Add new comment

Humanispherian begins by taking a paragraph from one ofmy essays on democracy. It is a good choice, since it raises such an important point, But then they do not even try to respond to it. How would an anarchist community decide on whether to build a new road, if there are differences of opinion? H.'s lack of response is intellectually cowardly.

Instead we are back to meaningless abstractions. God forbid the individual members of a commune should get together, talk it out, and come to a joint decision about what to do about the road or any other issue facing the commune. If they do, then the community of individuals will supposedly be 'occupying a position above that of the "members," mediating and constraining their relations, demanding sacrifices to "the collective." ' From there, there is barely a step to Lumpentroll's fantasies of mass murdering Stalinist dictatorships. If we take Humanisphere's principles to be anarchism, then clearly anarchism cannot work and we might as well settle for some conception of statist reformism. Thankfully I do not agree.