subscribe or follow us:                    

A Problem Of White Male Anarchism and Libertarianism We Must Confront

32 comments

Posted by PunkJohnnyCash on Oct 19, 2010 in Anarchism, feminism, Racism, Social Issues | 32 comments

Gonzo Times

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

It seems that the current anarchist movement is dominated by voices of white males.  I have noticed a divide in gender, culture and race. It seems that there are few voices of minorities or women dominate in Agorist, Mutualist, Libertarian or Anarchist circles. Why is it that these concepts are embraced more by white males than other people groups? Yes we can point to a few people out there of diverse backgrounds and people groups, but they are few and far between.

We are a minority in our views. I would be willing to say that we anarchists are of one of the least accepted of political philosophies. Within this group we are gaining more and more of a voice, we are growing, but we are really growing mostly within groups of white males. It does seem that many are attracted to certain economical stances that are heavily saturated with white males and traditionally attract white males. I feel that we far too often pass over social issues that seem to be the focus of others. Do we need to change our narrative and dialogue? Do we need to re-evaluate our beliefs? Do we need to challenge our philosophies with perspectives and beliefs of others?

Our authors that have founded many of our beliefs are also white males. Pierre Joseph Proudhon, Murray Rothbard, Lysander Spooner and Samuel Edwin Konkin are many of the pantheon of philosophers we often study. All of them white males. I can say that I seem to see a small minority of white women who also embrace our belifs and have helped to perpetuate them like Voltairine de Cleyre, but they are much less dominate. It is difficult to find people who are not white within this pantheon. The writers and philosophers popular culture in general studies seem to have the same demographics. So, why is it? Where are people from other people groups? Have we all too often overlooked the writings of others that we agree with on many areas because they wrote in the confines of a state?

It seems that many who are radical among other people groups tend to look at concepts of empowerment. We often look at an abolition of power. Where exactly do these differ and why exactly is there a divide? I stand strongly on the philosophy of non-aggression as a foundation of what I believe. Is there something about this that opposes empowerment? I feel at home with the radical left often. I agree with them mostly on every issue except for the few I feel they deviate from non-aggression. I tend to be more of a mutualist on property rights which is why I do not agree with a hard right libertarian anarcho-capitalist perspective.  Is there a need to build a more robust mutualist perspective and tome of writings? Would something like that begin to bridge the gaps? What about our beliefs is not attractive to Womanism? At times I read womanist writings and blogs finding that I agree with much of what they say. Do we need to change focus?

I have written here for quite a while and the majority of the comments, writers, contributors and fans I have collected over those years have been white males. Is it there a sort of ethnocentrism present we do not see?

What is the unknown racial and gender divide that is present in the anarchist movement? Or is this divide known and overlooked? I feel that we have a far way to go. When we are led by a more diverse group of thinkers and writers I feel we will be on a more accurate path. Apparently our Anarchism is not for everyone because many reject it. I do not feel that all blame can be placed on others for embracing the state, for I see a dominant anti-authoritarian philosophy strong in many other groups we seem to not embrace, or they seem to not embrace us. I do want a form of solidarity.

I have a great deal of respect, admiration and agreement with the Black Liberation Movement from the 60′s and 70′s.  This interview of Angela Davis really got me thinking of this:

I do see many of my beliefs and those of others mirrored in what Angela Davis has to say in this interview. Here is a Woman who is speaking of the prison system of a form of terrorism and the violence of the state.

Comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

  • http://www.broadsnark.com BroadSnark

    Interesting interview, especially the part about the connections between freedom and masculinity.

    It is far too rare for white, male anarchists (even rarer for right libertarians) to even ask the question. Even when they notice that women and POC are nowhere to be found, they rarely seem to ask why the ideas are only appealing to a few people. You’d be amazed how often I have to respond to men who dismiss a lack of women who subscribe to their political views by claiming that women just aren’t interested in politics.

    I also think there is a great deal of insensitivity and arrogance within anarchist/libertarian communities. Most people don’t take time to understand how others may define freedom or what things stand in the way of their freedom. They don’t think about how what they say will be interpreted by people outside their experience. And they don’t spend enough time learning about things outside of their experience.

