Add new comment

if i accept the premise that critique takes the form of either expressing why something is a bad goal or expressing that its a bad strategy to get the goal, i find myself doing the former much more than the latter. i wish anarchists would engage more in the former too, i think a lot of anarchists have bad goals - not in the long term, as in the abolition of the state, but in the sort term, as in break windows in the same place on the same day every year. it seems that goals, once they are settled on, take a lot more time and effort to do any questioning of, or have that questioning gain any purchase. another example: we're currently exiting a several year period in which no platforming baddies became a goal so desirable that it became very difficult to do any questioning of whether or not it was a good goal, unless you happened to be in the company of some friends who already pretty much agreed with you that it was a bad goal. in the meantime, the strategies and tactics to achieve this have only gotten refined. if no platforming baddies has started now to fall out of favor as the most desirable goal, its only because the people doing it are finally starting to tire, not because of any critique.
no platforming and more broken windows are only the tip of the iceberg for bad and/or useless goals for anarchists. we have so much baggage left to lose! the world changes a lot faster than the milieu does, and i'm inclined to think that this type of critique is the sort of thing that accelerates changes in the milieu, but i'm really starting to get carried away.
the last thing i'll add is that it might be more desireable to, rather than express why a certain goal is bad, to engage in critique in a sort of inquiring mode and actually find out why something is bad