Add new comment

(1) Dunbar's theory covered the limits on the number of people an individual's brain can effectively handle. I do not know much about it, but it fits into the data on human scale which Kirkpatrick Sale collected a while ago. It supports our opinion that society must be rooted in small, face-to-face, communities. This does not necessarily prevent it from federating and networking into larger social structures, but it must be based in smaller units (see also John Dewey on this).

(2) Ok, I will acknowledge that I "simply don't understand an opposing position," Hemispherian. Your abstract principles seem to me to provide little guidance for building an actual anarchist society, or for how such a society would make decisions. I cannot pin you down to even hypothetical cases of joint work and decision making. I don't know why you think that democratic decision-making is equivalent to establishing a state, or why when everyone has a voice in the making of a collective decision, those who (this time) are in the minority are being "pushed around." Or what you mean by saying that if your concept of anarchy is not workable in specific cases, then anarchists "probably should, for the sake of their own projects, reorganize around different principles." I admit, I don't get it.

(3)Apparently you do not think I am a real anarchist, but a "libertarian minarchist." Personally I think I am in the mainstream tradition of revolutionary anarchist socialism, from Bakunin and Kropotkin to the anarchist-communists and anarcho-syndicalists. Your criticisms would apply as much to them as to me. However, what if you are right? I don't really care to defend my being an orthodox anarchist or any kind of orthodox thing. The point is not to be an anarchist but to be for the liberation of the exploited and oppressed.

(4) Consider this point by Paul Goodman (not of my school of anarchism, but I have learned a lot from him): "Decentralization is not lack of order or planning, but a kind of coordination that relies on different motives from top down direction...to provide integration and cohesiveness. It is not 'anarchy' [chaos--WP]. But of course most Anarchists, like the anarcho-syndicalists or the community-anarchists, have not been 'anarchists' either, but decentralists."
People or Personnel.