    I’ll also add that I’ve talked to several other anarchist women who won’t participate in anarchist groups any more because of their general hostility and emphasis on destruction. So they work outside of explicitly anarchist venues.

    I could probably babble on for a while on the subject of homogeneity in the anarchist/libertarian communities, but I’ll restrain myself.

    • http://www.gonzotimes.com/ PunkJohnnyCash

      How would one go about creating a less egocentric movement?

      Do many need to shift perspectives?

      I think in general there is a great deal here that you mention that must be addressed. Hey, would you be interested in writing a few posts here on Gonzo Times?

      Some of this perspective needs to be heard.

      • http://www.broadsnark.com BroadSnark

        Thank you for the offer to write. I would, but I am so overwhelmed with the amount of projects I have taken on, I’m afraid I just wouldn’t follow through. And I hate to do that.

        As to how to create a less egocentric movement – We talk to people. More importantly, we listen to people. We acknowledge that we have a problem, like you are doing here. We expose ourselves to as many different histories, philosophies, cultures, and backgrounds as possible – so that we can learn how to relate, where the common ground is, where the sensitivities are, where our blind spots are… We try to be sensitive and respectful. And we don’t give up when we inevitably get slapped for doing something stupid. We also need patience and humility. Building trust takes a long, long time.

    • http://drunkenatheist.wordpress.com/ Drunkenatheist

      “Most people don’t take time to understand how others may define freedom or what things stand in the way of their freedom. They don’t think about how what they say will be interpreted by people outside their experience. And they don’t spend enough time learning about things outside of their experience.”

      A+++

      I don’t think it’s that there is a lack of women within these movements, I think that woman’s voices are silenced pretty often – specifically the more radical voices. I’ve had “libertarian” men post the nastiest comments to me when I point out the sexism in their commentaries. Part of the reason I’m selective about where I post, which people I e-associate with, etc., is because I’m sick of having misogynist slurs hurled at me, sick of the defensive crap that occurs whenever you ask someone to check their privilege, etc. You get the drift.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000858781680 Marissa ‘Havoka’ Munroe

        You put this so eloquently. As a female anarchist, I find that nearly everyone I sympathize with politically is white and male.  I don’t know exactly why there’s a hugely disproportionate number of them, except that perhaps politically active women and people of color spend a lot of their effort battling continued racism and misogyny (as you mentioned).

        We cannot move closer to freedom (ie, a world without governing) if we are still at each other’s throats about minor things like skin color or gender.  The more we are divided amongst ourselves, the less strength we have as a movement.

        -Marissa

  • TheMuslimAgorist

    In full disclosure… I am a white male. Let me begin by apologizing for the circumstances of my birth.

    For me personally, I grew up surrounded by the popular propaganda that white males were powerful and privileged, and yet I have never been in a position of power of privilege myself. So, from the beginning I was inclined to approach societal assumptions with skepticism and the suspicion that we were being duped. This likely contributed to my interest in and openness to libertarian and anarchist thought.

    It’s also true the enlightenment tradition began in Europe and America at a time when intellectual pursuits were dominated by men. Not only are we still shaking off these historical shackles, but the fact that so many of these early thinkers were hypocrites and slave owners and racists and misogynists, likely damages their credibility, and perhaps the credibility of the ideas in the eyes of women and minorities living today.

    It may be true, although I’m not sure, that women and minorities have more to gain from the existence of the State. Women definitely come out on top of child custody and alimony disputes. Whether or not it’s true, the popular propaganda is that abolition, women’s suffrage and the civil rights movements were examples of successful state intervention. And the strategies of many campaigns, especially on the left, is to herd people into race/gender voting blocks and make them outrageous promises.

    It could also be, although not the case with me, that the current generation of libertarian/anarchist folks have evolved from the political right, which is also dominated by white males.

    It may also be a difference of vocabulary and not content. After I read the reports on Lew Rockwell of how the collapse of the State in Somalia has actually radically improved the quality of life there I approached a friend of mine who lived there as a child. A political system we would describe as anarchist he called “decentralized.” A judicial system that we describe as common law he called “Islamic” even though it’s not the conception of an Islamic order anywhere in the Middle East. He described a culture with a distinctly anti authoritarian outlook, who actively apposed the formation of a central government. But he never described himself as libertarian or anarchist.

