What makes the TPP different than previous “free trade” treaties is the enforcement provisions, which allow multinational corporations to go before a non-elected tribunal of corporate judges (who work as lawyers for the bosses in their day jobs) and sue governments for “future damages” that may be caused if an environmental law, food safety regulation or worker protection is enforced. Citizens of these countries could be taxed to pay for hypothetical losses that have not yet happened. (A chapter of the treaty draft obtained by Wikileaks includes a provision specifying that it would not be made public until four years after the agreement is implemented. The treaty draft is being kept secret from citizens and unions; members of Congress are allowed to read it but not to take notes – however, hundreds of corporate “advisors” have special access.)
This is nothing short of a power grab by the multi-national corporations that will result in lowering labor and health standards down to the level of the poorest countries in the world. Future government leaders will be bound by whatever terms the multi-national corporations dictate. Although President Obama and the leaders of the other countries involved will be giving up some of the national sovereignty they now have, they know what they are doing. Obama and his supporters (in both the Republican and Democrat corporatist parties) are playing the role of corporate hit-men, and will be handsomely rewarded for their betrayal. The six hundred corporate lobbyists who are helping write this treaty will be gaining a lock on future governments and the international economy, creating a bulwark against workers who might follow the example of Greece and Spain to fight austerity policies.
The business union leaders of the AFL-CIO have not been silent about TPP. Although they have been shut out of the secret negotiations, they know from past experience with NAFTA and CAFTA what “fast-track” means – more jobs losses to global sweatshops. The so-called environmental and labor protections will never be enforced. What will be enforced are patent and copyright protections that are there for the drug companies and media companies to stop production of low-cost generic medicines and to police the internet. The provisions of Stop Online Piracy Act that were rejected after a public outcry because they would have criminalized unauthorized use of copyrighted material (by, for example, posting a video of you singing a copywritten song), blocked internet sites accused of hosting copyrighted material from appearing on search engines, and allowed media conglomerates to go after internet providers for allowing their users to share “copyrighted” information have been reintroduced through the back door as part of TPP.
This is the brave new world order in the making. The mainstream labor movement’s efforts to block the deal by pressuring Democrats (many of whom rely on unions for campaign workers and money) have failed. Even the Republicans’ much-ballyhooed hatred of the Obama administration was not sufficient to peel off enough Republicans to join the tiny handful of Senate Democrats who tried to block fast-track. The social democrats in the Democrat Party are too few in number to make a difference, even if the corporations were willing to tolerate democracy. The one principle upon which nearly all politicians can agree is the supremacy of capital over all.
If we want a different world, or even to preserve the limited protections won through past struggles, we can not rely on the Democrats. Our power lies in our organization – in our refusal to submit. It is time to organize and take back our lives.
]]>Eric Chester, The Wobblies in their Heyday: The Rise and Destruction of the Industrial Workers of the World during the World War I Era. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2014. 316 pages, $58, hardcover.
Eric Chester’s new book on the IWW focuses on the period leading up to the U.S. government’s decision to crush the organization, and to the massive repression unleashed against the union during World War I. Based upon an impressive array of archival sources, many previously unavailable, Chester argues that the IWW appealed to many workers precisely because of its radicalism but that IWW leaders made a series of strategic errors that undermined their ability to build the broader radical coalition necessary to prevail.
ASR has published three articles by Eric Chester: two on IWW history (one on the Wheatland Hops case appears in longer form in this book; the other examined IWW membership levels from World War I through the mid-1920s) and an analysis of a Danish general strike for shorter hours. His previous books include True Mission: Socialists and the Labor Party Question in the U.S.; Rag-Tags, Scum, Riff-Raff and Commies: The U.S. Intervention in the Dominican Republic; and Covert Network: Progressives, the International Rescue Committee and the CIA.
Chester offers detailed accounts of the Bisbee and Butte mining strikes, offering a sympathetic portrayal of IWW organizer Frank Little in the process, though he is critical of Little’s proposal to resume picketing when strike support waned (strikers originally decided against picketing in order to avoid confrontations with gun thugs), and seems to suggest that Little should have heeded warnings to go into hiding at a critical moment in the strike. (Little was lynched two days later.)He discusses California Wobblies’ resort to empty threats in a counter-productive effort to free Ford and Suhr (imprisoned for their role in a strike of hops pickers) – substituting rhetorical bluster for the power they had been unable to build in the fields. (The argument that national IWW leaders supported this, or that government officials were provoked to crush the IWW by this campaign is less persuasive.)
Chester also offers a detailed analysis of the IWW’s legal strategy, which he argues exhibited a naive faith that justice could be had in the U.S. courts. He demonstrates that the Chicago espionage trial was a show trial whose outcome was pre-arranged by prosecutors and the judge and presents evidence suggesting promises of leniency if the Wobblies played along. (Instead, the judge handed down savage sentences that shocked many observers.)
The book focuses on IWW activity and government repression in the Western United States; the IWW looks like a very different organization when examining its work in the maritime, textiles and timber industries, or its substantial membership among the immigrants who made up so large a share of the U.S. working class. (The claim that the IWW failed to sink deep or lasting roots in working-class communities, for example, ignores textile, longshore and seafarers branches that lasted for decades, as well as a network of Finnish branches that sustained a daily newspaper, several large halls, a traveling theater troupe, etc.) And while Chester is surely correct that the union suffered a far more devastating blow than is acknowledged in its official history, it remains true that the IWW was far from crushed. The IWW launched several major organizing drives in the 1920s and 1930s, reopened its halls and newspapers, and maintained a significant industrial presence in manufacturing and maritime.
We offer four takes on this important addition to the historiography on the IWW. We asked each reviewer for critical reflections on the book and “what this history can tell us about the challenges and prospects facing those trying to rebuild a labor movement that envisions itself as part of a broader emancipatory project.”
Staughton Lynd has written countless books on history, labor law and political theory; is a longtime advocate of solidarity unionism; and a life-long participant in and student of radical social struggles. His books include Doing History From the Bottom Up, The New Rank and File, and Wobblies & Zapatistas.
Peter Cole is professor of history at Western Illinois University, wrote Wobblies on the Waterfront: Interracial Unionism in Progressive Era Philadelphia (University of Illinois) and edited Ben Fletcher: The Life and Times of a Black Wobbly, including Fellow Worker Fletcher’s Writings & Speeches (Charles H. Kerr). He is currently working on a book titled Dockworker Power: Struggles in Durban and the San Francisco Bay Area.
Gerald Ronning is chair of the liberal arts department at the Minneapolis College of Art and Design. His dissertation explored the IWW in the West and offers the most authoritative available account of IWW martyr Frank Little.
Steve Kellerman is a longtime Wobbly, retired machinist and compiler of An Annotated Bibliography of Books on the IWW (2007), a comprehensive list of books published in the IWW’s first 100 years with brief but useful assessments of each.
]]>Not likely. For one thing the political odds are stacked against him. As Sam Dolgoff pointed out in his classic essay “The Labor Party Illusion,” the electoral system has always been rigged in favor of big business and capitalism. Even before the Supreme Court Citizens United decision (2009) and the massive Gerrymandering that occurred in the wake of the Republican sweep of 2010, elections have always been bought and representation has never been proportional and evenly distributed. The electoral system has been created to make sure that the majority does not rule. Sanders will face an uphill battle both within the Democrat Party and in the general election that will follow.
