Friday, July 24, 2009

In the last post I reacted to a statement by the author, Rafe Mair, about the origin of the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand which precipitated WW I. What I assumed was that his absurd statement about the "anarchist" origin of this attentat derived from some sort of Marxist sympathies. I was wrong. Not, of course, about the historical reality of the forces behind the assassination- Serbian nationalists- but rather about the possible motives of Mr. Mair. I have little doubt that some commies have, somewhere and sometime, listed this nationalist attentat as an example of the faults of anarchism, without any factual justification whatsoever. But the majority of Marxist sources, when they are trying to be convincing, make no such mistake.
Mr Mair, an ex-Social Credit MLA in BC ,is hardly your typical "leftist", and I am drawn to the explanation that it is simple ignorance rather than communist influence that led him to assume that "any" assassination at that time and place must have been by an anarchist. That's OK, we all make mistakes because of our presuppositions. It is, however, very obvious that Mr Mair knows next to nothing about anarchist. that would be fine amongst a general member of the public. Mr. Mair, however, has travelled a rather unique political career. While there are numerous examples of ex-lefties who use their contrition to build a subsequent literary career (most prominently in the USA and France) there are very few representatives of ex-rightists who follow the path from the opposite direction. Mr Mair is a perhaps unique representative of this change of opinion. I urge my readers to look him up. British Colombian politics has always been sort of "weird", and Mr Mair is an outstanding example of how this great tradition hasn't been obliterated in recent times.
I still fault Mr Mair because, given his years-long association with the "greenies" of BC, that he should have come to an understanding of anarchism that was, if not profound, sufficient to prevent him from assuming the anarchism=terrorism connection could apply to all situations. ALSO he should have looked up the facts before he wrote. The greenies, after all, are full of vague anarchist sympathies that I cannot imagine he would have not come in contact with. These vague sympathies are, of course, not anarchism "in full bloom". It would be absurd to assume any anarchist consistency from any supporter of a political party. but the general "atmosphere" of the 'anarcho-simps' that he would have inevitably met should have given him pause before he made such a statement.
All that being said look this guy up. he's quite the interesting fellow.

No comments: