Anarcho-Bicyclist Conference Manchester April 2011

i'm not saying people don't want anarchism, but if you ask those people with bread taped to their heads demonstrating (or the students, or those in opposition) what they want it's freedom, choice and a better life.

Agreed, nothing to dispute here, you could have this conversation with a right wing Texas gun lobbyist or a late 1970s union man and arrive at the same position, I am not saying this is demagogic (although that would always be my first suspicion with these kinds of 'better life' appeals even if not intended), just that it goes without saying, so yes I am with you 100% here, ask anyone do they want freedom, choice and a better life and the ticks in the 'no' box' are going to be fairly low.

What I do have a problem with is the inferred (and in what you post 'but' is operative here) is the idea that you are setting up a dichotomy, either "freedom, choice and a better life" or XXXX (XXXX here being whatever you intend to traduce without ever having to deal with).

So by way of example- all these play the same card, all seek to contrast 'X' - (insert what it is you can't be bothered to challenge but instead would rather collapse with demagoguery) - with "freedom, choice and a better life", I am not saying this is not good technique (the polit bureau would have work for you) just unreliable - anyhow those examples:

"i'm not saying people don't want capitalism, but if you ask those people with bread taped to their heads demonstrating (or the students, or those in opposition) what they want it's freedom, choice and a better life."

Inferred cut and paste conclusion shocker! capitalism = lack of freedom, lack of choice and a lack of of a better life!! OMG !!

"i'm not saying people don't want conservatism, but if you ask those people with bread taped to their heads demonstrating (or the students, or those in opposition) what they want it's freedom, choice and a better life."

Inferred cut and paste conclusion shocker! conservatism = lack of freedom, lack of choice and a lack of of a better life!! OMG !!

"i'm not saying people don't want socialism, but if you ask those people with bread taped to their heads demonstrating (or the students, or those in opposition) what they want it's freedom, choice and a better life."

Inferred cut and paste conclusion shocker! socialism = lack of freedom, lack of choice and a lack of of a better life!! OMG !!

"i'm not saying people don't want monarchism, but if you ask those people with bread taped to their heads demonstrating (or the students, or those in opposition) what they want it's freedom, choice and a better life."

Inferred cut and paste conclusion shocker! monarchism = lack of freedom, lack of choice and a lack of of a better life!! OMG !!

where does anarchism fit in?

In Egypt?

Nowhere as far as I can see, where do you think veganism or Reaganomics or the Euroseptics fit in ? Is there a point to where did XXX fit in ? And if there is a point is it this: because XXXX did not play a part in the Egyptian revolution then XXXX is redundant ? Or wrong ? Or something like that ?

Help me out here, am I way off course here ?

[EDIT] "where does anarchism fit in?"

The removal of the state in favour of the will of the ruled.

actually i am saying that.
when it comes down to it people want mobile phones, laptops, more food, cheaper fuel and to not have their collar felt by plod, anarchism just isn't on the agenda for 99% of the population and the 1% are just a lunatic fringe lacking the organisation to effect any kind of 'revolution' *

*stick to the basic point without hiding behind iff's and but's

I agree, people want iPads, sex, beer, friendship, exponentially increasingly interesting communication devices, holidays, love, children, happiness, nice trousers, farms, streamed music websites, pets, pet food, ice skates, curtains, charities, sofas, for others to be happy (reciprocal altruism), discos, cocaine, photoshop, Mr Kipling lemon slices, bicycles, hospitals and all the other good stuff +, of course, not to be interfered with by the state whenever reasonable ("have their collar felt by plod").

And I agree that any "lunatic fringe" (an idea you granted yourself free from any test) are just that, lunatic and fringe - by your own definition, not unlike commenting on "the mad".

The pity is that you seem to have a fairly robust and honest outlook but no clue as to what anarchism actually is, your admonishment to "stick to the basic point without hiding behind iff's and but's" suggests you have asked a question of something or someone ?