    It makes me wonder if there are other subcultures in America who describe the same ideas with different words.

    • http://www.broadsnark.com BroadSnark

      “the popular propaganda is that abolition, women’s suffrage and the civil rights movements were examples of successful state intervention.”

      This is very true. And I find that this history is not addressed. And when it is addressed, it is often done in a way that is completely insensitive.

    • http://twitter.com/scalpingelmo William Hinds

      This right here, it is in the vocabulary.

      When preaching to lawyers about the indignity of the state, I would make a fool of myself if I mentioned class warfare in the same manner that I used when speaking to unemployed twenty-somethings.

      Self-identified anarchists are probably more common among white males due to the fact that these same folks know that they can become whatever they wish, where as the minorities KNOW that no matter what they do they will always be labeled first as a colored. At least that is they way I came to understood it as a hybrid. I would hang out with my white friends, but if we all walked into a store together, my potential for shop lifting was weighted differently by the loss prevention staff.

      The keyword here is self-identified, you don’t have to be an anarchist to “do anarchy”. Folks just need to be informed that they dont need to be white to make a difference in this world, they dont need political office or a Bentley to get shit done.

      We can do what we need to do with what we got, our voices.

    • http://drunkenatheist.wordpress.com/ Drunkenatheist

      “I am a white male. Let me begin by apologizing for the circumstances of my birth.”

      I am sick to death of defensiveness. Really, truly, painfully sick of defensiveness.

      “I grew up surrounded by the popular propaganda that white males were powerful and privileged, and yet I have never been in a position of power of privilege myself.”

      You’re misinterpreting “privilege.” No one is saying that you personally are privileged and all powerful; the concept lies in institutionalized and systemic power.

      What you’re saying is akin to saying “well, Oprah Winfrey – an individual woman – has all this clout and money, therefore, women – on a whole – are not a minority/disenfranchised/oppressed”.

      “It may be true, although I’m not sure, that women and minorities have more to gain from the existence of the State. ”

      I’m trying really, awfully hard to not be a jerk here, but on what planet can you rationally and reasonably argue this?

      Let’s see, without the existence of the State I can do all of the following with no worries:

      I can marry whomever I want
      I can seek an abortion freely, without state-mandated stipulations like waiting periods and other ridiculous regulations rooted in the idea that women should not be trusted with medical decisions.
      I can have a child without worrying about them being removed from my home for no reason
      If my heterosexual partner and I split up and we agree that he should raise our child instead of me, we won’t have to deal with a court system that assumes I will be the better parent by virtue of my possessing a vagina.
      I can easily start a business without tying up thousands of dollars with ridiculous government regulations, licenses and endless red tape.
      I can freely choose sex work and work for myself with no fears of getting arrested.
      If I live in a high crime area, I can arm myself without fears of breaking the law
      I will not be held accountable if my high school aged children choose to cut school.
      As I touched on above, less regulations means businesses can be started easier, which leads to more jobs, which helps to break the vicious cycle of poverty that is perpetuated by the current welfare system. (I have 10ish year old stats from a study in Chicago, IIRC, that said your average “welfare mother” of one would have to make roughly $25K/annually just to make the same amount they did on welfare.)

      These are just offhand examples from the top of my head. I could probably get the list up to 50 if you gave me another hour. Honestly, I find your statement to be pretty naive, and when women (as well as the gamut of other minorities) are up against crap like that, it doesn’t help the overarching “liberty movement” bring more of us into the fold.

  • Kirsten

    “What about our beliefs is not attractive to Womanism?”

    Maybe it’s not the beliefs, but the behavior of many of those who hold them. The libertarian movement could use a drastic reduction in assholery.

    • http://www.gonzotimes.com/ PunkJohnnyCash

      I find often that there are many that I wish to distance myself from because of a similar feeling.

      I also reject the majority of the beliefs that are becoming popular labeled ‘libertarian’ it seems that they are promoting a sort of culturalism with a twisted logic.

