Talk:Anarchist symbolism

Squatters

I think the internatinal squatters symbol (http://www.symbols.com/encyclopedia/53/5313.html) should be included in this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squatters explains how it is often used with anarchist symbols. There should at least be a refference to squatting and this symbol. OliverR 00:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd support that. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 06:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Concur, please add. There is an appropriately licenced photo at Image:Graffitti con simbolo okupa malaga.jpg. Also, there are several other related symbols such as combining the anarchist "Circle A" or the squatter's symbol with gender symbols. - Jmabel | Talk 18:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

There are also the images Image:CircleN.svg and Image:Okupa.svg. I don't know which is more accurate to the way it's normally drawn, but I think the latter is.

As an aside, there was an episode of The Bill on the other day about a neo-Nazi movement (obvious parallel to the NF) who used the squatter's symbol. I thought it was weird. ~ Switch (✉✍☺) 06:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

The latter would be the way i have seen it from grafiti in Athens and in Nørrebro, Copenhagen relating to the youth house. In Athens it was used by students against a reform of some sort. A local translated the writing to say something like, "if we don't get what we want, we make provokement." I have pictures of some symbols from Athens if neccessary.. I just don't know how to upload them or where OliverR 22:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Harry Potter and Dumbledore's Army symbol

I would like consensus to add the content of Circle DA as anarchy symbolism. The release of the next movie, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix will lead many of the general public to wonder if the Circle DA symbol was inspired by the Circle A. It was. The only Phoenix in Harry Potter is named after Guy Fawkes, an noted anarchist, and Rowling has said the world of Harry Potter is "controlled anarchy." The similarity of the Dumbledore's Army picture to the V for Vendetta anarchy symbol picture is striking, both are vandalized authoritarian posters. This seems like appropriate content.

Although Harry Potter has been phenomenally successful, we should not allow that as bias for excluding this content. See the removed Dumbledore Army content at: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Anarchist_symbolism&oldid=132434860 Libertycookies 15:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you have any cites - for example, a quote from Rowling or a reputable source - indicating that Dumbledore's Army was in fact intended to be anarchist-inspired? My objection has nothing to do with Potter's pop-culture status or success, and everything to do with the claim appearing to be original research.

Oh, and Guy Fawkes wasn't an anarchist. Sorry. --Black Butterfly 19:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Fawkes' image is often utilized by Anarchists...some may think he was trying to secretly terrorize the heads of Parliament, but the amount of gunpowder that he hid in the basement was more than enough to kill them instantly with no fear at all. This would have created a lack of government, or state of Anarchy. From that state of Anarchy, he hoped a pro-Catholic government would emerge. Here is a poster from the Socialist Party of Scotland (now known as the Socialist Party of England and Wales, or SPEW) that illustrates the anarchistic use of Guy Fawkes image. The SSP received lot of negative press for putting up what the press described as "an anarchist poster."

Here is a quote from Rowling on Anarchy in school:

JKR: As far as the boarding school goes, I very often get asked “did I go to a boarding school?" No, I went to a comprehensive. We did have four houses – that’s as far as the similarities with Hogwarts go. What amused me in a way, though probably only me, was the idea that you would have this very traditional school in which you had almost controlled anarchy. I mean, if those students wanted to band together, they could have the staff, no problem. I’ve had that experience myself as a teacher looking out at the class and thinking “you could have me – what is holding you back”.

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-bloomsbury-fry.html

Does this mean that the students banding together in Harry Potter is Anarchy? If you define it as rebellion against authority, then yes, that is what they are doing, and that is what the photo of the Circle DA grafitti illustrates, although they are still acting in a "controlled" manner. At the very least the DA symbol is inspired by the Anarchy symbol. Watch the movie if you haven't read the book.

Libertycookies 23:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC) File:Fawkes vote.jpg

Guy Fawkes' image may be used by anarchists, but he himself was not one in any independently verifiable sense, in that anarchism as a political philosophy had not yet come about. Further, simply opposing a particular form of government does not make one an anarchist. However, I'd rather not spend too much time on the subject of Fawkes as that isn't the section under discussion.

Rowlings' comment on anarchy, while interesting, does not directly relate to Dumbledore's Army - further, it's unclear as to whether she's using the term in the common sense of disorder, or in the sense of political anarchism (my take would be the former but it's a matter of interpretation).

Your last paragraph illustrates my point precisely. "If you define" - in other words, what your point of view is. As there is no concrete, referenceable source for this, it does not belong in the article.

Further, I would argue that even if accurate this would not be the appropriate article for this information, in that it is not a symbol used by anarchists, but rather, an unsubstantiated claim of a reference in popular culture. As such, Anarchism and the arts might be more appropriate. Again, however, only if a concrete cite can be found. --Black Butterfly 13:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

That is a very narrow definition of Anarchy, and most of the symbols on this entry would not fit the criteria of being used by those who subscribe to Anarchism as a philosophy. Definately there is also room for Harry Potter on the Anarchism and the arts, however since Dumbledore's Army in the book and movie Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix are acting in an 'anarchistic' manner, in the sense of 'Anarchy' that Rowling's quote describes, is it not a symbol used by anarchists?

Here is a description of Dumbledore's Army which describes the fear of the Ministry of Magic that Dumbledore was attempting to overthrow the government, the very definition of an anarchistic group. Although the DA was created to fight Voldemort, the government and school administration considered them a threat to the government and authority.

"In Harry's fifth year, Dolores Umbridge was installed at Hogwarts as the new Defence Against Dark Arts teacher and High Inquisitor by her boss Cornelius Fudge. Out of the irrational fear that Albus Dumbledore was organising an army of students to overthrow the Ministry of Magic, Umbridge taught lessons that lacked practicality, simply ordering her students to read theory. Understandably, students were outraged, in particular the fifth years, who were expected to perform practical defence magic during their O.W.L examination that year. It was Hermione Granger who came up with the idea of forming a club where students willing to learn would be taught by Harry, who's had quite a lot of experiences dealing with Dark Magic. Harry was reluctant at first, but thanks to much persuasion by Ron and Hermione, attended the first meeting in Hog's Head. Harry, along with Ron and Hermione, who had reportedly pulled along "a couple of people", were greeted by a large group of students (25 in fact) from Gryffindor, Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff. (A detailed members list can be found below). During their first few meetings, the members sworn secrecy and signed their names on a piece of parchment, elected their leader, ( i.e. Harry), and chose a name for their club. The initials D.A. orginally stood for Defence Association, yet under Ginny suggestion, was changed to Dumbledore's Army, making fun of the Ministry's utmost fear.

http://shacel.info/da.shtml Libertycookies 19:51, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious - which symbols here do you feel are not used by political anarchists? Read the article - every one (with the exception of V for Vendetta, which I'm not sure should be here either) is referenced in the context of the anarchist movement. Further, being used by Harry Potter does not make it an anarchist symbol, partly because Potter is not anarchistic, but more significantly, because he does not in fact exist.

And again - while interesting, your quote does not demonstrate that Dumbledore's Army is anarchist-inspired. a quote from Rowling demonstrating this, or a reputable source showing it as an accepted interpretation, would give this at least a little credibility. At present this is entirely a product of personal interpretation, which is against Wikipedia policy (WP:NOR). --Black Butterfly 11:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

There is no documentation that the green/black, pink/black flags have ever been used by those so-called groups, which may or may not even exist. The jolly roger flag also is only claimed to be used by an anarchistic group with no citations of actual use. These have far less credibility or familiarity than the Harry Potter usage, which is a clear use of an anarchistic symbol, albeit in fiction, by a group that threatens the established ruling government. Keep in mind that this is 'Anarchist' symbolism, not 'Anarchism' symbolism.

I suggest to add a subcategory of 'Anarchistic symbols in Literature and the Arts' for the V for Vendetta, Eat the Rich, and Dumbledore's Army entries.

Dumbledore is an Anarchist....take for an example the singing of the School song.

 "And now, before we go to bed, let us sing the school song! 
  Everyone pick their favorite tune and off we go!" -Albus Dumbledore.  

The result of everyone singing their favorite song at the same time is....Anarchy.

Libertycookies 14:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Green and black flag: Insurgent Desire, an eco-anarchist group, has one on their front page.

Pink and black: Infoshop.org, one of the most well-known anarchist websites, has a pink and black star on the banner of its anarcha-feminism section.

Jolly Roger: London Class War has one on its front page.

So in short, you're wrong. Every symbol on here is based on use by anarchists. It is in the category for anarchism. Your proposed addition is a based on an entirely subjective interpretation of a work of fiction. It does not apply. --Black Butterfly 16:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The Pink and Black star you cite does not resemble the flag symbol on this entry other than in color. Would you please update the entry with the new symbol for anarcha-feminism?

London Class War does not purport to be an anarchistic organization. Is it only your subjective interpretation that they advocate Anarchism, or is there a verifiable source? Is the skull and crossbones merely used to suggest 'danger'? They seem very much in the category of Dumbledore's Army, where their actions may subvert the established government and authorities, but they don't call themselves anarchists.

