Scan barcode
smark1342's review against another edition
I always like how big his world is (maybe that’s a characteristic of a good anthropologist). The point that anthropologists are sitting on a goldmine of “our shared history” or whatever and that we might have something to learn from how people have lived elsewhere in time and place seems also true/valuable. The way he describes groups just deciding to pick up and move on (in contexts similar to the ones we live in and also very very dissimilar) makes for an interesting way to look at the world. his anarchism is way more fluid and able to change depending on context, jibes with his point about how it’s historically been a more practical grounded amorphous belief system. I wonder whether he’d count police department non enforcement (sometimes out of spite) of certain laws as a positive example of anarchist practice. I liked the theory about majoritarian democracy and the military and am always interested in how other types of democratic arrangements work/why we’ve come to view our weird stilted electoral systems as the only democratic way of life.
He writes about how none of the ways humans have related to/relied on each other in the past are lost completely but I don’t know if that’s true, at least over the next couple hundred years. I think some ways of being have been foreclosed upon by either because people won’t have the stomach for it or because the nonhuman world doesn’t look like how it used to.
Some of the ideas about how we won’t miss the poorly functioning institutions we’ve come to rely upon are dumb enough to make me feel like he knows they’re wrong and just thinks we should deal with the negative consequences. He simultaneously considers g20 schmucks/the global elite or whatever to be stupid useless shills but also invests godlike powers in them when it comes to solving problems like “who does shitty jobs in an anarchist utopia” or “how do people move freely in a post-state world without a whole host of problems arising”. Somehow they are simultaneously remoras on human society with no ability or value but if you start twisting them in the right way they’ll respond in a way that’s basically indistinguishable from magic. All in all I’m always glad to read his examples of how people have managed to live together.
He writes about how none of the ways humans have related to/relied on each other in the past are lost completely but I don’t know if that’s true, at least over the next couple hundred years. I think some ways of being have been foreclosed upon by either because people won’t have the stomach for it or because the nonhuman world doesn’t look like how it used to.
Some of the ideas about how we won’t miss the poorly functioning institutions we’ve come to rely upon are dumb enough to make me feel like he knows they’re wrong and just thinks we should deal with the negative consequences. He simultaneously considers g20 schmucks/the global elite or whatever to be stupid useless shills but also invests godlike powers in them when it comes to solving problems like “who does shitty jobs in an anarchist utopia” or “how do people move freely in a post-state world without a whole host of problems arising”. Somehow they are simultaneously remoras on human society with no ability or value but if you start twisting them in the right way they’ll respond in a way that’s basically indistinguishable from magic. All in all I’m always glad to read his examples of how people have managed to live together.
graeber_poupon's review against another edition
5.0
Had to go back to read this with a pencil, possibly one of Graeber's most thought provoking pieces. In hindsight, it can be understood as a to-do list for not only the entire discipline of anthropology, but for himself personally. In his later work, particularly Debt: The First 5000 Years and The Dawn Of Everything (in collaboration with archeologist David Wengrow), Graeber explored many of the key areas of study he lays out in this essay. Most notably a theory of the state and political entities that are not states, theories of alienation, and power/ignorance and power/stupidity, and of course hierarchy. What's most tantalizing of all, however, are the points he never got the chance to pursue himself - which remain for future anthropologists and anarchists to explore.
crowcore's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
fast-paced
4.75
I think this book might be difficult to understand at points for someone without some level of familiarity with anarchism and/or anthropology. That said, as an anarchist anthropologist, I loved it and found it very easy to read.
esalamon's review against another edition
4.0
interesting, concise, lots of great ideas. wish there were citations and sources.
zaboniki's review against another edition
3.0
Overall I appreciate the challenges set and questions raised by the author. I learned plenty of new and interesting things. It does baffle me, however, that there were almost no references and no bibliography. Surely references to relevant works and suggested further reading would have benefited this work, especially since its aim is to provide an academic basis for how to bridge anarchism and anthropology? We all win by crediting the ideas of other people. For all of the author’s anti-academic and anti-intellectual rants, a lot of the ideas put forth have long standing academic traditions. Referencing them directly (instead of rejecting to even be part of them) could have helped to ground and deepen his arguments.
amul27's review against another edition
4.0
3.5, Rounded off to 4.
"Another World is Possible" - A Brazilian Folk Song as quoted by Graeber, whose book can be described as an extended argument of this quote.
For anyone who has been pondering upon the reality of our political organization, David Graeber (The Democracy Project, Debt), the anthropology scholar who is better known for his coining of the phrase (Along with many others) 'Occupy Wall Street', offers literal 'fragments' of anarchist thought from pages of anthropology.
The failure of Capitalism in providing social and economic justice as well as its environmental cost is self-evident and the only answer for this concern has been 'What other choice do we have?'. In Fragments, Graeber is introducing Anarchist thought not as a solution or an alternative to Capitalism, but something more 'natural' to human beings than any other form of political organisation. As an anthropologist he has access to communities across the world who practice Anarchism, which is not a synonym to anarchy. He also answers the allegations of 'primitiveness' and not being 'modern'. But, more than that, he questions the very working of the field of anthropology and its assumptions and how it maybe failing in not sharing its knowledge on anarchist societies, thereby ignoring the potential and possibilities that anarchist thought can have on how we think about our political and economic reality.
However, if you're looking for a comprehensive case for anarchism or even a introduction to anarchism, then this isn't the book for you. Though, it is short, it reads more like Graeber's diary.
Goldman, Kropotkin, Bakunin are the pioneers of anarchist thought and they of course need to be read for a comprehensive understanding of Anarchism, but for a take on contemporary anarchist thought and its relation to anthropology, Fragments works.
"Another World is Possible" - A Brazilian Folk Song as quoted by Graeber, whose book can be described as an extended argument of this quote.
For anyone who has been pondering upon the reality of our political organization, David Graeber (The Democracy Project, Debt), the anthropology scholar who is better known for his coining of the phrase (Along with many others) 'Occupy Wall Street', offers literal 'fragments' of anarchist thought from pages of anthropology.
The failure of Capitalism in providing social and economic justice as well as its environmental cost is self-evident and the only answer for this concern has been 'What other choice do we have?'. In Fragments, Graeber is introducing Anarchist thought not as a solution or an alternative to Capitalism, but something more 'natural' to human beings than any other form of political organisation. As an anthropologist he has access to communities across the world who practice Anarchism, which is not a synonym to anarchy. He also answers the allegations of 'primitiveness' and not being 'modern'. But, more than that, he questions the very working of the field of anthropology and its assumptions and how it maybe failing in not sharing its knowledge on anarchist societies, thereby ignoring the potential and possibilities that anarchist thought can have on how we think about our political and economic reality.
However, if you're looking for a comprehensive case for anarchism or even a introduction to anarchism, then this isn't the book for you. Though, it is short, it reads more like Graeber's diary.
Goldman, Kropotkin, Bakunin are the pioneers of anarchist thought and they of course need to be read for a comprehensive understanding of Anarchism, but for a take on contemporary anarchist thought and its relation to anthropology, Fragments works.
lmbws's review against another edition
5.0
One of the most inspiring anthropologists makes a case for what anthropology and anarchism could learn for each other. Not only that but this book is also a small pladoyer for what role anthropologists should play in this current world and where the discipline could be helpful. A great read, easy to understand language and I'd say a must-read for everyone in anthropology.