"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."

Welcome to Infoshop News
Monday, January 26 2015 @ 04:29 PM CST

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Authors on Anarchism - an Interview with Alan Moore
Authored by: DrCruel on Tuesday, July 21 2009 @ 05:51 PM CDT
It's practically impossible for me to believe that Alan Moore actually believes anything he's saying here, and isn't simply devising a clever excuse on how to get otherwise rational people to abdicate to Marxists.

What sort of creatures is he talking about? Chickens? Ants? Gorillas? Wolves? Bees? All of them have heirarchies, all of them have some specialized creature of their species in a leadership role, and all profit considerably in regards the survivability of the organisms. Higher order animals themselves are collections of single-celled life forms that operate together in very structured ways, with some of these cells specifically designed to process incoming feedback from the environment and devise strategems for survival - so critically important are these cells that many animals are genetically predisposed to encase them in a bony carapace of some sort.

In fact, where leader-based structures are functional and successful, someone conspiring to line up their leader against a wall will be received with co-ordinated return fire from teh group so led - not out of some mindless subservience, but out of recognition for the critical position that leader holds in the group. In fact, one of the strategies of Marxist is exactly that - to demean, target and destroy leaders of rival political factions while exalting, protecting and empowering effective leaders amongst their own group. Indeed, radicals have a nasty name for it, voiced whenever this tactic is instead used against them - they call it "splitting".

Moore is an extremely biased and skewed pundit. He frequently obfuscates and equivocates when talking about Marxism and the Left, but seems to have no similar problem whatsoever when discussing ideologies associated with the so-called "Right". In particular, he loves to rail against "fascism", despite this ideology being almost identical to that of mainstream Marxism, and frequently likes to associate it with capitalism - which is an economic as opposed to a political theory, and which has nothing to do with fascism outside of the Marxian mythos.

Might I offer the opinion that fascists, Marxists, and other lovers of despotism are most usually found amongst the sort that like to muse about lining people up against a wall and shooting them, for whatever reason. This all too often numbers amongst their number so-called "anarchists" as well, who seem to entirely forget their quibbles with "leadership" once they've managed to seize power somewhere (for an excellent demonstration of this sort of thing, read Bryan Caplan's "Anarcho-Statists of Spain": http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/spain.htm ), and indeed appear to take quickly to a totalitarian approach when "liberating the proletariat" or somesuch.

If there's supposed to be freedom of thought, it shouldn't be so hard to have a discussion with anarchists and the like from a dissenting viewpoint. Instead, during the 1980s, it was virtually impossible to get a respectful hearing once one demonstrated any admiration for the likes of Reagan or Thatcher. One might have as their deity a Sumerian hand puppet without comment, or even harken from the spiritual worldview of Wahhabist Islam, but woe to a Christian who tries to enter into a similar conversation. Even liberation theologists are looked upon with suspicion. I see the same sort of narrow Leftist orthodoxy here.

Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised at the rank hypocrisy. Alan Moore himself dismisses the freedom of speech adage intrinsic in modern Western culture (in the US it's enshrined in our national constitution) with the idea that it's a function of capitalist greed. No doubt Mr. Moore himself, once he's thoroughly enjoyed himself at a shooting of elected mayors, small business owners, quarterbacks, and the like, would never thereafter stoop to allow a Republican or similar "fascist' to survive speaking out againt the prevailing Leftist wisdom. Out of a sense of moral principle no less.

Before he goes hunting for fascists, he might consider a bit of self examination regarding his own brand of Left fascism. It's no wonder his Rorschach character makes him so nervous. -DC
Authors on Anarchism - an Interview with Alan Moore
Authored by: anarcho on Friday, July 24 2009 @ 06:10 AM CDT

To paraphrase, it is practically impossible for me to believe what the previous commenter has written. After all, he considers Bryan Caplan's terrible essay on the Spanish Anarchists as an "excellent demonstration"! For a critique of Caplan, and other nonsense by the propertarian right, click here

Obviously our commenter is a propertarian, as can be seen by his comment that fascism is "almost identical to that of mainstream Marxism"!

Not to mention that he disassociated capitalism with fascism, suggesting that it "has nothing to do with fascism outside of the Marxian mythos." Except, of course, capitalists, landlords and other owners of property happily supported fascism to break the socialist movement (including anarchism, of course). Thus we find propertarian guru von Mises proclaiming:

"[It] cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilisation. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live eternally in history."


"Instead, during the 1980s, it was virtually impossible to get a respectful hearing once one demonstrated any admiration for the likes of Reagan or Thatcher."

Ah, right, "freedom of speech" means shutting up when propertarians talk nonsense or support the cutting edge of the capitalist assault on working class living standards and organisation!

I do sense a bit of projection going on he Moore is proclaimed to be a "Left Fascist" (surely, from the commentators perspective, a fascist is a "right socialist" as socialism came first?). Suffice to say, expressing admiration for the Thatcher regime which centralised state power and eroded basic civil liberties significantly shows how interested in freedom DC actually is...