My views may not align with yours, but that doesn't mean they are wrong. Yours seems to be the sole objection for adding a subcategory of "anarchistic symbols in literature and the arts" Does anyone else see harm in making this addition? Libertycookies 14:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Pink and Black is a general colour combination used for anarcha-feminism. The cite I found happened to be of a star, but it is also used as a flag. As for London Class War, check out pretty much any history of the group and you'll see they are generally considered part of the anarchist movement, although they tend to define more as a "class struggle" group. Here's a different example explicitly using the Jolly Roger in an anarchist sense: http://cw178.tripod.com/

I don't want to dwell too much on these however because to be honest they're not relevant to the inclusion or exclusion of the DA symbol.

I didn't say you were wrong because we have different views, but because the statements in your message were factually inaccurate. And given you and I are the only ones to be participating in this discussion, and that I have not stated any objection to the creation of that sub-section, your last paragraph is, again, wrong.

These are side-issues, however. If you can find a concrete, identifiable and reputable cite indicating that DA is in fact inspired by anarchism, and have some compelling reason for why in an article almost exclusively related to real-life anarchist symbols the DA symbol should be included, by all means present them. If not, it does not warrant inclusion. --Black Butterfly 16:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Some interesting points have come up here.

Libertycookies' claim that anarchists don't use anarchist symbols notwithstanding, he's been fairly reasonable. I nonetheless oppose the inclusion of the Harry Potter images because Potter (as well as the others involved) is not an anarchist. There's not even really anything vaguely anarchistic about him. You might try looking at the list of fictional anarchists where there is a notable absence of anyone from the Potter universe. Not everyone who stands in opposition to a current administration is an anarchist, as with Fawkes. Apart from a few ambiguous uses of the word "anarchy" which do not even relate directly to the DA, there is little supporting it.

On the other hand, I like the idea of a section for fictional anarchist symbols. This would include symbols used by fictional characters and groups that actually are anarchist, such as V or Anarky or Hagbard Celine. Not that it would be a large section, but it would be interesting.

Another interesting thing is the lack of star symbols in the current article - the black, red-and-black, pink-and-black and green-and-black stars are all used by anarchists. ~ Switch (✉✍☺) 02:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot about this talk issue ...

RE: Harry Potter, see Politics and influences of J.K. Rowling which if read fully might lead you to believe that Rowling herself might be an anarch ist. She certainly is a change agent. I already added a new page Circle A used in the arts. Libertycookies 05:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Black flag image not displaying in the article

There's some problem with the black flag image (in my browser, at least). In the article, I don't see anything in the image, just a big white expanse. If I highlight it, it turns grey as expected. If I click it I go to the image detail page where I do see the flag. Christian Campbell 03:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge Circle A here?

In light of how comprehensive the discussion of Circle A is here, is there any need for a separate article? Alternatively, should the information here be moved over to Circle A and summarized here? Comments, please. Skomorokh ^incite 19:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

As noted above, it would seem that the Circle A article was created to focus on fictional uses for anarchist symbolism, which means it was entirely mislabeled, since it hardly focuses on just the circle a. It also doesn't seem to have any information which Anarchist Symbolism article lacks, except for a short paragraph on fictional anarchists that don't use symbolism, which is even more out of place in that article. I agree with the idea of having a Fictional anarchist symbolism section, but I can only think of one symbol that could fit in it: V for Vendetta's "Circle-V." However, even that is already covered in the circle A section. I don't think a merge is useful. I think at this point, deletion is the more appropriate direction to move in.--Cast 19:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

PS. Just thought of another fictional anarchist symbol. The "ironite staff" was an anarchist symbol in Philip K. Dicks "The Last of the Masters." It was a metallic walking stick/weapon, which became a symbol of The Anarchist League as they patrolled the world on foot, seeking out and destroying governments.--Cast 19:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

PPS. Thought of two more fictional anarchist symbols. In the Shadowrun universe, there exists two fictional anarchist organizations along side the Anarchist Black Cross. These are the Anarchist Black Crescent (a fictional anarchist heath care organization) and Anarchist Black Star (a fictional anarchist para-military organization {think anarchist ninjas,}) which use the Black Crescent and Star as their symbols, respectively. There may be little use for that article on Circle-A in the Arts, but we could still make a small section on the representation of fictional anarchist symbols using the same strict guidelines used at the List of fictional anarchists to keep out non-anarchist fiction (I'm looking at you, Dumbledore Army!).--Cast 01:19, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I would support merging relevant information from the Circle A article into this one. However, I am concerned that the "Circle A in popular culture" section of this article is unnecessarily long and filled with largely irrelevant material. The beginning (up to "This process mirrored the cooptation of punk subculture in general, which occurred at approximately the same time.") is appropriate (tho could use some rewording - I'll try and give it a look soon), as the anarcho-punk movement did contribute to the growing use and recognition of the circle A as a symbol and affected popular perception (in that it became identified with a more general rebelliousness than a specific political philosophy.) The rest of the section, however, is a handful of references in popular culture chosen seemingly at random without any reference to how or why they are significant.

