sophie on anarchism

sophie scott-brown on anarch\ism [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zh2cwoXpAU]:

What I mean by ‘anarchy’ | Sophie Scott-Brown | Inside anarchy – 14 min video – june 2024

Sophie Scott-Brown delves into the meaning of everyday anarchy.

What does freedom really look like?

Watch the full talk at https://iai.tv/video/inside-anarchy-s…

Absolute freedom of the individual? Or chaotic dystopia? Anarchy is one of the most violently divisive political ideals going. Join outspoken theorist, Sophie Scott-Brown, as she sets out her vision of anarchy for everyone.

Sophie Scott-Brown is the former Director of Gresham College and fellow at the University of St Andrews. An inspiring intellectual historian with research interests in modern European political thought, Anarchism, and the history of education, Sophie is also a fellow of the Higher Education Academy and of the Royal History Society.

She is an author excited by historical biography as a means of understanding ideas. Her work includes The Histories of Raphael Samuel: A Portrait of a People’s Historian and Colin Ward and the Art of Everyday Anarchy.

notes/quotes from video:

2 min – faq: how will you get people to work w/o incentive, prevent crime w/o force or threat of jail, ensure people don’t horde, have revolution w/o violence (which is coercion).. anarchism could never work: nature is self interested, humans not equal, hierarchy is natural, i don’t want to live in commune

3 min – these are questions/statements that come out of a hierarchical/capitalist society.. social situation generate the problems they want to attribute to human nature

aka: whalespeak

black science of people/whales law.. we have no idea what legit free people are like

4 min – but actually .. if going to be honest and keep faith w anarchism have to say: i don’t know.. and don’t have desire to know.. but what i can do is say.. let’s talk about it.. less about me having a vision of how it would work and more about my openness to be able to discuss that and my capacity to see that discussion as a source of social action in and of itself

ooof.. why talk about it if don’t need to know.. (again we have no idea what legit free people would be like).. so talking ness et al .. as cancerous distraction ness.. willard talking law.. gibran talking law.. et al

6 min – anarchism commits me to two things: 1\ rejection of permanent authority and 2\ maximizing individual ‘liberty’ in any given situation

root of problem

legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do

how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..

ie: imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)

need to try the unconditional part of left to own devices ness..

there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. the unconditional part of left-to-own-devices ness.. for (blank)’s sake.. and we’re missing it

ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition

permanent: anarchism not chaos.. rather.. not permanent structures

rather.. infinitesimal structures approaching the limit of structureless\ness and/or vice versa .. aka: ginorm/small ness

7 min – maximizing individual liberty: neg freedom – freedom from (perm forms of authority) and freedom to.. this kind of anarchism is *bringing these together in conversation.. one can’t exist w/o other.. depends on how understanding individual and how view liberty

*conversation we need most.. is of 8 b people .. with the itch-in-their-soul.. so we can be/org-around.. what every soul already craves.. if we trust that.. if we listen for that.. don’t need to ie: invite, discuss, explain, decide.. et al

9 min – i’m interested in this notion of the social individual.. i’m not convinced of account of individual as unit tightly bound.. more as a shifting constellation.. relations/transactions w others and wider environ

10 min – *language is primary means by which we **describe/understand/animate conscious ness of self by interacting w others.. so always in negotiation w wider world we are in

*rather.. language as control/enclosure et al.. need to try idiosyncratic jargon ness of the unconditional part of left to own devices ness

**isn’t that more whalespeak?.. assuming we’d want to describe, understand.. negotiate.. ? graeber can’t know law.. graeber unpredictability/surprise law.. et al

need to try brown belonging law .. the unconditional part of meadows undisturbed law.. et al

11 min – rather than be *individual doing whatever you want when you want it .. individual liberty becomes more social:

*another case of assuming what human nature is like.. because of current cage.. need hari rat park law.. so that we realize.. (ie: we’re not all addicted to heroin.. just our best cope\ing strategy because of hari present in society law et al).. if legit free.. we want people doing what/when ever they want.. ie: meadows undisturbed law

1\ *freedom from ideological capture.. having certain patterns of life affirmed, asserted and imposed.. and others denied, silenced, suppressed or marginalized

*yes.. supposed to’s of school/work et al.. and maté trump law.. we need to try quiet enough ness.. ie: bachelard oikos law via the imagine if we ness of nonjudgmental expo labeling.. so that we can see/try the unconditional part of left to own devices ness (the thing we’ve not yet let go enough to try/see)

that (legit freedom) will only happen sans any form  of  measuring,  accounting, people telling other people what to do

2\ *freedom to be part of decision making .. actively negotiating the pattern of life as it effects you

*oi oi oi .. decision making is unmooring us

need curiosity over decision making for that.. otherwise.. maté trump law and wilde not-us law.. the death of us.. aka: same song

12 min – 3\ a state of *full ‘participatory potential’ confidence and capacity to respond to any set of circumstances

*oi.. rather.. that is voluntary compliance.. because public consensus always oppresses someone(s).. invited vs invented et al.. and any form of re ness (ie: respond et al) as red flag.. as cancerous distraction

diff from notions of being an active participant.. we have to be part of deciding what problems are we want to be dealing with.. a far more granular level

perhaps.. but not granular enough.. again.. the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. what we need is a means to listen to itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday.. and connect via that.. aka: org around legit needs

13 min – away from notion that have to be dashing about.. need to be able to choose not to

choose not to ness = cancerous distraction

for me.. anarchism is not: a perfect society; an optimum social order; a predetermined econ system; a single culture.. one person’s utopia is always another person’s prison.. wouldn’t be anarchism if i insisted on ideas..

anarchism is: 1\ an outlook on the world 2\ a way of thinking 3\ an ethics of practice.. but above all – active participation in decision framing, making and taking.. deciding on sorts of problems we ought to be caring about

oi.. ie: we are so obsessed with problem solving.. and decision making.. oooof .. again.. those are symptoms of (as you said) hari present in society law ness.. they are not a part/focus of legit free human nature.. but rather.. cancerous distractions

_______

________

colin ward and art of everyday anarchism

______

______

______

________