comment posted on another sub about Graeber

https://www.reddit.com/r/Postleftanarchism/comments/1f9711w/comment_posted_on_another_sub_about_graeber/

created by BolesCW on 04/09/2024 at 22:48 UTC

9 upvotes, 6 top-level comments (showing 6)

• as an anthropologist*: Graeber claimed (in his "Fragments") that he was pretty much the first actual anarchist anthropologist, despite the work of Harold Barclay and James C Scott, and the radical anti-tankie marxists Stanley Diamond and Pierre Clastres. so, **arrogant and ignorant at the same time**.

for his sweeping (and totally unreadable vanity project "Direct Action"), he reports as a participant-observer on the strategies and tactics of various anarchist and anarchist-influenced activist groups; many of the people he participated with and observed were not informed that their conversations and activities would be documented in a book. so, **questionable ethics**.

• as a revolutionary tourist*: like that other fool Milstein (and plenty of others, including a good personal friend of mine), Graeber was completely taken in by the PR handlers of the YPG when visiting Rojava. his paeans to the "Rojava Revolution" with their empty comparisons are painful to read for anyone who actually knows about the revolutionary projects of anarchists throughout the 20th century, like the Makhnovshchina, the various communes in pre-Mao China, the original Zapatistas, and the collectives in the Spanish Revolution. totally unlike the aforementioned examples, Rojava has no agricultural or industrial base to collectivize into economic self-management. the only aspects of life in Rojava that appear to be horizontal are the militias; while crucial for the defense of revolutionary experiments, the independent existence of militias is never sufficient for the flowering of such experiments. in most cases of anarchist and anarchist-influenced social revolution, militias arose AFTER the collectivization and self-management of agricultural and/or industrial areas. so, **upside-down historian**.

his campaigning for Corbyn was a colossal embarrassment for anyone familiar with the long-standing anarchist position on electoral politics (hint: anarchists are not in favor of parliamentarism). he should have known this already after writing a book called "Direct Action" -- which is the exact opposite of electoral action. plus, the fact that Corbyn did exhibit some soft antisemitism could never be admitted by Graeber or most other Jewish pro-Corbyn people. compounding the embarrassment is the fact that as a non-UK citizen, he wasn't even able to do what he encouraged others to do. so, **shallow understanding of antisemitism**, and **shallow understanding of the role of parliamentarianism in propping up industrial capitalism.**

• as an anarchist*: he didn't understand why anarchists are opposed to electoral politics; he didn't understand how he wasn't the first anarchist anthropologist; he didn't understand that the slogan he helped popularize ("We Are the 99%") is a majoritarian deception perpetrated by pro-capitalist populists who instinctively accept that landlords and cops are or can be our comrades in the struggle against a handful of "bad" capitalists. he didn't understand that going against the mainstream (in the case of his co-authored ode to urbanism, "The Dawn of Everything") often just makes you look foolish rather than radical. so, **bad anarchist**.

eagerly anticipating the flurry of downvotes from the anti-intellectual mob.

Comments

Comment by maneater_hyena at 05/09/2024 at 08:40 UTC

7 upvotes, 1 direct replies

As an anarchist and an aspiring anthropologist, Fragments were really fucking dull. Greaber omits the great tradition of critical theory and actual anarchist anthropologist only to make some uninspired propositions. I find nothing worth a while in his works, and as an anarchist anthropologist myself I'm more interested in autonomist Marxism. Greaber was loud, but he will not be remembered in the bigger view of social theory.

Comment by danarbok at 04/09/2024 at 23:10 UTC

10 upvotes, 1 direct replies

he watered down anti-work rhetoric by narrowing its scope. I think both Aragorn! and ziq have critiqued him on that specifically

Bullshit Jobs fails account for the fact that *all* jobs are ultimately bullshit

Comment by anti-cybernetix at 05/09/2024 at 18:29 UTC

6 upvotes, 0 direct replies

By the time Clastres wrote 'Society Against The State' he was an anarchist, marxists would never admit the state determines the advent of classes.. that would make their entire ideology redundant.

Comment by HakuYuki_s at 05/09/2024 at 00:24 UTC

6 upvotes, 1 direct replies

James C. Scott has openly stated that he has sympathies for anarchism but still personally believes in the need for a state.

Comment by [deleted] at 02/11/2024 at 10:05 UTC

1 upvotes, 1 direct replies

So Graeber called himself an anarchist, but advocated parliamentary politics? That doesn't make any sense at all, that is what I'm getting from your post.

As far as you having a problem with his arrogance, I feel pretty numb, as even outside of academia, anarchists tend to be pretty arrogant and self-righteous anyways. I think a lot of it has to do with the pressure to not be like normies within anarchist culture, but there are a lot of factors.

Comment by Weekly-Meal-8393 at 08/11/2024 at 11:49 UTC

0 upvotes, 0 direct replies

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHH!