- 24 Mar 2009 04:52
How do anarchists reconcile the failure of anarchist movements to avoid considerable splintering into minor factions with the ideas of a mass movement including the whole of the proletariat? How do anarchists hope to convince others, when they can't even convince themselves of the proper plan of attack? How does this failure of anarchist organizational structure in any way indicate anything but chaos should an anarchist movement achieve some shred of power? Most importantly, how can anarchists justify to themselves the abandonment of the working poor through the opposition to even minor victories, in the interest of satisfying their own ideological lust, where nothing less than total victory is worth the effort? Considering this apparent philosophy, what hope do anarchists have of ever becoming anything more than a minor movement comprised primarily of intoxicated youth who have grandiose ideas, but can't bear to give up their Macbook and other bourgeoisie possessions? Furthermore, given the inherent contradiction that the majority of modern anarchist support is derived from the very elements they seek to destroy, how does the anarchist movement reconcile its internal hypocrisy?