"The anarchist critique of seizing state power is often caricatured as being based on an abstract moral opposition to the state that ignores the harsh realities we are currently facing. Upon carefully reading historical anarchist authors, however, one discovers that the real reason why they argued that revolutionaries should not seize existing state power was because it was impractical for achieving their goals."

Fuck anarchopac is so good :anpacifism_heart:

📖 theanarchistlibrary.org/librar

🎧 invidio.us/watch?v=vsRyTWBj84E

I do find it funny when modern anarchists make moralistic arguments against electoralism when the argument in the past had always been one of tactics.

It kinda shows an ignorance to the history of anarchist movements: Proudhon was a member of the French National Assembly, Magon's platform in Mexico was advanced by a political party, members of the CNT joined the Popular Front government of the second spanish republic... hell fuckin Pi y Margall was even briefly President of the first spanish republic.

And every single one of those was criticized for participating in state institutions at the time - never from a place of moral opposition to the state, but because every single one of those decisions was ultimately counter-intuitive to the goals of the revolutions they were all a part of.

This is why I'm not big on criticizing people for voting because ultimately who gives a shit. When I see corbynites actively trying to coopt grassroots movement, the tactical argument rings true.

Show thread
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Anarchism Space

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!