💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › leon-dario-the-egoist-solidarity.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:00:46. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: The egoist solidarity Author: LeĂłn DarĂo Date: April 2020 Language: en Topics: egoism, individualist, class struggle, protest, Solstice Source: Published in April 2020 in number 10 of the anarchist magazine “Solstice”
She is so altruistic, solidarity, generosity, and it is that they tell
us and teach us from an early age the importance of the gesture of
solidarity, of being generous, of not being “egoists” and sharing, of
sharing toys with the children who came home hand in hand with our
father and mother, friends of ours, even though we didn’t like those
children at all, even though we were so comfortably playing “our own
way” we were forced to leave our precious properties to those
inopportune guests who so muddied our own world ... Solidarity is a
humanistic praxis because it is the engine of human relationships that
is based on giving, supporting or offering something without expecting
anything in return, without expecting anything in return relatively, a
presumed humanistic practice in which a (at least ) involuntary or
egoism selfishness; since solidarity always leads to being considered in
reciprocity, a debt with the one who has shown solidarity; The one who
did it expects an action-reaction with him in the future when he needs
this act of generosity without “expecting anything in return”, there is
a pending account either in the short, medium or long term, because said
action does not imply anything “Ipso facto”, an immediacy does not
originate, there is no “consideration” in the event itself but rather a
moment of prudence awaits until the generous need generosity out of
“pure solidarity”; that is, and we can affirm that this “gesture” is,
obviously, a “today for you, tomorrow for me”; society “watches over
you”, the community signs up if you were supportive when someone
belonging to the community needed it and needed it, therefore it is
possible that if you complied “without expecting anything in return”
that solidarity or generosity will be returned to you anyway “Without
expecting anything in return” ... and thus marching on, a chain of
action and reaction is developed; If instead you did not give support,
you were unsupportive when a person or a society (of which you are a
part) needed it, it is very likely that this alleged exercise of
altruism, dedication, provision of some service, product or object that
you may need will not be dispatched without delving into the question of
why you or I, as a subject, individual, have not loved myself or perhaps
I have not been able to pay what was owed when it has been needed or
rather it has been expected of me. The community will not enter to
assess what circumstances have led me not to respond with a “spirit of
solidarity”, either involuntarily or even voluntarily.
We can say, based on the text, that solidarity, and although we want to
deny it, has a egoist sense and without criminalizing or stigmatizing
the selfish concept because “egoist” comes from the principle of
oneself, in the doctrine of the individual and his individuality based
on self-interest, ego-interest, I myself am egoist because I make “I” my
principle and purpose and all my actions and objectives are based on
obtaining my own benefit, in fact if I have the capacity to do so I will
launch myself to obtain a privilege regardless of whether I do it to the
detriment of society if with it I can obtain a benefit for myself and by
extension for my immediate inner circle; Therefore, the supportive
person cannot deny that he also benefits from a egoist act, since he
knows that his altruistic act is an “investment” for when he requires
that the previously supported person attend.
I am also going to cite what I myself call “immediate solidarity”, this
if it is “per se”, a certain reciprocity between peers with an
established purpose that have certain interests and individual needs to
be satisfied as soon as possible. We can cite in this regard the
workers’ struggles, the strikes and active protests of workers in cases
of outstanding labor conflicts, although these struggles are under the
collective paradigm, they are really acting and developing in this
collective tool with a egoist interest, a individual claiming what
corresponds to him — only him — his labor “rights”, the improvement of
his salary or the remuneration of the overtime that he is doing in the
factory so that he works ... but together with hundreds or thousands as
The reason why he knows and is aware that by himself everything will
turn out in borage water and in a tantrum without repercussions, there
are hundreds or thousands of individuals with their respective personal
interests that unify forces among themselves to gather enough collective
capacity to paralyze the activity their workplaces, avoid the entry of
their “discordant” colleagues (scabs) to work, placing burning tires in
the acc those to the polygons ... all in that in order for employers to
yield or negotiate with respect to the demands set out on the table.
Synthesizing: “I” cannot by myself, I do not agglutinate the ability to
act with sufficiency to make the employer give in to my demands as a
worker, I need to unite with You, with your I, who, in turn, also need
from me, from my I, of my uniqueness and in turn, we need others like
us, other “selves” and all together then we unify our uniqueness and
particularities to exercise the tenacity that our particular demands
need.
Lastly, I want to relaunch the figure of individuality in a sea of ​​more
“socialist” anarchists that attack the free critical and questioning
capacity of assemblies or so-called horizontality forms; The character
of the central axis that the subject develops as the engine of anarchy
cannot be denied, and it is that no type of social, collective form is
possible without the addition (see the example that I quote before with
the workers’ protests) and cohesion of unities. Respectable are, go
ahead in my judgment and criteria, the decisive and collective forms
that I have cited, but the most “societal” anarchism must be aware that
the individual is the central subject anarchic; In this field,
individualist anarchism plays the maximum expression of it, which
unquestionably represents and demands the maximum expression of
individuality, therefore of anarchy itself, putting the anarchist as the
principle and purpose of itself without external interference that may
result in the impairment of his own individual integrity.