Superficially, anarchism is a movement of the Left but this is not strictly
so, since it implies being part of the political spectrum. Anarchists reject
this, asserting that there is more in common between Right and Left
political parties (like the struggle for power) than between even extreme
Left political groups and the anarchists. History has shown us that no
matter how 'Left' a party is when it starts off, the achievement of power
brings it round to the Right, for every government wants to maintain the
status quo; wants to extend the control it has over the people, and isn't
this what the Right really means?
Certain right-wing attitudes are specifically rejected by left-wing parties
- until they become useful in the power game. 'Divide and Rule', for
example, can be played with many variations, from wage differentials to
religious and colour prejudice, and although nationalism is intellectually
rejected by the political Left, they quite shamelessly use what are quaintly
called 'National Liberation Movements' when it suits their political
ambitions - and a 'Left' party in power knows very well the usefulness of
nationalism and indeed patriotism as a weapon of government. Even if this
were not deliberate cunning on the part of a so-called 'revolutionary
government', the logic of authoritarianism leads to it.
--this was reprinted from http://flag.blackened.net/antinat/anarnat.txt
also check out http://www.spunk.org/library/writers/goldman/sp000064.txt for a haunting view of patriotism before even the World Wars were fought.
3 comments:
Here i stand in front of the greatness of your words,
for ever so over powerful each one of them are.
jo..Hannahthemaid....
i HAVE READ ALL THE COMMENTS HERE AND I AM STILL SHAKING MY HEAD. THE MAN THAT WROTE THIS HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. HE USES BIG WORDS AND STATISTICS TO PROVE NOTHING. WHAT IS A PATRIOT? WHEN JAPAN INVADED THE UNITED STATES SHOULD WE HAVE JUST LET THEM COME IN AND TAKEN OVER OUR LAND AND PEOPLE? THIS MAN TALKS BIG BUT I WONDER HOW BIG HE WOULD BE TALKING IF IT WERE HIS FAMILY WITH A TERROIST GUN TO THEIR HEADS AND THREATING TO KILL ALL OF THEM. WOULD HE WANT OUR NATION TO SEND IN TROOPS TO FREE HIS FAMILY? OR HIMSELF? IT IS SO EASY TO DENOUNCE SOMETHING WHEN YOU ARE NOT INVOLVED IN IT PERSONALLY AND SIT AT HOME IN FRONT OF A COMPUTER AND WRITE YOUR FEELINGS BEING PROTECTED BY THESE SAME SOLDIERS THAT YOU DENOUNCE. I DONT LIKE THIS MANS WAY OF THINKING AND HE IS A COWARD . HOW DARE HE SIT THERE AND SAY THAT OUR MEN IN UNIFORM ARE A JOKE. MANY OF THEM HAVE DIED JUST TO GIVE HIM THAT RIGHT TO SPEAK AS HE DOES. IF NOT FOR OUR MEN IN UNIFORM HE WOULD NOT HAVE ALL THE FREEDOM AND RIGHTS THAT HE HAS NOW. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HIM THERE WITH OUR SOLDIERS TALKING TO THEM ABOUT BEING A PATRIOT. JANE FONDA WAS A TRAITOR AND GOT TWO MEN BEATEN ALMOST TO DEATH AND ONE WAS BEATEN TO DEATH BECAUSE OF HER BELIEFS. SHE HANDED THEM OVER TO THE PRISON GUARD AND BETRAYED THEN JUST AS IF SHE HAD BEAT THEM HERSELF. HOW SHE CAN LIVE WITH HERSELF IS BEYOND ME. I DETEST THE WOMAN AND HER APOLOGY AFTERWARD TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MEANS NOTHING TO ME. tO THE FAMILIES OF THE THREE MEN THAT SHE BETRAYED. PARTIOTISM WITH OUT IT THERE WOULD BE NO UNITED STATES AND THIS MAN WOULD NOT BE FREE NOW. HE WOULD BE ROTTING IN A JAIL AND TORTURED UNTIL HE SAW THERE WAY OF THINKING. IT IS SO EASY TO WRITE WHEN YOU ARENT THERE ISNT IT.
wow brightstar...you too, huh? the point wasn't about protecting our nation. Her point was that because We as Americans, and They as Japanese, Vietnamese, Iraqi, or otherwise, are all convinced we need to protect our soil. Another point was that we are ALL humans, we need to work together instead of fighting each other in the name of patriotism. She is not saying what you think she is saying... in fact, you obviously didn't notice that the person that was writing about patriotism was a woman.
Post a Comment