hpwombat writes:

"Why We Desire Destruction and Not Socialism"
Heretic and High Priest Wombat, KSC

What is Socialism?

The movements for socialism cannot exist without capitalism and their logic is that of civilization. Critiques of the totality cannot develop within the framework of these movements, only certain things are of value to be critiqued and these movements always have an alternative. If they are not utopian, which to some socialists is desirable, but not necessary, then they are progressive. Reduce pollutants but don't question the logic of work and the technology that drives it. We must put socialism to the question and its ultimate strategy for complete domination, rather than for the end of it.

First there is state socialism, a name we give to the movements and their strategies for achieving progress through state power. All of socialism is justified by some method or appeal to democracy and so participating in a democratic process, such as the election of representatives is just a move towards expanding democracy. According to many socialists, if the majority were given democracy, they would choose progressive policies and may even choose socialism over capitalism, should such a thing ever come to the ballot. Some state socialists are wary of democracy as it stands for one reason or another and opts instead to lead, as a vanguard, the movements for socialism towards their ascension over the state through undemocratic means, but not because they reject democracy but rather they fight for the future of democracy.When socialism wields state power it does so as a matter of politics, not of utility, ideology finds compromises to ensure and justify the power of progress in the regime. The state socialist's political aim could be to command or to grant industry benefits for backing the regime's method of progress. If the socialist does not command the economy, often the regime will assist unions in their ability to control the behavior of industry or back the development of cooperative business.

When not intervening in economic affairs, which is often the case of today's socialism, the socialist regime opts to intervene in the moral values of the nation, defining by law what is right or wrong behavior for individuals or groups to engage in. Abortion, recreational drug use, sexual conduct, racial and/or ethnic conflicts and so on are debated within our culture, but power is given to the regime to decide if and when to intervene. When a social regime opts to intervene it is usually with the ideas of humanism at heart and a desire to grant as much equality as possible given the political climate and position of socialism.

It is humanism and other enlightenment ideas that socialism pursues in every method that socialism uses to achieve power. The socialist political pressure group can find many forms, be it the total strategy a social group pursues or just one of the many arms it wields. This pressure group could make pretenses of democracy through grassroots organizing or nakedly lobby the government for enlightened reforms, being that pressure groups are ineffective in their goals except when the government plays politics with them, regardless of the regime's political persuasion. This includes direct actions that end when a reform is granted in the hopes of persuading the attacks to end. The pressure group therefore will demand state intervention or its removal to maintain its relevance. The reform is always the short term aim to a future program that never fulfills its ideological agenda.

We conclude this summary of socialism with the more democratic and libertarian socialisms where the cooperative and the union be it trade and/or industrial and the community meeting could bring socialism through those who see the autonomous institution as developing a counter-power, even challenging the socialist regime's, creating a dual power situation which pressures the government according to the desire of these nongovernmental organizations. Some see the ultimate end of this dual power as the ascension of the more democratic and union/cooperative over state ran capitalism, which will expose that bureaucracy without bosses is not even that threatening in comparison to how society is controlled today.

Democratic vs. libertarian tends to deal with a large gray area. Ideas revolving around work involve both strains, but it is often the democratic socialist who has a basis for voting for candidates in office and sometimes libertarian socialists are for voting against candidates in office, but for the most part libertarians question or reject voting, preferring the focus of social progress to be that of developing or empowering misery relieving institutions.

Some libertarian socialists advocate a cadre federation. This style of federation fulfills a position similar to a state vanguard party, but focuses on intervention within grassroots organizations and unions, pushing them towards militant methods to ensure stronger reforms, if successful. The union can be (and is) a social service that began spontaneously and then later institutionalized itself as well as the cooperative business, both of which began with equalitarian desires in mind. Just as well, credit unions and the many varieties of insurance were once projects of socialism. Remove the profit motive and add a dash of democracy, then wham! capitalism...err...something socialistic and workerist is created.

Why not Socialism?

Why is it so confusing in the anarchist milieu to see negation as a necessity towards a willful destruction of the present order in its totality? This discussion will fall within a smaller circle than most. This question is posed toward not just anarchists with leftist tendencies but also towards those with a critique of the left and attempt to act accordingly.

Workerist anarchists use progress as excuse for why they don't strike. They are quick to talk of revolution but see building their worker religion first then Valhalla! The demons are smeared under the massive weight of this procrastinating series of ideologies.

