|
| |
|
|  SlaineMacRoth | Nov 24, 2007 3:10pm | Hi everyone. I think the Anarchist FAQ* should be included in the Anarchy section as a related site. It's like the er, bible for anarchy...
Also, some see Participatory Economics (Parecon for short) ( zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm [zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm] ) as a particularly powerful anarchist vision (or libertarian socialism say), myself included, so a page on that might be worthy too? Chomsky is certainly impressed with it.
*
infoshop.org/faq/index.html [infoshop.org/faq/index.html]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Anarchist_FAQ [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Anarchist_FAQ]
""An Anarchist FAQ" is an online FAQ written by an international work group of anarchists connected through the internet. It documents anarchist theory and ideas whilst presenting arguments in favor of anarchism. It also explores debates internal to the anarchist movement, and counters common arguments against anarchism. It has been in constant evolution since 1995. While it was started as a critique of anarcho-capitalism, by the time it was officially released it had become a general introduction to anarchism.
The FAQ is published under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (copyleft) and it is dedicated "to the millions of anarchists, living and dead, who tried and are trying to create a better world." It was officially released on July 19, 1996 "to celebrate the Spanish Revolution of 1936 and the heroism of the Spanish anarchist movement.". |
|
| 
| | chetmo | Nov 24, 2007 7:09pm | It's certainly worthwhile to have as something to review. Never the less, isn't it a little too biased for their own view point? It certainly sounds as if it's trying to redefine Anarchy to only mean their belief system.
(And it's always worth pointing out the hypocrisy of Anarchists attempting to take charge of anything...) |
|
|
| | SlaineMacRoth | Nov 25, 2007 5:29am | | I can understand what you're saying, in terms of an attempt to define Anarchism, however, I don't think that's what it is. The vast majority of Anarchists (certainly those in the real world today and historically or not far-right "Anarchists" oxymoronic in name only) would agree with the basics tenets and this 'branch' of Anarchism. Of course it's not a blueprint really (or a bible I was joking there) as it is in costant evolution since its inception. As the wiki page says "It also explores debates internal to the anarchist movement, and counters common arguments against anarchism". |
| |
|
You need to Sign-up for StumbleUpon to post to this forum
| |
|
Anarchy → Discussion