"Whoever denies authority and fights against it is an anarchist." Sébastien Faure as quoted on p. 11 of 'Anarchism', by George Woodcock, broadview encore editions, 2004.

Since this is degenerating at the moment into a 'what am I reading'-diary, and I was anyway looking to do a 'Pop Culture' entry (it being long ago and all), why not do an anarchist quote?

It's not like the reader - if any - has a choice in the matter ;-)

So I'm an anarchist. That means I have a problem. Because to a real anarchist I will be an example of le nouveau bourgeois. A real anarchist will undoubtedly tell me an enormous amount of things that I will have to give up in order to be a real anarchist (plus probably some things I need to pierce through some selected body parts).

There you have my problem: I'm very bad with authority. So, I wouldn't listen to any well meant advise; certainly if that advise basically consists in telling me what needs to be done to enter a certain group of non-individuals. Nope, I am a bourgeois, and I am proud to be. I want my luxury and I feel no inclination whatsoever to fight, and revolutionize things by waving my arms about and chanting stuff in street choirs. No, I won't get involved in any of this marching and sacrificing and denouncing ...

And I certainly don't feel like using the word 'propaganda' as if it was a normal word that did not carry the connotation of brainwashing.

Nor do I particularly care for secret gatherings where people conspire to great things, smoking some stuff & ultimately going home drunk and/or stoned (mostly without a real prospect for having sex).

No, I like my luxury. I like my laziness. I like having the wealth of aristocrats & sons of craftsmen in the XIXth century that had both time & resources to concentrate on a life of thought and action and boozing with like minded souls.

Still I'm also an anarchist because I like my lifestyle and independence so very very much that I'd very much like everybody to be as bourgeois as I am. Some would be very harsh on me for wishing universal laziness. Many of them would say: it is a very decadent thing to convince everybody that they should be as decadent as I am.

They would be right! I am a decadent. This is the decadence movement. Without an exclamation mark ;-)

Whilst writing this I was listening to The Ramones, Weird Tales of The Ramones.

22:12 Gepost door Guido Nius in Vrije tijd | Permalink | Commentaren (4) | Tags: intention, imagination, pop culture, decadence, boldness |  Facebook |


From an anthropologic angle (aren’t we both men?) anarchy is really fascinating…a strong temptation.

It’s about man affirming himself towards the infinity.

The religious man likes infinity as well. Fascinating…

That’s why we are so close

But man cannot affirm himself against everybodyeverything….

Religious man accepts infinity as the meaning of himself

That’s why we are at the opposite.

Anyway….anarchist and religious man are the only two types of man deserving to be defined as such.

Gepost door: Stena | 01-04-10

Optimism You know, as much as I hate to admit it, maybe you are right. If the infinite is seen as a progress toward something positive; if it allows us a freedom which is free from paying our dues, but challenges us to give our contribution (proudly but modestly); if ...; then I believe I can accept such an infinity, as the meaning of myself, no sweat.

And that would indeed be the opposite: an infinity of original sins and burdens for which we need sacrifice and all that stuff that stresses people to do things in the name of something grand and stresses others .. in short the type of inifinity that makes life on earth a Purgatorio, too short to even redeem one's self in.

But I know that most self-proclaimed anarchists are more religiously fanatic in the sense of this last para than most quietly religious people.

I do find more pleasure in the bourgeois religious. & That's what I wanted to convey, I guess: that family people with ordinary life styles unsuited for heroism but not content to leave things as they are, that this type of people are the future. Not those that assert themselves continuously against whatever - getting addicted to being 'in the picture'. But those that are quietly optimistic, because they know their children are better than they could have been.

A reply longer than the original post ;-)

Gepost door: despreker | 01-04-10

Infinity, with capital letter, for a religious men is one of the different ways they have to give God a name. And (real) freedom lies in the relationship with Infinity. Strange but true. Otherwise men is a slave.
But I recognize the anarchist is not (or at least has a chance for not being)....ideoligies do not live in there.
Anarchist likes men more than any other men (that's fascinating). But anarchist walks this over the final boundary by considering men the "one and only" without any limit (to the infinite), without recognizing there is a boundary. And there is a boundary where every man have to recognize tere is something else....
That's why religious men is even more fascinating to me...ulitmately even more free...

would have more to say on Purgatorio...

Gepost door: stena | 02-04-10

infinity No I can't do thát. There is 'a man', 'men', 'man' and mankind. For sure not even stupid anarchists limit it to man and men (we are not nihilists after all). But a smart anarchist, like me, knows that 'man' is rather worth the effort already & mankind is all the infinity we will ever need. Any further freedom is pretense - the pretense of being in a better tradition.

Gepost door: thespeaker | 02-04-10

De commentaren zijn gesloten.