On the other hand, should a miracle happen and we have our first “socialist” president, Sanders will be blocked by the same forces that prevented Barack Obama from accomplishing anything beyond a bailout for the capitalists when they need it. There will be no socialist party that will be taking their places in the next Congress but the same army of corporate hacks in both parties that will prevent Sanders from implementing even the mildest reforms. Not to mention that Sanders himself has a spotty voting record in his past. Although Sanders did vote against giving George Bush the green light to invade Iraq, he voted in favor of Clinton’s “humanitarian war” in former Yugoslavia, the invasion of Afghanistan, the F-35 war plane program, giving military aid to Israel to make sure it did not run out of artillery shells it rained on Gaza, and Obama’s drone assassination program. Sanders is a member in good standing of the military-industrial complex, although “he doth protest too much.”
Nor would it make much difference if there were a left-wing party swept into office with Sanders. We have seen recently what happened with Syriza in Greece. When faced with the prospect of forced austerity in favor of European bankers, Syriza held a referendum of the Greek people. The people voted overwhelmingly to reject the austerity plan. When the bankers were unimpressed and doubled-down on their demands, Syriza agreed to them, ignoring the referendum results.
Apologists for Syriza on the left blame the bankers for ignoring the referendum results and staging a “coup.” If there was a coup it was not the bankers, but Syriza who staged it. Syriza had made no preparations for the likelihood that the bankers would ignore the voters. To do this would have required that the Greek people be ready to take over industry and agriculture themselves, and toss out the capitalists. This goes beyond the capabilities of politicians, even socialist ones. Syriza had no choice and their election to power was an empty victory.
Many on the left will no doubt agree that Sanders can lead us nowhere, but will insist on voting for him anyway. What can it hurt?
Admittedly the act of voting itself will not hurt. An extra few minutes out of the day, does not really hurt. It could be seen as a protest vote, like voting for Mickey Mouse. The real problem is the many who will spend inordinate amounts of time and money on the Sanders campaign that could better be used to build unions and grass-roots movements that could make a real difference. The choice is yours.
]]>
ASR 66 (Winter 2016)
3. Editorial: The Bernie Sanders Illusion
3. OBITUARY: Federico Arcos
4. Wobbles: Vulture Capitalists, Economic “Boom,” Killing Your Own Job, Jailed for Poverty, Profiteering Off Pensions…
6. Syndicalist News: Union-busting in Kyrgyzstan, Polish Nurses Strike, U.S. Job Deaths Rise, Repression in Iran, Paperworkers Build Global Links, Autoworkers Fight Two-Tier, Polish & German Amazon Workers Coordinate Struggles, CNT Strike… compiled by Mike Hargis
9. Articles: Ready to Fight: Developing 21st Century Community Syndicalism by Shane Burley
15. Imperial Wars & Their Losers: A Critique of ‘Labor Aristocracy’ Theories by Lucien van der Walt
16. The “Sharing” Economy by Jon Bekken
17. The Attempted Rehabilitation of the Communist Party by Wayne Price
21. Poor Adam Smith by Iain McKay
23. Proudhon, Property & Possession by Iain McKay
26. Regarding Louis Blanc – The Present Utility and Future Possibility of the State by P. J. Proudhon; translated by Shawn P. Wilbur
29. Anarchists in the Russian Labor Movement: 1900 – 1930 by Anatoly Viktorovich Dubovik, translated by Malcolm Archibald
32. REVIEWS: The Realities of Self-Managementreview by Jeff Stein
34. Anarchists & the French-Algerian War review by Wayne Price
35. Joe Hill’s Living Legacy review by Jon Bekken
35. The “Progressives” and Labor Reform review by Dylan B.
38. Germany’s “Wild Socialism” review by Jon Bekken
39. Reclaiming the Commons review by Jon Bekken
39. Letter: Like A Bag Over Our Heads by Kenneth Miller
]]>
ASR 64/5 Contents:
3. Editorial: Trans-Pacific Partnership
4. Wobbles: Outbreak of Bi-Partisanship, Profiteering off Health Care “Reform,” Announcements
5. International News: Bulgarian Syndicalists, Solidarity with Amazon Temps; Green/Rail Alliance, Fighting Wage Theft… compiled by Michael Hargis
9. Polish hospital workers win… by John Kalwaic
10. Articles: Anarchy in Athens by Nicholas Apoifis
13. (barely) Staying Alive: The US Economy Since the ’70s (50 Years of Economic Crisis) by Jon Bekken
17. From Capitalism To Commons by Brian Martin
21. Symposium: The U.S. Government’s War Against the IWW Review and commentary by Staughton Lynd (21), Peter Cole (23), Gerald Ronning (25) and Steve Kellerman (27). Response by Eric Chester (29).
