Notices by Alex Prichard (alexprichard@mstdn.social)

@abolisyonista yeah, more or less. It’s a memoir really, with some theory to help him reflect on his practices.

@abolisyonista
one more book you might want to have a look at is Stephen Condit's Anarchism and Local Governance (Anthem, 2019). I like it.

https://anthempress.com/humanities-literature-and-arts/anarchism-in-local-governance-pdf

@abolisyonista @catch56

Sure, but there’s a good argument for anarchist corporatism too. I’m not sure where I stand, and it definitely depends on the specific labour and legal context, but…

@abolisyonista @catch56 and it’s worth remembering that while corporatism is usually aligned with fascism now, Mussolini’s dad knew Bakunin, I believe, and the fascist cooptation of anarchism didn’t end there either.

@catch56 @abolisyonista

I think the main problem has been the standard way of thinking about revolution. Seeing revolution as the contestation of sovereignty is problematic because most revolutionary movements don’t or fail to contest like that, but change society anyway. Also, most ‘successful’ revolutions on this definition are long term failures. We need a better theory of reform.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41312-021-00101-5

@abolisyonista Lifestyle Anarchism and Radical Activism

@abolisyonista

Matt’s the purest anarchist I know (at least he was until he got a job at Swansea University this year)

@abolisyonista @catch56 sure. But it is possible@to do both, and take part in a street demo. But if you have no real prospects of changing the mode of production, for example, it’s all reformism.

@abolisyonista Matt Wilson’s Rules Without Rulers is good. He calls himself a revolutionary reformist. I suppose anything that praises ‘lifestyle’ anarchism too. Lifestyles are not just reformist - if we all changed our lifestyles it would be revolutionary. Laura Portwood Stacer’s book is worth a read too. Most people who defend a ‘revolutionary’ anarchism in principle are inevitably reformists in practice. So that might be something to look at too.

@abolisyonista I’ll have to have a read…

@abolisyonista this just popped into my research gate feed. He’s not anti-prefiguración, I don’t think, just not committed to it exclusively.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-39462-1_8

@abolisyonista I’d much rather anarchists were pragmatic rather than purists. Purists are just engaged in historical reenactment

@abolisyonista

yeah, I had a look around and found this too. Reminds me of Zahir Kazmi’s book, Polite Anarchy, where states become anarchists. From what I can tell, though, this one is at least revolutionary in intent, and reformist in practice (which I think is all anyone can actually be)

@abolisyonista

hi. No, never come across him before.

Interesting..

Anarchism and Social Revolution: An Anarchist Politics of the Transitionary State

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-39462-1#toc

#Oppenheimer is great film. See it.

Nerdy criticism (spoiler?):

To drive home his youthful intellectual affinity with socialism, Nolan’s Oppenheimer states that he’s read all three volumes of #Marx Das Capital, ‘in the original German’. Nolan has him argue that Marx’s phrase ‘all property is theft’ should actually be translated as ‘all ownership is…’

But this isn’t Marx’s phrase at all. It’s actually the #anarchist #Proudhon ‘s most famous dictum.

Is Nolan gaslighting anarchists, or what?