In light of WP:IPC, I would propose that references which cannot be shown to have had a significant impact on perception of the Circle A be removed. --Black Butterfly 11:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and redirected Circle A here. There was no unique information to merge other than the conjecture that, rejected from this article, led to the creation of Circle A used in the arts in the first place. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 04:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

FAUD's Anarchy bumblebee?

I would like to consider adding the "Anarchy Bumblebee" to this article, but first its history must be confirmed. The website lists it with the caption "FAUD's Anarchy bumblebee." Looking around, I discovered the FAUD to be the Free Union of German Workers, an anarcho-syndicalist outfit founded in December 1919, by Rudolf Rocker, Arthur Lehning, & Augustin Souchy. (Daily Bleed, Blackend Flag, and the Kate Sharply Library for the sources:

1899 -- Arthur Lehning lives. German anarchist. Founder, in December 1919, with Rudolf Rocker & Augustin Souchy, of the FUAD. Establishes & becomes curator of the monumental "Bakunin Files", with the International Institute of Social History of Amsterdam, in 1971. (http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/sinners/RockerRudolf.htm)

1945 -- Germany: Julius Nolden freed from Luttringhausen prison with the arrival of the Allies today. Previously head of the FAUD, on Pentecost Sunday of 1947 he met in Darmstadt with other comrades to establish the Federation of Libertarian Socialists.

Nolden was head of the anarcho-syndicalist FAUD (Free Union of German Workers) in the Rhineland & one of 83 sent to prison for "preparing acts of high treason." Unfortunately several of the 83 were murdered in prison by their captors."[1]

(Also: [2] [3] )

So, anyone know if this Bee is really associated with the FAUD? If not, where does it come from?--Cast 23:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

In eure Hand, / Arbeitsbienen, / Werkstatt und Land, / Forst und Maschinen!Lied der schwarzen Scharen, circa 1930. Anarchy in the hive ;)--87.162.35.68 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Christian punk link

A user added the link Christian punk to the "See also" section of this article. After scrolling down somewhat, I found the link - an "Omega-A" symbol which represents the Christian concept of God and also plays off the circle-A as a punk symbol. I don't entirely think it's appropriate (and the link should at least be to that section), but I'm raising it for discussion. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 04:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

A similar appearing symbol, used by a totally unrelated sect, is not really worth linking too in my book. I mean, we could link to anyone who's ever used a black cat as well. Murderbike 09:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Is it really totally unrelated? There have always been christian anarchists, as oxymoronic as that may be. I mean, some people even call themselves queer muslims. I was stunned by the assertion that the circle-A is actually an "A & O" symbol. It's not totally outlandish to assume a connection to Alpha et Omega as used by esoterics. Some renditions of A & Ω resemble the Ⓐ: [4][5][6]. Of course it's speculative, but I wouldn't dismiss it rightaway. Of course if such a connection exists, it cannot be related to christian punk because that is a very recent phenomenon.--87.162.35.68 (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Move "Bisected flags and stars" into "Black flag"?

Seeing as these flags are all derived from the black flag, should the section on them be moved into the larger black flag section? Or should it remain independent in "Other symbols"? I would support a move to the article covering the derivations of the black flag and the the flag itself in the same section. Only a small rewrite would be necessary. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 04:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I was just thinking that myself, but the counter argument to this might be that the Other symbols section is used for symbols that tend to be used by only a segment of the anarchist milieu, while the Black Flag and Circle-A are used by most everyone. I would, however, Agree with you on the move.--Cast 06:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea. I think of them as all variations on the same theme. Murderbike 09:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

My concern would be that the black flag section is quite large already, as is the section on the red and black flag (combining both the basic red and black and the CNT version.) While other symbols are only described in brief it is possible they will be expanded over time, which could lead to an unweildy large section.

I would suggest we create a single section entitled "Flags and stars" with sub-sections for the black and red & black versions, and another sub-section for other variants (pink and black, green and black, etc.).