  • http://stickeenotes.wordpress.com/ Stickeenotes

    I believe a big reason is that certain ideologies speak to individualism, while others speak to collectivism. The simple fact is minorities appear to base their identity on race, gender and other shared attributes, than white males. It may be that this is due to white males position as the majority and it may change if and when white males are the minority. Will white males, once a minority, be considered racist for identifying based on race and gender? Of course, because they have not earned oppressed minority status which allows for racial identity without being labeled as ethnocentric. Personally, I prefer a celebration of individualism where race, gender and other characteristic, of which we have no control, are given less prominence while ideology and philosophy, which more accurately reflect that which we can control, are moved to the forefront. But, that’s likely just my inner white devil talking.

  • http://twitter.com/mopowell Michael Orion Powell

    No easy answer, but when the face of libertarianism is Ron Paul and his son is out there saying that businesses have the right to discriminate against anyone they want (a debate that I thought was over nearly half a century ago), you can’t hardly blame people of color for moving past libertarianism.

    As for anarchism, next time you’re in Seattle, I’ll take you to Left Bank Books, PJC. There’s plenty of diverse anarchist literature and very pluralist staff there.

  • Kirsten

    Stickeenotes:
    “The simple fact is minorities appear to base their identity on race, gender and other shared attributes, than white males.”

    I don’t think that is a “simple fact”. Perhaps, a collective racial or gender identity is thrust upon them and expected of them. Example: the above quote.

    • http://twitter.com/mopowell Michael Orion Powell

      Haha. Touche.

    • http://www.gonzotimes.com/ PunkJohnnyCash

      It does seem to be that way. It seems that one group assumes to speak for another. We have it all figured out don’t we?

    • http://stickeenotes.wordpress.com/ stickeenotes

      Did I state why they base their identity on race, gender etc? Debating why that’s the case is not evidence that it is in fact not the reality.

      Perhaps you’re right and it’s wrong to give people too much credit and assume they’re not victims of a patriarchal structure that has told them what to think and believe. Perhaps you’re right and their collectivist behavior is rooted in their inherent weakness. (see, now that was condescending, dismissive, and insulting, while attempting to appear superior. Only an oppressive white patriarch can truly pull that off. Cute, huh?)

  • tiecuando

    Oh I dunno, maybe “they” are able to think for themselves unlike “us”, what do you think? I will tell you what I think, the whole idea of a “movement” is implicitly authoritarian. Black people and women empowering themselves? The horror!

    “Non-aggression”, way to repeat the cycle of abuse through enabling the abusers.

  • http://www.broadsnark.com BroadSnark
  • http://www.gaysagainstobama.org Elián Maricón

    I admire the effort at self-criticism. I would encourage you to re-read your post and ponder the terms “queer”, “genderqueer”, “transgender”…

    I often feel that straight white cis male anarchists (of the libertarian socialist varieties) forget that radical queers exist, or perhaps they would prefer that we didn’t exist (I am not pointing the finger at you or anyone in particular–just making a general observation). Of course there are exceptions. Plenty of exceptions. In my experience, however, some of the most anti-queer and gender-fascist remarks I’ve heard have come out of the mouths of straight white cis male anarchists, albeit unwittingly and seemingly without overt or intentional malice. Nevertheless, when one is treated in such a manner by a person who extols the virtues of anti-authoritarianism and dismantling unjustifable hierarchies, it can be somewhat jarring.

    Again, I admire your efforts at self-criticism. I don’t engage in such critiques of my own politics nearly as often as I should.

  • jesse

    Couldn’t there be fewer people of color heard in anarchism because there are fewer people of color in North America? Isn’t that why society has callously labeled them “minorities?”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VUYGSN7QWEU3FKCAOT466MSWOQ ryan s

    The root of the issue lies in the publics complete misunderstanding of economics. As a libertarian, I have to follow up any of my beliefs with a 10 minute explanation because society is so ‘ass-backwards.’ If people were more economically literate, they would be more sympathetic to the libertarian point of view.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1068833855 Hank Xavier

    Easy answer…

    Black culture has been clearly coopted into the socialist agenda and has been dominated by democrats promising change for 50 years. Same for women. These two groups specifically were targeted by Fabian socialists with an interest in homogenizing society under the state in order to manifest dependent classes that could be used to push the growth of government.

