Ontology:Q3302
- pronounced [S2] Anarchism is Existentialism with a coat of black paint 1-1-1
Characteristics in draft[edit]
- item type
- S2 (pronounced C) 1-1-1
- pronounced [P] label [string] (L)
- pronounced [S2] Anarchism is Existentialism with a coat of black paint 1-1-1
- pronounced [P] alias (mis) [string]
- anarchism is near-synonymous with Existentialism
- field, scope, or group [Item]
- pronounced Z–617 pronounced [MX] [Z] meta-Marxism 1-1-1
- sub-case of [Item]
- --
- case of [Item]
- --
- super-case of [Item]
- --
- prototype notes
- the claim that Anarchism's actual model of society is the same cluster of Existentialist models Liberalism uses, and then each of them builds other larger-scale village/town/region propositions on top of that. I don't really know if this is true. it would take a bit of investigation to build a decent logical proof either way. this concept comes out of the works of Horst Stowasser, [1] who claims that anarchism is "not an ideology" (impossible, but go on) but a cluster of things based on "freedom", "hostility to domination", "solidarity", "mutual aid", "autonomy of the individual", "networks of small units", "self determination", and "rebellion against foreign determination". 5/8 of those are Existentialist values, and half of them can be co-opted into Liberalism.
Components[edit]
- consists of components [Item]
- --
Wavebuilder combinations[edit]
- pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]
- --
- along with [Item]
- --
Usage notes[edit]
Falsification criteria[edit]
The core of this claim is that any particular named Anarchism with identifiable goals will devolve into Existentialism and turn into center-Liberalism or a bunch of identity-politics movements fighting each other, because people who hypothetically in the future might all be called Existentialists instead call themselves anarchists today and think they have something other than Existentialism when actually they do not. The claim does not require "Existentialist-Structuralist tradition" to be a valid category. All it really requires is that some particular ideology that appropriates anarchism such as schizoanalysis or Lacanianism is the "truer" form of anarchism which for all practical purposes is indistinguishable from anarchism.
This claim is rendered false if it can be shown that anarchist theories were appropriated and misused by the Existentialist-Structuralist tradition. There is a slight case if it is possible to detail a named Anarchism with a particular civilizational shape which was improperly characterized or misconstrued. There is a strong case if it is possible to detail a named Anarchism with a plausible method of realization which was hijacked and effectively prevented from happening.