33. Kropotkin: Class Warrior by Iain McKay
36. The Action of the Masses & the Individual P. Kropotin
38. Climate Change: “Only Mass Social Movements Can Save Us Now” Review essay by Wayne Price
40. Canada’s New Anti-Terrorism Act and the “Green Syndicalist Menace” by Jeff Shantz
42. Democracy At Work Review essay by Iain McKay
50. Reviews: Lessons of the Spanish Civil War Jeff Stein
52. The Great Lawrence Textile Strike of 1912review by Steve Kellerman
53. Syndicalism in a Neo-Liberal Climate by Mark McGuire
55. Two Cheers For Anarchism review by Iain McKay
58. Celebrating a Frame-Up review by Robert Helms
58. The Legacy of Chinese Anarchism review by Jing Zhao
]]>
Editorial: The Capitalist Seige Mentality
Obituary: Penny Pixler
WOBBLES: Bosses want cheap workers, Union Scabbery, Amazon rips off workers, Educators under attack…
Syndicalist News: CNT gains ground, Workers occupy factory in Istanbul, Solidarity Federation wins unpaid wages, IWW picket attacked, Turkey: “It’s not an accident, it’s murder” … Compiled by Mike Hargis
Fast Food Walkouts: New Experimental Solidarity or Astroturf Smoke and Mirrors? by John Kalwaic
ARTICLES: Ukraine, Odessa, Anarchism in the context of civil war by Antti Rautiainen
Venezuela: Autonomy, self-management, direct action & solidarity by El Libertario
The making of an anarchist bookfair by Jay Kerr & Sid Parissi
Bakunin Bicentennary: An injury to one is an injury to all: Mikhail Bakunin’s social conception of freedom by Harald Beyer-Arnesen
Bakunin: Count on No One But Yourselves!
Bakunin & the First International by Jon Bekken
Politics at a distance from the State: Speech to South African Movements by Lucien van der Walt
Radical Happiness by Brian Martin
Work & Freedom by Jon Bekken
REVIEWS: Libertarian Socialism: Beyond Anarchism and Marxism? Review essay by Iain McKay
What really was the “Real Socialism” of the Soviet Union? Review by Wayne Price
Marxist economics for anarchists Review by J.N. McFadden
Green Syndicalism Review by Jon Bekken
]]>Review by Graham Purchase
I knew nothing about the development of anarchism in New Zealand before reading this well-researched and ably produced study. Sewing Freedom is a brief, readable and informative piece of anarchist historical scholarship examining movements, organizations and personalities active at the cusp of the 20th Century.
The book is nominally an account of the life of Josephs, who, from his little tailor’s shop, organized the distribution of anarchist literature he imported wholesale from London and America. Josephs was an anarchist of the category perhaps best described as the Kropotkinite-Freedom Group (London) tradition.
Josephs migrated to Glasgow from Latvia in 1897. There he married a cigarette-factory worker, fathered four children and toiled as a sweatshop machinist before moving to Wellington in 1904. In Wellington, he set up as a self-employed tailor-cum-anarchist bookseller, becoming involved in local revolutionary and anti-capitalist groupings, particularly the N.Z. Socialist Party, then a broad-based organization attracting many syndicalists. Activities focused around Socialist Hall, where lectures on such topics as socialist economics were delivered. Josephs contributed articles to the Commonweal and the Maoriland Worker, newspapers published by the NZSP and the Federation of Labor.
