Do you think the problem with anarchism is anarchists? It is certainly a multifaceted avenue to walk, a many coloured mosaic, but are its variations, its strength or its weakness?
An interesting article from libertarian-labyrinth:
Read the full article HERE:As for energy and perseverance, I can honestly say that I have never been more in love with the ideal of anarchy or more convinced of the possibility of its practical application, provided people actually want it. I feel like I have a clear sense of the general lines of the tradition and, somewhat surprisingly, that the elements that originally drew me to that tradition were no so marginal to it as I had been led to believe. I find myself curiously mainstream, with a line of influences running right through the heart of the “classical” part of the tradition (roughly Fourier—Proudhon—Bakunin—Mella—Nettlau—> .)
The last couple of years have been like a homecoming, though perhaps a little light at times on the welcome. The last couple of months have been about getting okay with all of that.
It’s not so easy to feel like you have finally reached the sort of understanding you’ve been struggling toward, and to end up feeling more than a bit lonely when you get there. It’s easy to imagine that, even among anarchists, failure to conform is failure. But I’ve come to believe, over time and through periods of wrestling with facts and stakes, that it is unfortunate, but not unlikely that coming to terms with the ideal of anarchy, in the midst of a world that is so firmly set against it, should be an isolating affair. I’ve spent a lot of time, particularly quite recently, in the context of some other anarchists’ explorations of similar concerns, thinking about what “not giving up” and “not burning out” might look like, and also what it might look like it the burn-out was more general than individual. And I’ve reached my own conclusions, for better or worse, and this time around I really think that, well…
(It appears that this article has been removed from The Labyrinth.)