I would also suggest:

* making the circle A the first section in the article, as it is the symbol most associated with anarchism

* making each "other symbols" section (black cat, jolly roger, etc.) a section in its own right rather than subsections.

--Black Butterfly 10:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The circle-a was the first section in the article for a while, but I switched it for the sake of layout. Too many images in too small an area, plus the Anarchism sidebar (which was then much larger.) That's no longer quite the same problem it once was. However, I would also say it makes sense for Black Flag to remain the first because it is the oldest symbol associated with anarchy in existence (assuming there were others far more esoteric that we've forgotten,) and because its simple to keep things in alphabetical order.--Cast 06:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

If the length of the black flag section is really a worry it could be moved to its own article and summarised here, like the red flag/red star articles and communist symbolism. I don't think it's too long at all though; if anything I only think the other sections are somewhat short. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 05:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Black Flag and fascism/Islam

Folks, can we discuss this here instead of reverting all the reverts? Anybody got evidence for fascists using it? I'm pretty sure I've seen Islamic militias use it, but is it relevant to an article on ANARCHIST symbolism? Murderbike 09:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Islamic militants use the Black Flag. I'm not aware of any evidence of fascists using it. But, ultimately, why mention this in an article on anarchist symbolism? particularly if one claim is simply an assertion, without backing support. BlackFlag 10:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackFlag (talk • contribs)

Who cares? The subject of the article is anarchist uses of symbolism, not any uses of the symbolism. We don't refer to old wive's tales in the black cat section, why bother with fascism/Islam in the Black Flag section? Skomorokh ^incite 09:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I reinserted it largely on the assumption that historical background information on the use of a given symbol was acceptable, given the (comparatively) lengthy section on unrelated pre-anarchist usage of the circle A.

I would propose the creation of an article on Black Flag (political symbol), due to the numerous usages of said flag. The present disambiguation page lists several, each of which consists of a stub with little information - however (aside from the fascist one - I get the feeling whoever entered it simply saw the fascist use of the colour black and assumed it had been used as a flag at some point), others do have more background - Islam, American Civil War, and Afghanistan, for example. Plus, of course, the anarchist use.

How would people feel about this? --Black Butterfly 11:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems that if the non-anarchist uses of the black flag are removed, so should those for Circle-A. A Black Flag article would be a good idea. Murderbike 18:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't the references to Islam and Fascism be included in a footnote to the blackflag section? Perhaps as a footnote tag to a line mentioning that the black flag has been used by other cultures or political movements? The footnote provides appropriate links to articles regarding such subjects. There, editors can provide appropriate history for those uses of the black flag, or not, as those editors may lack the interest in creating such sections on those uses of the flag? And if they aren't going to provide information on the black flag as used by other groups, why should we? We've got other articles of interest to ourselves me might prefer to spend our time updating. No need for us to split Black Flag off just so we won't provide context for other uses of the flag anyway.--Cast 08:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

A Black Flag article would make sense -- its use by supporters of Islam is irrelevant to anarchist symbolism. And just to stress, the use of the black flag by fascists has not been proved. BlackFlag 11:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Circle A in popular culture

I decided to be bold and remove large chunks of the Circle A in popular culture section. My rationale is as follows:

* Given that the circle A is so heavily used nowadays it seems odd to single out specific instances (Ashlee Simpson, Hot Topic)

* The section read as an anarchist perspective on what happened (e.g. describing the Sex Pistols' use as appropriation) rather than a neutral commentary.

If people want to reinsert things here please go ahead but bear the above points in mind when doing so. --Black Butterfly 08:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Note from occ: The comments regarding the "circla-A" and the blah blah -- its never rendered as it is in the image, and we all know it. It's traditionally done in a faux "spraypaint" theme (or, you know, actual spraypaint) -- and the "O" is simply an intensifying circling of the "A". The chances of it standing for "order" are incredibly slim -- at least, in the broader sense that the origins of the symbol are "shrouded in mystery" (read: its just the most obvious way to spraypaint and intensify a big "A"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.75.149 (talk) 12:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Merge Ancap symbolism