Strikes were illegal under an obsolete and bankrupt arbitration system, whose courts invariably favored employers despite low wages and increasing living costs. The first challenge to the arbitration system was an illegal strike by tram workers in 1906, followed by slaughtermen and miners (the Blackbull strike), culminating in the General Strike of 1913. The ‘Red-Fed’ (Federation of Labor) was an I.W.W. affiliate and the most revolutionary. The Federation split with the N.Z. Socialist Party because its members rejected parliamentary politics and trades unionism in favor of direct workers’ action. The syndicalist surge within the class struggles of 1908-13 was bolstered by a stream of noted revolutionaries and labor leaders who stepped off the ship and onto the soapbox. Transnational radical tourism created a melting pot of ideas which spawned a minority movement of anarcho-syndicalists within a radicalized and militant labor movement.
War legislation was used extensively to stymie revolutionary syndicalism, and a state-sponsored campaign against Wobbly-anarchist-socialism continued after the conclusion of the Great War. Fascination with Bolshevism after the Russian Revolution (1917) and the founding of the N.Z. Labor Party in 1916 corresponded with a decline in revolutionary syndicalism.
Josephs migrated to Australia in 1921, and little is known about his life thereafter. In truth not much is known about his life in New Zealand, either. But his life usefully serves as an anchor upon which to elaborate a modest but extremely cogent account of early anarchism and syndicalism and its relationship with the wider labor movement in New Zealand.
]]>During the shutdown, health and safety inspections of workplaces stopped, as did oversight of polluters. Museums, art galleries and public parks were closed. No one answered the phones at agencies charged with “enforcing” workers’ rights. But the border guards were out in full force, making sure none of our fellow workers crossed the borders money flows across so freely. The military continued its operations. No one was released from prison, not even those the administration concedes are victims of unfair treatment in the war on drugs. Whistleblowers like Private Manning were not set free; the persecution of those accused of lifting the curtain on the government’s secrets did not stop.
We can see what is important to the bosses in the list of essential “services” continued during the government shutdown, and in the list of those shuttered.
Even more telling was the pundits’ bleating. The government shutdown was not so bad, they said. We can get by just fine without parks and art, without labor rights and the like. What really matters – and on this the pundits were unanimous – is that Republicans back down on their threat to not lift the debt ceiling.
If they didn’t, horror of horrors, the government might go into technical default. The bankers would not receive their money on time! Financial markets would rebel! Catastrophe would ensue!
One can almost see the platoons of bankers, decked out in three piece suits, fountain pens in hand, parachuting in from their global tax havens to occupy Washington DC and set things right. Money must prevail! Debts must be paid!
They really don’t go to all that much trouble to conceal who’s in charge, and whose interests really matter.
*After we went to press, a deal was struck to slash food stamps by a “modest” $8 billion; the boss press and pundits hailed this bipartisan compromise, and expressed their fervent hope that it presages more of the same.
]]>On Oct. 1 and Dec. 12, the International Workers Association (AIT) organized international days of action against Santander Bank in solidarity with information technology workers facing casualization and retaliation for union activity.
Despite being highly profitable, the Santander Group (which bought U.S.-based Sovereign Bank in 2008, in the depths of the financial crisis using funds it pulled out of land speculation in Spain just before the bubble burst) has been slashing payrolls and outsourcing operations around the world. In order to evade Spanish laws providing protections for permanent workers, Santander’s information technology services subsidiary, ISBAN, is in the forefront of transforming thousands of what should be decent jobs into ill-paid temporary jobs. In August 2013, workers organized in the National Confederation of Labor (CNT-AIT) protested this outsourcing; ISBAN responded by firing the union delegate (as a “temporary” worker, technically he was merely returned to the employment agency that supplied him, Panel Sistemas), sending a clear message to Santander workers that they risk their jobs if they demand their rights as workers.
