David Graeber, anthropologist and author of Bullshit Jobs, dies aged 59

[PETRUS]

32. Well, I have no reason to argue with any of that.

I think you're basically right. A few more thoughts:

It's true that the kind of sexism and sidelining of women that you're describing was a problem among lefty activists in the '60s. I don't mean this as a defense, but it's my impression that it wasn't any worse that what it was like in other areas of life at the time (schools, churches, workplaces, etc.). It's particularly infuriating in this context (and smacks of hypocrisy), because we're talking about people who claimed to be standing up for the oppressed and marginalized. I think there's been progress on this front, particularly among left-leaning activist types. Still, it's a legitimate complaint.

The other day. I was reading the comments section on a blog, and someone posted "We are also told that government is ‘not a solution, but a problem’. Well, government is neutral, like a hammer, it is a tool to achieve a political end." That's not too far from my point of view. In other words, I don't categorically reject "government" the way (some? all?) committed anarchists do. On the other hand, I'm not at all hostile to an anarchist point of view. Some of the people who claim to be on board with anarchism are infiltrators/saboteurs (needless to say, they are not my friends), and others are angry people without anything I'd call a coherent political philosophy. But the people who are sincere and have thought deeply about anarchism tend to be on the correct side of pretty much all political struggles, in my opinion. There's a Yale professor named James Scott whose thinking I appreciate. I've read three of his books, one of which is entitled "Two Cheers for Anarchism." There's a handy quote on his wiki page: "Lacking a comprehensive anarchist worldview and philosophy, and in any case wary of nomothetic ways of seeing, I am making a case for a sort of anarchist squint. What I aim to show is that if you put on anarchist glasses and look at the history of popular movements, revolutions, ordinary politics, and the state from that angle, certain insights will appear that are obscured from almost any other angle. It will also become apparent that anarchist principles are active in the aspirations and political action of people who have never heard of anarchism or anarchist philosophy." I agree with him on that. I also think that the human impulse (and capacity) to pull together for the common good is pretty strong. There's a book by Rebecca Solnit called "A Paradise Built in Hell." Her book describes groups of people who worked together to get things done following some kind of disaster, and she makes a point of examining cases where the goverment was (at least temporarily) effectively absent.

Anyway, thanks again for the polite conversation.