Since we have a long standing consensus not to ghettoize any form of anarchism (anarcho-communism and anarcho-capitalism are both included in Anarchism for example), and as the Symbols section of Anarcho-capitalist terminology and symbolism is small enough that it wouldn't overwhelm this page, it should be merged so that we have a cohesive inclusive anarchist symbolism article. Anarcho-capitalist terminology and symbolism is largely reliant on unreliable sources, does not assert its notability, is unlikely to survive a vote for deletion. Please indicate your support or opposition to the proposed merger here. Skomorokh ^incite 21:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Fine with me. Murderbike (talk) 22:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I personally am okay with that, hopefully other anarchist of the culturally left-leaning don't get so upset which they have in the past as evident by the many discussions above this one. Lord Metroid 17:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Motion passed without opposition, impending merge Skomorokh ^incite 09:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy with the merger. Allixpeeke (talk) 19:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, can you feel the non-sectarian love? A simple merge like this would have spawned a divisive edit war nine months ago. If anyone has any opinions on what to do with the bereft successor article, Anarcho-capitalist terminology, a discussion is underway at the talkpage. Skomorokh ^incite 19:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

This is really pretty bad, merging two totally distinct political traditions and their symbols into one. Really, what does anarchism and "anarcho"-capitalism have in common beyond attempts by the latter to call itself "anarchist"? As for symbols, the flag of strikes being associated with gold? What a joke! As for "non-sectarian", that would assume that anarchists and "anarcho"-capitalists aim for the same thing, which they do not. Still, I do not have time for a pointless argument so I will leave my changes to showing when and why anarchists started using it. [User:BlackFlag|BlackFlag] —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackFlag (talk • contribs) 14:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course if you poison the well by classing non-capitalist forms of anarchism as the "anarchism" opposed to anarcho-capitalism, the discussion is over already. Your subjective whim as to which anarchist school of thought to exclude is worth about as much as the individualist who refuses to allow anarcho-communism within the hallowed halls of anarchism due to its authoritarianism, the anti-fascist who denies nationalist anarchism or the insurrectionist who repudiates the supposedly submissive anarcho-pacifism. Anyone can indulge in these infantile definitional games (we even have an article on it); so you are right, the argument is pointless. Skomorokh ^incite 15:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

There's room for anarcho: communism/socialism, individualism, syndicalism, parecon, primitivism, transhumanism, etc in an article on anarchism. All claim to aim for a society with no or as little as possible hierarchy. So called "Anarcho"-capitalism simply isn't anarchism because it supports hierarchy based on wealth. All references to anarcho-capitalism should be removed from articles on anarchism. I'm similarly opposed to so called nationalist "anarchism". Nationalism is based on racism and jingoism; it supports a hierarchy based on genetics and/or geography. It isn't anarchism. Delirium of disorder (talk) 22:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Look how grown-up and non-sectarian we are, that we can present a recent attempt by right-wing libertarians to co-opt the 'image' of a long-standing tradition that many have died for as though they were of equal importance to one another. Well done all! Cdh1984 (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Black Rose edit

I deleted the mention of the Irish folk song from the black rose section, as the song has nothing to do with Irish nationalism. http://www.irishfestivals.net/littleblackrose.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.59.162 (talk) 15:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Jolly Roger

I just noticed that this photo shows a flag with a skull and crossbones (and dollar signs) on it an anarchist rally in 1915. I wish we could see more of what was on the flag, but maybe we'll someday know what manner this symbol was used back then? Murderbike (talk) 01:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Just found another one [here] showing what appears to be the same flag with the text "Broadway 26 26". What the heck does that mean? Murderbike (talk) 01:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

A threat against Standard Oil? The wiki image metadata say May 1st, 1914, not 1915. That was shortly before the Lexington Avenue bombing when dynamite intended for Rockefeller/Standard Oil blew up on the activists.--87.162.35.68 (talk) 18:32, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

black and red flag

I've the black and red flag material before the other symbols as it came first and the rest are variations on it. I would also note that red is not the colour of "socialism" (anarchism is a school of socialism) as such, but the labour movement as a whole. Also, black and red flags were used in the 1870s by anarchists, so they are traditional colours and both come from the same source, the 1831 Lyons revolt. So the use of red and black by anarchists is because of their joint source in labour protests and the labour movement. I would suggest that the section gets modified to reflect the origins of anarchist use of the black and red flags in the general labour/socialist movement which it is a part of. BlackFlag —Preceding comment was added at 15:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted your change, purely on the basis of image alignment. This article has had to have minutely-tweaked balancing of images and your change seriously screws up the antecedent section. The significance of the red-and-black bisected flag is not in doubt - it has an entire subsection devoted which accounts for half the bisected flag section to begin with. Wikipedia articles that are not exclusively historical follow topic-based rather than chronological sectioning. No problems with your proposed content changes. Skomorokh ^incite 15:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Voluntaryist V

