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.


–3 votes

edited for tags
edited by
While the original question might be discussion worthy (though I think there are related questions already going) your mode of explaining your question is a huge turn off. Personally, I come here for discussion, not booklists. Try articulating your question more in depth, maybe using the ideas /you/ find worthwhile in those texts to back it up, if you think they are /that/ relevant.

3 Answers

0 votes
Democracy is often about choosing a power, a ruler or a reign, choosing a political party to have all the power of a country, and while that probably is better than a fascist state where a ruler brutes or bribes himself to power without being elected, it still is choosing someone else to rule and decide for you, which doesn't make that much sense from an anarchistic perspective.

If you talk about democracy in another way. Let say that the public votes for some political decision through a non-power society, well its a bit different, and perhaps depends a bit on the issue.. but in most cases it still makes no sense that a majority of people should decide over everybody. Its still kind of statist. Anarchists usually believes in freedom to the individual, and not in the support of controlling others.  

Being ruled by others just because they're in a majority makes little sense. Kind of a "argumentum ad populum", really.
by (150 points)
0 votes
I have also heard left communists saying that they are "anti-democracy" so this is an important issue to deal with (in fact you also place some left communist texts such as by authors like Gilles Dauve). I see myself both as an anarchist and a democrat and i am clearly not something strange within anarchism. Democracy is a form of decision making within a group. But i think the anarchists and left communists who say they are "anti-democracy" need to be more careful in their use of the word democracy. It seems they reduce the word democracy to the contemporary systems of state administration which more specifically should be called "parlamentary electoral systems" and "centralist representational democracy". I see myself againts such systems and instead i advocate federal systems of networked communities and forms of local direct democracy with representation reduced to a minimum.

On the other hand i see that under democracy, even of a local direct nature, there could be forms of legislation which i would be againts which are those which will try to legislate over one´s thought and body. For example forbidding people of using drugs, forbidding people of engaging in homosexual relationships or forcing everyone to adhere to christianity or islam. So it will be a democratic measure if a community decided in a majoritarian position to prohibit drug intake and homosexual relationships or forcing everyone a particular religion and so in a sense i will be an antidemocrat for rejecting a community to legislate over one´s body and thought. This could be identified as an individualist anti-democratism and one could say that it is a common position within anarchism.

On the other hand i think means of production and shared spaces do need to have some forms of collective decisions to be agreed and so i think the forms which are closer to justice is that the decisions which will affect a particular group to be decided by that group and not bureucrats, particular career politicians or an aristocracy or a monarch. So i advocate nonrepresentational democracy and i will see both anarchists and left communists as nonrepresentational democrats. I will just suggest these writers of anarchist and left communist "anti-democracy" to be more careful in their use of concepts in order to avoid confusions and bad interpretations.

Specifically as far as left communists right wingers will say that since they reject democracy they must want a leninist dictator which of course is not the case. As far as anarchists right wingers will accuse them of wanting an end of the state and then mafias and chaos will take place of the state which of course is also not the case. It seems to me that the "anti-democrats" left communists and anarchist might be getting some pleasure in raising the controversial and sensationalistic "anti-democracy" stand but in that they end up losing in correct understanding of their positions.
by (3.3k points)
edited by