  • http://www.facebook.com/JamesCBabb James Babb Ⓐ

    Great video. It’s hard to understand how someone so smart can fight slavery while also arguing for slave master control of healthcare and housing.

  • http://libertysnippet.com LibertySnippet

    It could be that people who choose to spend a lot of time online are mostly white males.I didn’t realize I was an anarchist until I connected with other people online, but I prefer to spend time with friends and family in person.

    The online anarchist community has quite a few trolls and jerks, and after I connected with other anarchists I liked, I chose to spend less time online because it’s more fun and productive to spend time with people in person.

    It seems to me that there are some people who put being an anarchist as their #1 criterion for choosing friends, to the exclusion of other criteria I value more highly (fun to drink a beer with, makes me laugh, helps me learn something).

    Also, being an anarchist is only one part of who I am. I deliberately avoid making numerous posts about my point of view because I don’t want to alienate my friends who aren’t anarchists or don’t realize they’re already anarchists.

    As long as I trust people around me not to violate the non-aggression principle in practice, I am very accepting of all kinds of differences; in fact I prefer them. There are many things that are more important to me than “like-mindedness” when choosing who to spend my time with. I cringe every time I hear the Free State Project commercial about “moving to a place with people who think like you.” I have some friends who live in NH, but yikes! Being surrounded by people who think like me is not my idea of fun.

    I agree with the comments here about vocabulary, and I believe there are likely millions of anarchists out there who don’t realize they’re anarchists.

    In summary, when asking the question, “Why are there so few [women, black, hispanic, etc...] anarchists?” I believe there is an erroneous assumption that the online anarchist world provides the full picture.

    By the way, I’m one of those moms that Broadsnark was talking about reaching in her post linked above.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZZV5EVJYOZWRNQYGX5J2UTEMMY streamfortyseven

    Emma Goldman. Wendy McElroy (wrote this: http://www.ifeminists.com/introduction/essays/introduction.html). Dorothy Day. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Harris_Jones – co-founder of IWW…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZZV5EVJYOZWRNQYGX5J2UTEMMY streamfortyseven

    Emma Goldman. Wendy McElroy (wrote this: http://www.ifeminists.com/introduction/essays/introduction.html). Dorothy Day. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Harris_Jones – co-founder of IWW…

  • http://twitter.com/mmatalucci Michael Matalucci

    Food for thought.

    “Move’s work is to stop industry from poisoning the air, the water, the soil, and to put an end to the enslavement of life. The purpose of John Africa’s revolution is to show people through John Africa’s teaching, the truth that this system is the cause of all their problems (alcholism, drug addiction, unemployment, wife abuse, child pornography, every problem in the world) and to set the example of revolution for people to set the example of revolution for people to follow when they realize how they’ve been oppressed, repressed, duped, tricked by this system, this government and see the need to rid themselves of this cancerious system as move does. ”

    http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/114.html

  • Pingback: The Bikecast Episode #52: Race, Gender, and Anarchism | The jVerse

  • Anonymous

    Because Anarchism is an essentially an expression of Western civilization youth culture and is foreign to other ethnic backgrounds.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bob-Jones/100001286368420 Bob Jones

    Using accusations of racism to subvert honest discussion of ideas has become far too transparent; it is a tactic that individuals have witnessed for decades and developed a resistance to.  Why not examine principle, and ideals, instead of paying so much attention to race?  It is inevitable, after all, that particular societies refine ideas over time, producing various demographic subscriptions to ideas.  Intellectually, you would be better served by disregarding race.  

    • http://www.gonzotimes.com/ PunkJohnnyCash

      Perhaps you should read other articles on the site if you do not want to ask questions of race. We have discussed aspects of political philosophy deeply here, from many perspectives from libertarian, communism anarchist and many other anti-state perspectives.

      Bringing up issues of race and problems is not an attack as so many seem to take it. It is an effort to point out an issue many wish to disregard.