So, an anon IP fairly legitamately removed this section, being that it's been tagged as OR for awhile, and is unsourced. I'm not personally knowledgeable of an-cap symbolism and whatnot, so maybe somebody else can find a source for this before readding the info? Murderbike (talk) 03:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I am similarly unfamiliar, but I have been monitoring the page and wondering about the threshold for inclusion. Shall we say that if no coverage in reliable sources for a symbol may be found, and it is not the symbol of an organization notable per Wikipedia standards, it does not deserve inclusion on this page? Effectively, that would mean removing the Mutualist, Agorist, Eat the Rich and GNU symbols. скоморохъ 03:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the Voluntaryist V. There is a widely used Agorist Action Alliance (A3) logo, which might take the place of the other. Libertatia (talk) 04:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This whole section is basically made up and belongs only in the dreams of whoever made it up, not on wikipedia. This is not a place to showcase the doodles of anyone who self-identifies as 'anarchist'. 82.32.14.24 (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, but it seems to me, that most any "symbol" is "made up". The circle-A didn't appear in nature for the exploitation of the struggling masses. Murderbike (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Gallery

The page is very cluttered with images – completely understandable given the nature of the topic. Maybe to improve the layout, a gallery should be introduced for the "other" section. Post thoughts here if you care to discuss alternatives.--Cast (talk) 04:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks ok at my screen res, but if we are to increase the images/text ration (i.e. by re-adding the recently removed gnu/agorist/mutualist symbols), it should be an option. The desirability of a gallery seems to depend on whether or not there are 3-5 related symbols which can be described in one or two paragraphs. At the moment the only image cluttering the Other section for me is the "Eat the Rich" symbol Which image groupings did you have in mind? скоморохъ 14:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Please pardon the late response. I was referring to both the "anarcho-capitalist" section and "other symbols" section, which were cluttered prior to my creating this section. As I look at the layout now, it seems to have been improved slightly. I won't raise the issue again until I see the page becoming cluttered again.--Cast (talk) 22:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Black Star/Red Star

I was looking for information regarding the history of the star in anarchism, but couldn't find anything. Anyone have some info about it? It's the reason I came to this article.72.78.251.171 (talk) 22:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

what has happenet to christian anarchy symbol

who deleted it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fonfeluch (talk • contribs) 13:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I did, it's not a symbol, the author his/herself described it as being something they just made up. This article is about actually used anarchist symbols. ProbablyAmbiguous (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Anarcho-punk red circled A

I was wondering if the red circled A, used by anarcho-punk bands (see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Circle-A_red.svg) should be included in the symbols. You could argue that it was just like the regular cirlce-A, but it has notable differences in look (the red color, the a being bigger then the cirling o) and it's usage is also different. It's mostly used by (anarcho)punk bands to represent their anarchist beleifs. So I thought it should be added as a symbol or at least mentioned as a variation on the circle-A symbol.

ComicKurt: That is not death wich can eternal lie and with strange aeons even death may die. 18:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucrash anarcho-capitalist logo

Then of course there is this logo. Pretty snazzy. Aldrich Hanssen (talk) 18:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The thing about anarcho-capitalists is that they can be awfully keen on copyright, unlike Wikipedia. Skomorokh 18:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Rothbard wasn't all that keen on it, unless it resulted from a voluntary agreement between producer and purchaser.[7] Hmm, what about third parties such as myself, who were not privy to that transaction and therefore made no such agreement? In any event, if Wikipedia were to relocate to Sweden, then like the Pirate Bay we could probably get away with rampant copyright violations. Jimbo, are you listening? Aldrich Hanssen (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re-third parties, specifying in the voluntary agreement the rights of end-users and resellers sorts that problem. And I am totally in favour of a fuck-copyright Piratepedia. You oughta write a {{proposal}} Skomorokh 18:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Trying to change Wikipedia policy through proposals is like trying to attain anarchy through democratic processes. Actually, it's worse, because even if you get a majority on your side, they can declare "no consensus." The solution is to secede and form our own piratepedia, ideally equipped with software to integrate content from the mainstream wikipedia as well. (E.g. cross-wiki searches, watchlists, and subversion branching of page histories). We could try to elect pro-piracy folks to the Wikimedia Foundation and move it to Sweden that way, but there are so many other intractable issues as well (such as deletion policy) that I think it's better to just make a clean break. http://www.spiritworldwiki.com

