Wikipedia 10K Redux by Reagle from Starling archive. Bugs abound!!!

<-- Previous | Newer --> | Current: 981929802 TimShell at Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:16:42 +0000.


Tim, in AnarchY, you replaced the historical definition of the term with a propaganda definition that has no value. The propaganda definition is inaccurate since anarcho-syndicalists "opposes cultural, economic, and political institutions equally, often failing to distinguish between them" and so fall in the category of destroyers of society in the definition. The definition describes two groups, and then lumps anarcho-syndicalists with "anarcho"-capitalists in the wrong group. Further, I made no mention of government in my definition, because it's irrelevant. Anarcho-syndicalists aim to demolish government by not acknowledging it. To claim that "anarcho"-capitalists have equal claim to the term Anarchy as anarcho-syndicalists is a gross distortion of history. The latter have existed for more than a hundred years. The former about two or three decades. I do not think you understand Anarchism. Are you an anarchist or otherwise student of the movement? -- RichardKulisz? 
I didn't add the part about anarcho-syndicalism, someone else did.  Maybe it should be deleted.

The history of anarchism is something that can be addressed in a subsection.  Which group has "historical priority" is non-essential when describing what anarchy is.

The concept should be addressed logically, with a genus-differentia definition.  Anarchy is a social system (genus) that differs from all other social systems in that in advocates the absence of government (differentia).  Then we take the genus anarchy as we just defined it, and look at different types of anarchy.  I do not think genus-differentia definitions count as propaganda.