Many anarchists are so caught up in the behavior of a natural future, that utopia in their head, that they try to make everyone behave as they would then. Their millenarian notions, their thoughts cause them from achieving a lot of what they can do. Many often reject destruction as too soon, and thus prevents them from attacking the very structures that they themselves usually admit are in the way of people being liberated. They also fail to critique these methods of work and the technology that drives it. Instead they back an ideology that controls the damaging affects of both, rather than the very negation of their control.

"The General Strike for Industrial Freedom" published by the IWW is a good example of ignoring the critique of the division of labor. They insist on uniting with techno experts so they can fulfill industrialism and keep everyone in the role of the worker and democrat. Not only that, throughout the booklet they kept mentioning that insurrections are pointless or even perhaps attempting a coup, reducing revolt to a political maneuver. The one big union then proposes a general strike, where they seize the factories and intend on developing a global industrial democracy, an international web of technology and morally coerced democratic behaviors, where time is divided between the "short" work day with equally or maybe even more time spent in horrendously boring meetings with people you don't socialize with outside these meetings.

To the Post-Left

Those who are critical of the left understand the value of critique, yet they fear acting on their desires. Yes, the totality of control must be destroyed if it is ever to disappear, but we destroyers see it as a conscious choice to go with. This is a path that frightens many for the path runs against the control of the totality.

Those who don't see destruction as their will can always aid in the networking that is required to develop in order for these actions to spread and multiply. The can provide the funding, the housing, the food, mutual aid networks, the social centers. Perhaps even spreading propaganda promoting the end of the boredom, hypocrisy and lameness that onslaughts our lives everyday. They can learn criminal behaviors necessary to survive without work and without gaining attention or alerting officials. The can create prisoner defense networks and help prisoners find like-minded people. The can just do their own desire, some help, some don't, the willful destruction of the totality is just that, its a self desire, not a moral one.

Why Willful Destruction?

Every kind of compulsory morality is up for question and not only that, which is simply post-left critique, it is up for destruction, which moves us into the anti-left. When you have a compulsory moral conception its bound to lead to one form or another of oppression. You are looking at a monolithic conceptions of an ideal society that is something that is imposed on someone's will outside of their actual desire rather than based on what they do desire, regardless should this be a present or a future ideal. Both the capitalism we are presented with today and the socialism offered for the future are controllers of the totality that we must live with.

Targets of destruction can be many. Though the first thought on using such a hard word as destruction leads one to think of the physical destruction, it is more than that. We must question and attack morality, regardless of how benevolent the intentions moral conceptions always get in the way of choice or provide us with a false choice. The recuperation of insurrection is because of the false promises of socialism and it takes away an individual's ability to revolt because their revolt must come under the name or an ideal, be it a vanguard or a democratic assembly, rather than dealing with the situation of eliminating that with impedes their desires and living how they choose. For all the socialists like to talk about empowerment, they disempower individuals. This is why when the project of destruction comes into an insurrectionary situation, it is important to intervene and negate recuperating behaviors whenever possible. This may be by word and persuasion or by deed, should it seem that the forces of mediation will succeed in ending this period of wide disgruntlement.

One problem we see with a lot of anarchists is that they feel that ideology is to be dismissed but confuses this dismissal with dismissing critiques and confuse people being willing to destroy with people just attacking people with contrary views. They feel that we propose an ideology of destruction, when in fact we only want people to understand and be aware of the need for us to willfully destroy if we are to be free of the constraints that the totality imposes on us, we do not propose that everyone go against their own desires.

If we are to destroy, we should only consider what we are capable of doing, it comes down to understanding our own position and acting from that position. If we aren't capable or if we don't feel we can succeed, then either try to improve our abilities or find something we can succeed with. Some efforts can be through discussion, exposing the fallacies to others that this totality presents on us, destroying the illusions that people stand up for so that even should they not agree with our solutions, they will question the solutions that ideology offers and find their own path, their own desires. They can see that they can hate work, monogamous relationships, technological devices, poisonous fumes, urban sprawl, commercials, political debates, college, religion and the list goes on and on.

The liberation of desire is about finding your own desires and should you decide that you have had it with how this society operates, then it must be negated. People will attack the totality through many methods, sometimes the attacks will be symbolic, such as the breaking of a window and sometimes it will be meant to do economic damage, such as arsoning a car lot. Sometimes it will be written or verbal, exposing the harm that a political regime has done or screaming about atrocities businessmen have done at a public gathering to feed the homeless. It is simply important to know that we don't have to wait anymore, those that wait are only fooling themselves, act as you desire now.