Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.


0 votes

2 Answers

+3 votes
Best answer

consistent with what? some universal anarchist dogma? the social presumption that one must have a job; live a particular way; be "successful"?

for me, the first thing i would question is the desire for consistency. what does it mean to be "consistent"? consistent with what? and why? 

hypocrisy and contradictions (those words come to mind, they may not be precisely accurate) are an unfortunate reality for anyone that lives in this world - which is almost completely driven by economics and power struggles - and has radically different ideas about how they would like to live. such as anarchists. i personally seek to minimize those contradictions as much as possible, but i accept that i cannot avoid some of them. 

if you choose a life that requires a substantial and reliable income, then you will almost certainly need to hold a job of some sort (unless born rich). for sure, some jobs will be much more abhorrent to you than others, and if you have anarchist ideas about life, that will clearly impact your desires, if not your choices (hopefully both). 

my suggestion would always be to find/grow/learn/discover/create what are your desires and priorities, as well as (or as part of that) what it means to you to be an anarchist. of course some of that will come from interacting with others (human and otherwise), reading, observations, experiences, etc. but ultimately it has got to be yoursyour ideas, your desires, your life. only then can you know what you consider to be anarchistic, what goes against your anarchistic desires, and what other considerations will factor into your choices in life.

as dot mentioned below, this democrapitalistic shithole (modern society) is antithetical to most/all anarchistic ideas and desires (at least those i choose to associate with). that fact needs to be accepted and digested thoroughly. then an approach to dealing with it can be derived.

one choice is to do your best to live outside/away from it, minimizing the contradictions it requires (from those that don't buy into it - you?) as well as your interactions with it. another choice is to live within it, making the best of what it has to offer while trying to create an anarchistic life within it (which may be limited to intellectual exercises, writings and discussions). there are many other choices as well.


"What kind of job can an anarchist have?"  

an anarchist can have any job that anyone else can have - anarchists are people too. ;-)  if it is approval from other anarchists you are asking about, that is a different question, and you will no doubt get many different answers. some jobs may be more tolerable than others (and that will vary by individual), and some will require more in the way of compromise from an anarchist perspective. only you can decide where a reasonable balance is for you.

but to be clear: NO job is an "anarchist" job, so you either have to accept that and take a job that you can tolerate, or create a life where a job is not necessary (difficult, but not impossible). that in itself (the latter) will likely bring up its own set of compromises. but again, it is - or ought to be, imo - all about your needs and desires. 

"I understand that existing in such a manner contributes to capitalism but what other option do I have?"

if you are after that elusive "american dream" (which seems the case from a comment i saw), then probably none. if, on the other hand, you are open to exploring other ways of life (and there are many), you have virtually infinite options. to me, the key there is in figuring out what your priorities really are, based on your own needs and desires. and then setting about realizing them as best you can.

i guess that alludes to ba@'s question: what does "living better than most" mean?

damn, this funky dude can sure babble after a strong cup of coffee!

edit (just because this comment wasn't quite long enough), to more directly address the question:

being a teacher is a role that is well defined within a hierarchical structure. it also typically requires adherence to a curriculum that generally valorizes and perpetuates this entire system. on the other hand, it potentially provides some opportunity for exposing students to alternative ideas (with varying degrees of opposition from the hierarchy).

by (13.4k points)
selected by
0 votes
by (53.1k points)

funkyanarchy: "the only vagueness in the question is in how different people define "anarchist" and "teacher"."

yes, and the only other words in the question other than "consistent", are "is, be, to, for, and it".

lets face it...the question sucks as written...and your original answer points that out.

bummer we can't post any more....just when i felt ready to write again! well, i'll miss it for sure....

"so maybe you could get some clarification on terminology as others are using it, before you launch into defensive/attack mode."

dot was also imagining that i had a "pro vs. con" list:

"i think a better way to talk about jobs and anarchy in general is, how hard is it to be anarchist in a job, rather than some list of jobs: pro or con."

I'll repeat myself again: I do not like the idea of supposed anarchists telling people that certain jobs are inconsistent "with anarchy". Jobs are inconsistent with anarchy anyway, because you normally pay taxes, plus things are structured in a way that you normally can't run a business how you want to, especially if you don't like authority. I would like there to be people like James C. Scott or David Graeber in this somewhat depressing and terrifying world we live in rather than obedient anarchists who don't do what they want or are only focused on the money aspect of living/eating/dying.

I've been on this forum for years and have read lots of anarchist books, maybe you should rethink the problem with ideology and anarchist bosses before going into attack mode. I don't see what hairsplitting has to do with anarchy. To me it's just a word game, "this is this and that is that, mind your p's and q's and don't be a rat" type of deal.

I've also been using anarchist news for years and it's still mostly just a place for cyber-bullying and distortions of other people's intentions. The anarchist bosses get a Z in my book.

dot seems to be feeling incredibly tolerant or apathetic or something, i appreciate it. Another comment: i don't care about whether someone "is a teacher". The problem is what they do as a teacher. I'm pretty adament about anarchist free schools and anarchist free markets, but of course there's always the possibility that some anarchist will run a free school or free market in a way that would irritate me, and i don't see a problem with that at all! Part of my irritation is this is a school of anarchy, and dot is the school teacher clearly, and in a sense anyone who posts here non-questioningly is a school teacher as well, so yes it can be consistent or else dot isn't allowed to have this website, and we are nothing but hypocrites for posting in the positive/affirmative. Ya'll may want school to just mean one thing forever so that you can rebel against it, but the english language is already multivalent, things have more than one meaning, and humans are perpetual creators of meanings!

I refuse to support empty protest and rebellion, i'm also pretty enraged by this weird anarchist voting >:-(. Votes are only a form of power brokering in both the larger and grassroots scope of things, I vote no to anarchist voting! Anarchist preachers, holy rollers, and demagogues like myself are also lame!

We are nothing!

Absolutely, the question is vague. I was hoping my comment would've got peeps to think more about what a school can be. dot gave a short-sighted, blanket answer of "no" on whether a school teacher is consistent with anarchism. I was a bit surprised it wasn't downvoted into oblivion since one word or vague answers, are more often than not, downvoted into oblivion on here. Anyways, since the site uses the American college course numbering system and is set up similar to online class, dot's answer would mean answering questions on this site is inconsistent with anarchism. People answering questions and discussing them fill the role of the teacher. People asking questions and discussing them fill the role of the student. For moi, I would be more of a student on this site since I've asked more questions than answered. 

I mean, how ya finna be like "no" on a site called anarchy 101 in which they run. Does not compute.

A school can be a formal or informal place/setting where one can learn and discuss something with someone knowledgeable in whatever area.  A teacher is one that helps guide or instructs the person on whatever the subject. The teacher doesn't necessarily have to be a person. Like is the school of hard knocks inconsistent or teaching a bunch of people that wanted to learn tiger-style kung-fu inconsistent? If it's always inconsistent, regardless of the context or situation, then I dunno. Sounds wack.

every time we communicate we use words that can mean various things. 101 doesn't have to be a hard connect to school. it could be a soft, mocking connect. brevity doesn't have to be hostile, it could be provocative (or both). subsequent comments that echo previous ones don't have to be *answers* to the previous ones, they could riffs on a theme.

some thoughts for the future for me, at least.