So anyway, suppose Bureaucrash sells its t-shirt, under an agreement stating, "The buyer and his heirs, assignees, end users, etc. cannot rip off our design and sell it themselves." However, I go on the internet, see their advertisement, and rip it off without ever signing that agreement. How would I be bound to not copy it? Does this rely on copyright being a part of the overall anarcho-capitalist legal code (much like pollution, which is also prohibited even when a contract does not exist between the polluter and the pollutee)? If you have some more insight on this, perhaps content could be added to Libertarianism and intellectual property. Aldrich Hanssen (talk) 19:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Pre-anarchist usage

Not to put too fine a point on it, I think this section is shit. I mean, it's shit anyway, as a discussion of alchemical symbology; but it's especially shit as a serious exposition on the history of the Circle-A before its use by anarchists. You might just as well incorporate that bit on the Christian Alpha-Omega: it's an incidental (and accidental) use of the same or similar symbol by a totally different and much less public group at a completely different time period, and with utterly different intent. There's no connection between the two, and I move that the section Pre-anarchist usage be deleted.

Nuttyskin (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I second that motion, and have enacted it. Plrk (talk) 18:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yellow = classical liberalism?

Might not the yellow-and-black (as opposed to gold-and-black) also be considered symbolic of anarcho-classical-liberalism, due to yellow's historical association with classical liberalism? Tisane (talk) 18:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

• I agree. There is a sentence that says capitalism and anarchism are inherently incompatible, which is liked to an ebook which says stuff like "capitalists are not opposed to rent, employment and private property, which is the same thing as exploitation, so they are not anarchists." Obviously, rent, employment and private property can easily become exploitive when they are set up and supported by the State, the author is criticizing statist conservatives who think government does not harm the lower classes in this way, it does not adress the opinions of people such as myself, who believe that an imperial country that uses companies, markets and fiat currency as a tool of the powerful are just as exploitive as pre-renaissance absolutist monarchies, I have removed the expression and simply added:

"Anarcho-communists and Anarcho capitalists both consider each others' philosophy to be incompatible with anarchism, as capitalists believe communism is state oppression, and communists believe capitalism is state oppression. As a result, both groups claim the other is not really anarchism."

Because all capitalists agree that private property and rent are not state oppression, but natural behaviors of free markets, and all communists believe that the creation of local communes, soviets (with a lowercase "S") and peasant/worker control of land/factories is a natural behavior of a pure communist society, they both deny the other as tools of Statist imperial oppression. Of course, they both agree that government is inherently oppressive. Rustyfence (talk) 01:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Where's Sabocat?

I liked that little guy... Seriously, though, why no black cat section anymore? 218.160.183.224 (talk) 03:00, 19 February 2011 (UTC) right here Anarcho-syndicalist symbolism#Black cat --Guerillero | My Talk 04:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

"Bisected flags and stars"

This whole section may be original research. What is the history of the diagonally bisected black+color coded flag? Can someone find some references?

The section may need to be either expanded on, or removed.

66.108.243.166 (talk) 06:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)Moi

Certainly the black-and-red is well-known in Spain (for example, used by the CGT for the better part of a century). The rest of this though? I have no idea. - Jmabel | Talk 06:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

• CGT example
  CGT example
• 
  And another
• 
  And this one dates from
• 
  Here is apparently at least one real-world example of purple-and-black from 2005

More on the black-and-red bisected flag here. Probably not a citable source in its own right, but full of citations one could follow up. - Jmabel | Talk 06:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Circle-E

I'd like to propose that a section be added on the circle-E (for "Equality"). I'm not really sure as to its origin, although I would guess that it's even newer than the squatter's symbol, possibly originating within anarcho-punk culture and symbolism. It is, however, used by many anarchists today, as evidenced by these photographs:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UHFNuAfw6UY/STMUtpIjP8I/AAAAAAAAAX0/XlY2XFywRB0/s400/anarchy+-+whoever+they+vote+for+we+are+ungovernable.jpg

http://www.theodoresworld.net/pics/0307/traitorsImage6.jpg

http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/800px-g20_protesters_pittsburgh_pennsylvania_2009-09-24.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkkhrhTCg11qe86fxo1_400.jpg

BlackGoat138 (talk) 09:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The Irony of Symbolism

This article should include something on the irony of symbolism in Anarchy. I mean, c'mon folks - if the idea of anarchy is no structure, a widely recognized symbol meaning "Anarchy" is the first sign of structure and governance. It's kinda funny that a group of people, brought together to be anarchists (and you just know they are going to defer to a leader in the group, because that's what people do) adopt a symbol? Seriously? That isn't anarchy - thats a Condo Association. Real anarchy doesn't use symbols, correct? 68.252.62.180 (talk) 16:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)