The historic international anarcho-syndicalist federation, the IWA-AIT, which includes labor unions as well as other groups, responded with demonstrations around the world. The COB in Brazil handed out flyers in Aracajú and Araxá. In Philadelphia, syndicalists leafleted a Santander branch across from City Hall. The Polish ZSP demonstrated in Warsaw where Santander is trying to expand. In Uruguay the anarcho-syndicalists of Montevideo visited the headquarters of Santander Bank for an informational picket.
The Portuguese section of the IWA-AIT organized pickets in Lisbon and Oporto. In Norway the NSF picketed in Oslo. In the UK the Solidarity Federation held informational pickets in Brighton and Hove. The FAU in Germany picketed in Koln. And of course there were protests across Spain.
Where there were no Santander branches, groups such as the KRAS in Russia and the PA in Slovakia demonstrated against affiliated companies such as Isban and Panel Sistemas.
The dismissed CNT delegate made a symbolic gesture of thanks for this solidarity by putting up a banner in English in his current workplace, Panel Sistemas.
]]>Dear J*,
If you watch the anarchist tirades coming from extremist Republicans in the House, you’d think they believe that the government that governs best is a government that doesn’t exist at all.
But behind all the slogans of the Tea Party – and all the thinly veiled calls for anarchy in Washington – is a reality: The American people don’t want a future without government.
When was the last time the anarchy gang called for regulators to go easier on companies that put lead in children’s toys? Or for inspectors to stop checking whether the meat in our grocery stores is crawling with deadly bacteria? Or for the FDA to ignore whether morning sickness drugs will cause horrible deformities in our babies?
When? Never. In fact, whenever the anarchists make any headway in their quest and cause damage to our government, the opposite happens.
After the sequester kicked in, Republicans immediately turned around and called on us to protect funding for our national defense and to keep our air traffic controllers on the job.
And now that the House Republicans have shut down the government – holding the country hostage because of some imaginary government “health care bogeyman” – Republicans almost immediately turned around and called on us to start reopening parts of our government.
Why do they do this? Because the bogeyman government in the alternate universe of their fiery political speeches isn’t real. It doesn’t exist.
Government is real, and it has three basic functions:
Provide for the national defense.
Put rules in place rules, like traffic lights and bank regulations, that are fair and transparent.
Build the things together that none of us can build alone – roads, schools, power grids – the things that give everyone a chance to succeed.
These things did not appear by magic. In each instance, we made a choice as a people to come together. We made that choice because we wanted to be a country with a foundation that would allow anyone to have a chance to succeed.
The Food and Drug Administration makes sure that the white pills we take are antibiotics and not baking soda. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration oversees crash tests to make sure our new cars have functioning brakes. The Consumer Product Safety Commission makes sure that babies’ car seats don’t collapse in a crash and that toasters don’t explode.
We are alive, we are healthier, we are stronger because of government. Alive, healthier, stronger because of what we did together.
We are not a country of anarchists. We are not a country of pessimists and ideologues whose motto is, “I’ve got mine, the rest of you are on your own.” We are not a country that tolerates dangerous drugs, unsafe meat, dirty air, or toxic mortgages.
We are not that nation. We have never been that nation. And we never will be that nation.
The political minority in the House that condemns government and begged for this shutdown has its day. But like all the reckless and extremist factions that have come before it, its day will pass – and the government will get back to the work we have chosen to do together.
Thank you for being a part of this,
Elizabeth Warren
Elizabeth,
Thank you for your letter, but it is confusing. Do you really consider your Republican counterparts in the House of Representatives to be “anarchists”? What leads you to believe that?
According to you an anarchist believes government is not necessary and wants to get rid of it. Is this what the Republican Party truly believes? According to you government has three basic functions: national defense, putting rules in place that are “fair and transparent”, and building things that we all need but cannot provide for ourselves. How can anybody be against that?
