Is there any reason not to collude with the intent of manufacturing a manifesto of intent - is there any reason we cannot hammer out differences between us in a friendly but firm manner till we establish a viable anarchist community with demands and form a propoganda strategy?
I don't think a manifesto can be applied to an entire mouvement of people. Sure, there are core values, but at the same time there are little things that people will always disagree over. The state already knows what we want and its going to do everything in its power to stop us.
Yeah but surely if some of us here get together and start actually getting a cohesive agreement on what constitutes OUR brand of the counter culture - we would be able to develop a strategy for getting those beliefs across to a wider audience. Its about thinking for ourselves and, as thinkers, being a force to be reckoned with 2 minds are better than 1 10 minds are better than 2 It would let people establish core truths to their rationale
Sounds like you want to get under a flag of ideology. Form an organization with a mission statement. Collect dues and form an inner cricle to make decisions and propmote propaganda on "behalf of" the anarchist movement. I don't want a "brand of counter culture". The best way to take direct action is with small temporary groups acting autonomously for specific actions. Once action is taken the group dissolves. More take their place for other specific actions. repeat. non traceable. avoid the pitfalls of leftist addiction to representative organizations. avoid heirarchy of "generals and soldiers". No manifesto!
Because we ain't communists. Communism is an economic system. A manifesto works well for that kind of thing. Anarchism is a complete revamp of the way we relate to each other. You can't sum up anarchism within a manifesto, and if you tried the people who would reject it would be the anarchists...
That's true. But economics and politics have become so tightly bound together that it can be hard to separate one from the other. It seems to me that a book that outlines the basic principles of the anarchist movement would be a good idea simply to express to the public what the movement is about. The anarchists wouldn't have to agree on everything the book covered, it would just need to explain to the common individual what anarchism is. I don't see how they can convey their message without that kind of thing. Where am I going wrong in that way of thinking?
Actually AK Press is going to be publishing the Anarchist FAQ in spring 2007 and I can't think of a better book that sums up the common aims and workings of anarchism as a whole as well as the various families.
