Add new comment

"While an anarchism based in the idea of “no rulers” opposes these tendencies, as it is always vigilant towards potential coercive situations, mutualism does not contain this same defense mechanisms."

so here the author of the article is somehow how anarchism is better than mutualism, but they both contain the possibility to become fixed forms of behavior, which is what the writer of this is criticizing. It doesn't matter if a word has an inherent defense mechanism, in the same way that it's possible to have a democratic dictatorship, it's also possible to have an anarchist dictatorship, but the latter is less likely not so much because of the word but because of the people who practice anarchism and anarchism's general alienation throughout the whole political spectrum.

ultimately this type of confusion doesn't really help clarify anarchist philosophy for anyone, but i guess it's nice the person is trying to build a starting point for nihilism....

.....

?!