Certainly the Republican Party is not opposed to “national defense.” During the previous Republican Administration they were so much in favor of national defense they felt the need to defend the streets of Baghdad from Al-Qaeda, even though there were no members of Al-Qaeda to be seen anywhere in Iraq. Of course, the members of your Party, the Democratic Party, were no slouches when it came to national defense and voted to give Bush and Cheney the authority to invade that country. Good for you, you Democrats.
As you point out the Republicans have always been in favor of funding for bombs, the military, and any old thing the Pentagon wants. During the latest round of government defunding, they made sure that the troops would still get paid. After all, we can’t expect them to be in Afghanistan, Gitmo or other parts of our country being shot at without getting paid for it. If they stopped getting paid, the soldiers might get it into their heads to go home to their families. Not to mention those “defense” contractors that can always count on getting paid. So does paying the military make the Republicans “anarchists”? Certainly not.
That brings us to rules, especially rules that are “fair and transparent.” As you told us during the last election, many of us ordinary citizens have come to suspect “the system is rigged.” I thought you were right about that one. The electoral system is rigged. The political system is rigged. Certainly the economic system is rigged, which is why so many of us are either out of work or just struggling to get by.
The question we anarchists have is “do the rules that come from the Senate, Congress, or any of the various states really do away with rigging the system, or are they part of what makes the system unfair”? It is true that the deregulation of the financial sector played a big role in making the system less fair and less transparent, but is that all the Republicans’ fault? Seems to me that Bill Clinton and the Democrats played a big role in that, so is Bill Clinton an anarchist too?
As for that transparency thing, there are a couple guys named Manning and Snowden who would probably tell you that President Obama is no more interested in transparency than his Republican predecessors. Are you getting all this down, NSA?
I could go on and on about this law or that law that makes life in this country less fair. I don’t know that the Republicans are against these laws. Vaginal probes anyone?
And not that I have ever placed much faith in the electoral system, but how are those Republican voter I.D. laws working out for those of you who do? I remember when the U.S. military held the first elections in Iraq, all the Iraqis had to do was present their fingers to show they had no ink stains on them and our occupying military let them stick their finger in a bottle of ink and vote. Kind of simple wasn’t it? Maybe that’s how the majority ended up in power there (not that any government really operates according to majority rule). Good thing there weren’t any Green Party candidates over there trying to get on the ballot.
Finally you say the anarchists are against building things together that we all need but can’t build by ourselves and that it takes government to do that. Well, I admit the Republicans have been pretty stingy lately. But is either one of your propositions true, are Republicans against building stuff and does that make them anarchists? What about the Keystone Pipeline? The Republicans want to build that. That is pretty much a bipartisan issue. A lot of members of your party want to build that too.
On the other hand anarchists like roads, especially railroads and mass transit systems and other transportation that is more sustainable. We haven’t seen much a an effort by either the Republicans or Democrats to do that, so it may not be so much a question of building stuff but what your priorities are that makes you an anarchist.
So just to clue you in, there is a difference between the Republicans and the anarchists. True, we have both been known to rant about “the government,” but the difference between Republicans or Tea Baggers or the followers of Ayn Rand is that anarchists want liberty … and equality. Because we know that you can’t have one without the other. Equality in civil liberties. Equality in economic power. Equality in treatment regardless of what family you come from, or how you want to live your life. Liberty without equality is a political fiction.
Republicans don’t want liberty and equality, but neither do the Democrats. Your Party is just as much to blame for the globalization and financialization of the economy that have replaced the old forms of capitalist exploitation with new ones based on low wages and lifetime financial debt. If given the choice between your Party and the Republicans, and a real alternative, many would choose to have neither one of you. So you and your counterparts on the other side of the aisle continue to play Americans against each other. Don’t blame anarchists for the failings of your economic and political system.
Sincerely,
The Anarchists
]]>