A New Anarchist FAQ: An Introduction to Anarchy in the 21st Century
A New Anarchist FAQ: An Introduction to Anarchy in the 21st Century
raddle.me
Just a moment...
It is an attempt at a crowdsourced alternative to An Anarchist FAQ, mainly aiming to eliminate any biases by having multiple people write this work.
But many people did work on afaq, no?
Edit: what things do you think are biased on afaq? I feel like a link to a critique would help.
Raddle is very post-left. For example:
Like I would argue that the items to the left of the bolded text make anarchists leftists, in the sense that we claim to support (and do support) non-hierarchical modes of living as the classical Left claims to do as well. Of course any serious left-wing anarchists do not want to replicate the left wing of the State. But making that critique and rejecting left unity where it conflicts with our anarchist values does not mean that we're not leftists and that there's nothing to be learned from classical Left literature.
So I would assume that the bias is towards the classical Left. Which...I think that the original FAQ is pretty critical of the classical Left? But a shorter FAQ for outsiders or classical-Left-averse people is still incredibly useful IMO.
Very informative! Thanks a lot! :)
I should have clarified in the post; this is not my opinion, nor am I a participant of Raddle. I just found a cool link that I wanted to share.
According to Raddle,
Again, I don't have much of an opinion on this, as I don't know how much of it is true. I haven't read AFAQ in much detail: I preferred the digestibility of Peter Gelderloos' Anarchy Works.
Thank you for clarifying. That helps a great deal! :)
Nothing about Raddle, or it's creator, deserves any kind of trust.
It's maker, Ziq, was caught red-handed on Raddle using an army of sock-puppet accounts to harass participants and manipulate narratives on Raddle itself - a method they were suspected of using to disrupt and hijack r/anarchism way back when.
They are literally a text-book example of a bad actor.
I started the new FAQ, I can provide direct quotes from the old FAQ to outline its biases if you want. But biases aren't really a problem, that's to be expected in any project, the problem is the vicious smears it directs at anarchists of different schools, and the way it's tries to assert monolithic thought onto anarchy, especially the author's ideology of majoritarianism which he borrows from Murray Bookchin's theories.
Hi, I'm the one who started the new FAQ. I started it specifically because the old FAQ repeatedly claims anarchy is dedicated to majoritarianism i.e. direct democracy, and because of how readily it smears and dismisses green anarchy, while praising non-anarchists like Murray Bookchin. You can see some examples here: https://raddle.me/wiki/A_New_Anarchist_FAQ_Instructions
Wait, are you Ziq?
EDIT: It seems so. So, still steadfastly opposed to postmill joining the fediverse? Then you wouldn't need accounts like these to interact :D
Thanks. I'll check that out. That said, I happen to be in a lot of anarchist groups and read quite a bit in between.
Afaik, the afaq rightfully claims that both direct democracy and consent are legit ways of anarchist group decisionmaking. I'd agree if you said it doesnt shed light of things like qualified majorities which are used in anarcho syndicalism quite a bit.
Am I missing something?