All of this is just a long way of saying that very shortly we are going to be facing some of the most serious challenges humanity has ever encountered. And there are going to have to be a lot of decisions about how we live in this new world--there may be some strong tendencies to step backward into autocratic rule, but there will also be opportunity to try to establish egalitarian and truly democratic societies. Which makes me think maybe now is the time to start brushing up on anarchist theory and practice. It may be possible that some anarchist principles could be useful in attempting to refashion our communities to meet the requirements that are going to be imposed in oil poor world, and work toward a society were individuals have meaningful autonomy to the extent possible and the means of production and major economic decisions are managed by some democratic process.
So I was pleased to read this book at this time. Anarchism has long been a sort of hobby-horse of mine, and I've enjoyed reading the texts of major anarchist thinkers. Beyond Chomsky's essay in American Power, I don't have much familiarity with anarchism as practiced in Spain duirng the short-lived revolution. This book gives some insight into how those societies tried to function, though there's not a lot of meat on the bones. And of course all the contributers, and the editor, are sympathizers and it's hard to say to what degree they permit themselves to be critical of the movement.
Maybe my whole radical impending societal change theory is pure bunk. It wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about something ("After the travesty of the 2000 elections, the American people will not stand for the continued existence of an undemocratic institution like the Electoral College"). Still, it's both frightening and exciting to think of the potential for creation of a better world than the one dominated by global capitalism. Though no revolutionaries are going to overthrow the government anytime soon (I hope, anyway), it is becoming increasingly clear that the the present state of affairs is unsustainable--certainly in the long term, but maybe also in the relatively short term.
2 comments:
I agree with the thrust of your claims.
Personally, I quite like the idea of a kind of hybrid between sortition and direct democracy. Sortition takes a bit of taling through, (and I'm not going to do that in detail unless you're really interested, but it's based on the idea of government by lot) Put that together with a set of policies aimed at putting the commanding heights under popular control either through grass roots functional organisations, or at the level of regional governance depending on what we're talking about and I think you could get a good balance between pluralist sociopolitcal norms and the planning you need for large scale infrastructure.
I quite like the idea of having essentially a polluter-pays system for human activity, with the funds channelled into remediation, new technology, R & D, adaptation, or social services and income support more generally.
Fran
fran.beta@gmail.com
Thanks Fran--you are proposing some interesting and far-reaching ideas. I too have sometimes been taken with the idea of sortition--have you ever read Phillip K. Dick's "Solar Lottery"?
I think any kind of representative government might well benefit from one or more houses that have members randomly selected. I don't know of any historical examples were this has been tried, though.
Also, in response to the pay to pollute system, perhaps there needs to be some tier of the court system dedicated to making decisions that evaluate economic necessity and environmental impact--and could impose certain fines or other conditions on some economic ventures that are need essential?
Post a Comment