested by the prefix "anarcho-" - thereby
> distinguishing this kind of "socialism" from what most people have in
> mind which has perhaps been irrevocably besmirched by its (mis)
> association with state tyranny. Conversely, as far as "anarchists"
> in our sector are concerned, it would be advantageous for them to
> more effectively distance themselves from others who likewise claim
> to be anarchists e.g. the anarcho-capitalists, by firmly grounding
> their anarchism in a non-capitalist context.
> I raise this as a suggestion but would be interested to hear what
> others might have to say on the matter....
> Best regards
> Robin
> World in Common group
> FORUM: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/worldincommon/
> WEBSITE (temporary): http://www.angelfire.com/folk/wic/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
> ------
>  >From the African anarchism list to send a message email 
> anarchy_africa at yahoogroups.com
> http://struggle.ws/africa.html
> Find out about others on the list and add your info
> in the polls and bookmarks sections
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anarchy_africa
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> ------
>  >From the African anarchism list to send a message email 
> anarchy_africa at yahoogroups.com
> http://struggle.ws/africa.html
> Find out about others on the list and add your info
> in the polls and bookmarks sections
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anarchy_africa
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Chuck0

------------------------------------------------------------
Personal homepage        -> http://chuck.mahost.org/
Infoshop.org             -> http://www.infoshop.org/
MutualAid.org            -> http://www.mutualaid.org/
Alternative Press Review -> http://www.altpr.org/
Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/
Anarchy: AJODA           -> http://www.anarchymag.org/

"The state can't give you free speech, and the state can't take it away. 
You're born with it, like your eyes, like your ears. Freedom is something you 
assume, then you wait for someone to try to take it away. The degree to which 
you resist is the degree to which you are free..."
---Utah Phillips