Widespread Anarchist Movements in the Unted States

[Xnyrax]

As an anarcho-syndicalist/anarcho-communist myself, I'm often interested in PODs which would "further the cause", so to speak. So, on that subject, how could we get a -really- widespread anarchist movement in the US, beyond just the various collectives in California and the Midwest and that new collective in New Orleans, with a POD after 1945?

EDIT: And just noticed I made an incredibly retarded mistake in the title. Yay.

[Ancien Regime]

ASB after 1945. 100%, no contest. 1945-1973 was period of the New Deal Coalition, which was nothing if not statist. There is no political paradigm that even challenges the supremacy of the New Deal regulatory state. Even with a paradigm that is more suspicious of the state on paper, outright abolishing it will never happen unless there is a major systemic collapse of everything.

[Wendell]

So it has to be a left-anarchist movement?

[Sachyriel]

Less tension between the USSR and the USA might help take away the stigma that Leftism has in the USA. I don't know how to go about doing that though.

[Jello_Biafra]

Originally Posted by Wendell

So it has to be a left-anarchist movement?

Before the 1970s you wouldn't find any other kind of anarchist movement. It wasn't until Rothbard et al that right-wing anarchism came into being.

[SirAshfordFanrico]

I really can't see Anarchism getting too far in any post-1900 ATL that doesn't involve the space bats.

And even then it would require key figures to be almost comic book villains in order to work. That or some major economic shit to go down that doesn't get fixed or is incredibly botched in attempts to fix it. But even then it requires the Anarchism movement to have more adherents and believers.

[Killer300]

Sorry if this revives a long dead thread, but how about the Haymarket Riot just going... really differently. Say that it was exposed police caused it. What would this result in? True, this is pre 1900, but still.

But okay, I see the point more from biases surrounding Anarchism. Oh well.

[Dialga]

And even if an Anarchist regime did succeed, how long before it would collapse? Just doesn't sound too stable.

[Cryptic]

Originally Posted by Xnyrax

how could we get a -really- widespread anarchist movement in the US, beyond just the various collectives in California and the Midwest and that new collective in New Orleans, with a POD after 1945?

Though I dont know much about the various leftist sub groups....

"Just say no to drugs"

The 1960s was probably the potential high water mark for a revival of any leftist movement. But... many of the political experimenters also embraced the drug culture. In contrast to Timothy Leary's proclamations, drugs produce fogged thinking at best and also violently erratic behavior. Worse, they also attacted alot of criminals and their associated baggage into movements, communes etc.

So.... the anarchists embrace "Just say No" ala Nation of Islam. No drugs means fewer fogged decisions, less erratic behavior and less criminals and more stable communes.

and.... No free love

The 60s leftist tolerance of "free love" gets dropped by anarchists. Love is not free and nothing destroys small group cohesion faster than pretending it is. I bet alot of communes failed due to uhmmm... "revolutionary experimentation" in this area.

[EnglishCanuck]

The free love ideal is one that is...shall we say extremely idealistic. It doesn't take much more to shatter a group than one man saying that he can sleep with whoever he wants, even if some of the members of that group are happily married.

For communes to truly exist and thrive first off they really need to have a unifying ideology and not so much sappy idealism. Secondly they need a method of either self-sufficiency or a niche in the local economy. But really this isn't going to catch on as a major mainstream ideology.

[The Ubbergeek]

To play faitr, and be a Devil Advocate...

Cryptic, I think you may have some misinformed ideas on drugs - I am no drugs apologist, but 'reefer madness' style things are silly foolish.

Marijuana by example will not harm such a movement, you may even cynically say it will ensure and helps it remaining calm, civic, pacifist...

And "free love', 'no private stuff' etc may OR may not work, depending of how are REALLY human beings. To say such things are 'total ASB' is kinda more ideological position than ultimate truth maybe. Or not.

[Lord Grattan]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Sorry if this revives a long dead thread, but how about the Haymarket Riot just going... really differently. Say that it was exposed police caused it. What would this result in? True, this is pre 1900, but still.

But okay, I see the point more from biases surrounding Anarchism. Oh well.

A word to the wise: reviving dead threads, especially when you have one going on the same topic, is frowned upon here.

[Cryptic]

Originally Posted by The Ubbergeek

To play faitr, and be a Devil Advocate...

Cryptic, I think you may have some misinformed ideas on drugs - I am no drugs apologist, but 'reefer madness' style things are silly foolish.

Marijuana by example will not harm such a movement, you may even cynically say it will ensure and helps it remaining calm, civic, pacifist...

Please note, I never said that "reefer" in particular leads to violent behavior. Too much reefer just produces fogged thinking and decision making (which a small group cant afford).

Of course, one could say the same with alcohol, but marijuana is far more portable and easier to consume. Also historicaly, a tolerance of marijuana by communes etc. tended to open the door to drug use which does produce violent behavior. The harder drugs also attracted criminals into movements.

Originally Posted by EnglishCanuck

The free love ideal is one that is...shall we say extremely idealistic. It doesn't take much more to shatter a group than one man saying that he can sleep with whoever he wants, even if some of the members of that group are happily married.

Or a rank and file woman practicing free love with married men.