Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
At its best, classical anarchism combined the fervor of revolutionary communism with the Kantian moral claim that one should never use another human being as a means to an end -- thus foreclosing many of communism's most powerful revolutionary strategies. It was a profound and contradictory movement, and I'm glad O'Hehir mentioned that most anarchists never supported indiscriminate terrorism, as well as the role they played in the rise of social welfare movements.
"Western society in its late consumer-capitalist phase no longer produces its own internal enemies."
Like "The Terrorism Bubble" or "The End of History," this smacks of a naive conclusion based on surface observations. Western society produces plenty of internal enemies, it's just that America has more space, more wealth and way more distractions then other, more socially involved societies.
You can thank our Vast Entertainment Complex, the greatest pacifier in the history of the world.
an excellent article. More please.
Which it will. We are going to have to watch out for the American Taliban. Rednecks who are the poorest of this nation taking up arms against the government for the rich.
Yes they are that stupid.
Hannity is asking his flock which type of revolution would they prefer on his website.
I dare not link.
maybe someone can wake up Julius Evola and call up Jacques Verges, and we can all have ourselves a nice intellectual Salon.
Interesting, but as usual, what we can learn from the French usually has more to do with sex, wine and cuisine than with ethics or morals. I love these esoteric moralists who probably have never had any tragedy in their lives asking questions like... "which was worse for America 9/11 or Guantanamo"? If you have to ask a question like that, you'll never understand the answer. If this silly bastard had lost a loved one on 9/11, I dare say he would not even consider that question, never mind asking it.
watch your back pal, I think the stupid rednecks have your number
"Western world's first encounter with terrorism, at least as we use that word today"
So how do we define it today? Individuals and groups have committed voilent act against civilian targets for political (and religious) reasons for centuries, since the Roman empire at least. Anarchism might more correctly be called the last time the West was so preocuppied with terrorism.
Was Nat Turner a terrorist?
Within the same generation that TECUMSEH terrorized the White Man in the USA, a towering American military man was given that name Maj. General William Tecumseh Sherman- did his parents somehow admire the leader of the Black Halk War?
PONTIAC was ruthless. Torture and an inability to make truce with the American White Man gained him enormous noteriety- within a few generations U.S. Auto designers named a car after him- featuring his likeness on the hood!
Nat Turner was pictured on a U.S. postage stamp back in the 1980's.
Gush Imun and innumerable Israeli terorists are considered heroes in our land as well as in Zion.
How about the Biblical and Koranic injustices upon innocents? The Holy Books are full of terror committed by the saintly.
St Francis of Assisi was even involved in a crusade.
St Joan? a fearless terror in her day.
Think they'll be any likeminded revisionist history on the current batch of evil doers someday?
Grahame Greene (the Native American hiustorian and actor) claims that Captain George Washington once caused a French- British world war by turning over French Prisoners from the Mononghahela conflict (sp) over to the murderous forces of the HALF KING who scalped them all, prizing their blonde and red locks for years.
So what is this terror- the one that loses its terrorizing as the pages turn?
There is a very real chance that the mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and other hellholes will lead to the deaths of far more Americans than the number who died in the 9/11 attacks. Every act of brutality we commit acts as a tool for recruiting among terrorist organizations. We've already lost far more troops in Iraq and Afghanistan than the 9/11 death toll, and I guarantee you that most of those deaths were caused by people who, although they may not have liked Americans very much, weren't actually motivated to go out and kill them until we invaded their countries. These deaths happen by ones and twos, so they don't grab the same kind of attention as the Twin Towers -- but they're still just as dead.
Dear Mr. O'Herir,
The first letter I ever wrote to Salon was in enthusiastic response to a markedly well-written review of yours.
Thanks for another very interesting and well-written article. Reading that was a pleasure.
Sincerely,
david terry
So there is finally a serious article in a mainstream publication that discusses anarchists, but only in terms of the stereotype of chucking bombs. Tactics have moved along somewhat since then, although, alas, not that much more successfully.
Actually, some anarchist thought with regard to ownership of the means of production and (non-personal) "property equals theft" could be interesting to reflect on at these times.
During the presidential campaign last year, there was an entertaining kerfuffle over William Ayers, late of the Weather Underground. (remember Mrs. Palin's deathless phrase "pallin' around with terrorists"?) A Chicago Tribune columnist, Steve Chapman, wrote a critique of Obama, and at that time I wrote the following to the Tribune. It reiterates a couple of the anarchist points O'Hehir explixates in his excellent review. Apparently, I must be a middle-class fellow-traveller.
We’re all terrorists. Steve Chapman’s column about Barack Obama’s friendship with Bernardine Dohrn and William Ayers (”About Obama’s terrorist acquaintance,” Commentary, April 20) was far, far too simplistic. All of us who were adult Americans in the ’70s were complicit in one form or terror or another.
Yes, police officers were tragically lost in a foolish attempt to attack the U.S. government, but all such casualties were part and parcel of a foolish war instigated by a Democratic president and continued by a Republican.
The Weather Underground is guilty of terror, as is each Vietnam vet who killed or ordered the killings of civilians. I sat on my 2-S deferment and let it all happen; I’m guilty.
We’re all ex-terrorists, no matter which side we enabled then or are on now. That’s what wars of aggression do to the instigating nations.
Obedience and loyalty are never excuses for sins against mankind. Finger-pointing won’t hide that.
–Chris Deignan
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
