- Original Content
- Party TIme
- Environmental Disaster
- Life Styles
- MBN LIVE
- Our Projects
- Thunder Dome
- Other News
- Site RSS Map
This is an excerpt from an interview with philosopher and author Paul Mattick Jr. It is the third in a series of interviews conducted with participants from the Global Uprisings conference, that occurred during the weekend of November 15-17th, 2013.
View more interviews and online documentaries at globaluprisings.org.
First off, let me apologize for using those terms, left & right. What I mean by that is Anarcho-Communists and Anarcho-Capitalists.
What I mean by 'circular argument' is that it just goes around and around, always returning where it started, with no resolutions or agreements made. No further understanding is achieved either. Usually, neither side understands how in the world the other can believe what they believe. Let me be one of the few to say, I understand BOTH sides & I think that we argue with more platitudes than realistic statements.
One of the biggest issues there lies in the time setting of the discussion. I often find Anarcho-Capitalists will discuss life in a time AFTER government has been abolished, anarchy has been accepted as the most moral way of life, & communities are deciding amongst themselves what their rules should be (unanimously). Anarcho-Communists will discuss life in a time that is either BEFORE government has been abolished or DURING the abolishment of government. In the discussion of life before government is abolished, they usually seem to argue for a conversion from our current governing structure into communism, then just pull the leaders out afterward (I know I'm hacking the argument apart to a very bare bones view, but stick with me here). In the discussion of life during the abolishment of government, they're usually explaining that the conversion into anarchy would inherently (in their belief) go straight into communism, but without any leaders.
At first glance (& if you've never watched one of these arguments amongst anarchists happen) you might not see why that matters. So I hope I can lay out the arguments & dissect it accordingly so it all makes sense. I'll attempt to do so using the arguments as they usually happen when I'm in them.
THE ARGUMENT BEGINS!