Add new comment

For me that is the foresight and hindsight distinction that needs to be made regarding the failures of the 1886 radical model. Hindsight can be very unfair and bludgeoning sword to wield but I think these these mistakes were avoidable and classical anarchism already had these discursive tools ready to go.

Instead of a strategy centered around striking why not focus on absenteeism instead and an overall goal of creating different structures of culture outside and beyond the workplace. The classical individualists already had the basics figured out unlike their organization driven collective cousins who got suckered into trade union ideology. I don't think it's wealth that's the issue but time and one day this will be understood more acutely if or when we are deeper into a cybernetic age.

Time, being and surrogate activity(putting aside Uncle Ted's as such criticism to them) need to be the focal point of analysis from here on out. If proles and other dispossessed continue to be hooked on surrogate activities that are connected to facilitated processes(like the petro dollar) then there will inevitably be state blow back and recuperation.

I don't want to overdump on 1886 but I think understanding how it got recuperated is important because are still talking about state leviathan facilitated new deals as opposed to our and my deal. The fact that syndicalism still has a place in anarchism-unlike say agorism-is reason to bring these issues up. The fact is that the syndies(along with the ancoms) do bare a certain amount of blame for the structural collapse of classical anarchism.