Skip to main content

Here, as in the preceding articles, it is not a question of philanthropy but of right. Hospitality means the right of a stranger not to be treated as an enemy when he arrives in the land of another. One may refuse to receive him when this can be done without causing his destruction; but, so long as he peacefully occupies his place, one may not treat him with hostility. It is not the right to be a permanent visitor that one may demand. A special beneficent agreement would be needed in order to give an outsider a right to become a fellow inhabitant for a certain length of time. It is only a right of temporary sojourn, a right to associate, which all men have. They have it by virtue of their common possession of the surface of the earth, where, as a globe, they cannot infinitely disperse and hence must finally tolerate the presence of each other. Originally, no one had more right than another to a particular part of the earth. Bolding mine - there's also a lot more context to this...
Kant, 'Perpetual Peace'


Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end.
Kant, 'Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals'

I was once a philosophy scholar. I absconded to follow my heart and play music instead, but a strange thing happened when I studied Kant - generally held to be one of the greatest philosophic defenders of Republican capitalism and the supposed Protestant ethic that accompanies. Kant, not Marx, Foucault, Goldmun, Nietzshe, or any other, is responsible for turning me into an anarchist - the content of the above two quotes are why.

1. No one has any natural right to property - the earth is common [whatever rights exist now are artificial - not wrongly so, but not rightly so either].

2. Every human being must be treated as and end in themselves - never as merely a means.

While I certainly had predilections towards anarchism in my youth, and had studied Kant then too, it wasn't until I bounced these two idea off of the epistemological ideas of his First Critique and contextualized them within the secular tradition of the Pre-Socratic Sophists, that I really understood what Kant ultimately implied. Let me repeat:

1. The earth is common.

2. Every human being is an end in themselves, i.e. any hierarchy [social, political, economic] violates universal moral law.

Every position, action and opinion I have is based on these two tenets of Kantian universalism. It is why I am anti-nationalist. It is why I am anti-capitalist. It is why I am anti-religion. It is why I am a pacifist.

It is why I believe our species, for all of it's idiocies, foibles and clear instincts for self-annihilation, should make every effort to preserve itself.

It is why I am a humanist.

It is why I believe that if our institutions fail us, we must forge a new world.

I don't know what that new world looks like, but I've been advocating that since the day I joined dkos in 2004 - before it became a 'democratic party blog'...  While I see that as shortsighted, I don't advocate against it - but I might mock it from time to time.

I'm still here because I want to remind people that there are still greater stakes, and there are greater possibilities. We will certainly live with the consequences of our own current governance, but that doesn't have to obtain.

We just need to stand up, and be human beings, in the face of every instance that seeks our dehumanization.

***Please note the title of this diary is jab at those that believe 'anarchism' has something to do with 'lawlessness'. Anarchism means only one thing - no leaders - an [no] archos [leaders].

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site