Talk:Chinese anarchism

Origins of Article
This entry was originally a term paper i wrote on the subject, as such it has a lot of usefull information but the tone is not as nuetral as would be hoped for in an encyclopedia article. I'm relying on the wikipedia community to help rectify that since i don't have the time to go through it again and re-write it. (This was posted by the anonymous creator of this article) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dglynch (talk • contribs) 04:07, November 5, 2005.

Just leftist?
What what I've read of this article, it appears that the dominant (only?) form of anarchism in "Chinese anarchism" is leftist? Syndicalism and anarcho-communism, and the like? What about moderate and right-anarchism? You know, individual anarchism, anarcho-capitalism, and libertarianism and minarchism to some extent? -- Миборовский U 07:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Such "anarchism" is a recent phenomena and have never had a historical base or a movement. //anom. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.22.59.4 (talk • contribs) 14:48, May 14, 2006.


 * Why do you say so? Elle vécut heureuse à jamais  (Be eudaimonic!) 05:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * This does read like original research, even though there has been published works on the subject. However, it must be denoted as to how much role it played in the development of modern China. Based on general history, I'd say the effect is not much. Discussions on the 1911 revolution rarely goes into "Chinese anarchism" and I don't even know if it's notable enough to mention this in the ROC article. BlueShirts  00:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * hey folks, i'm actually the creator of the original article. it's not original research, though i did try to cite primary sources as much as possible.  the article relies primarily on arif dirlik's excelent book on the topic, along with a much shorter book called 'The Chinese Anarchist Movement' by R. Scalpino and G.T. Yu.


 * as per the other users question, no, there was no right-wing anarchism in china at all, at least none that anyone i've ever read on the topic thought significant enough to mention. though it should be noted that proudhonian-style mutualism, from which American individualist anarchism and then anarcho-capitalism evolved, was present.  Anarcho-capitalism, however, seems to be a peculiarly american phenomenon.


 * Also, there were some aspects of the chinese anarchist movement that clearly separated it from other regional varieties of anarchism - it's evolutionary character (not focusesed on immediate revolution the way euro and american anarchism at the time was), it's close ties to the nationalist movement, and the tendency for Chinese anarchos from the school originated by the tokyo students to rely primarily on historical indigenous anarchist-type movements such as the well field system and anarchist elements within taoism. so it is closely related to western anarchism, particularly russian anarchism, but also distinct.  it kind of reminds me of what western anarchism might have evolved into if bakunin had been able to resolve his pan-slavist nationalist sympathies with his anti-authoritarianism.


 * as per significance, it's *very* significant in its own right as a mass movement that motivated hundreds of thousands of people for two decades, and also for its influences on other regional anarchisms in Korea, Vietnam, Japan, Taiwan, and many other asian nations. Additionally, you can't understand Maoism fully without understanding the anarchist movement that preceded Mao because many of the key tenents of Maoism that departed radically from traditional Marxism were cribbed directly from the Anarchist movement - the focus on grassroots organizing of Peasants instead of factory workers and the need for a "new culture" being the two biggest. Taken in context, Maoism could be understood to be an attempt to implement Anarchist goals with a Marxist state.  Dirlik goes into that in quite a bit of detail in his other book on the origins of chinese communism, i forget the name of it though and don't have it handy as i lent it to a friend...


 * hope that clarifies things a bit, if i have time i'll go back through this and put the source citations inline. the original version was meticulously sourced but unfortunately the inlines didn't carry over when i copied the text in from microsoft word. Anarchocelt 23:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Did some copy editing and broke down article into more paragraphs and headers
The article had such massive blocks of text that I thought breaking it down would help people get in there and fix the article up.

I know nothing about the subject matter, so more knowledgble individuals need to fix paragraphing and headers.

The article badly needs reference footnotes. See: KarenAnn 17:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Verifiability
 * Reliable sources
 * Citing sources

Did more copy editing and fixed article as best I could - removing copyedit tag
Since no one else seems do be doing andything on the article, I decided to finish it or else it will languish forever.

I think the article is extremely interesting and taught me a great deal about what has been going on in China. However, I cannot possibly address whether the article is biased or not, as all I know about the subject matter is what I learned in dealing with this article.

So I am removing the copyedit tag. I hope you all continue to work on it and fixed the deficiences you believe it has. KarenAnn 17:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Anarchism in China
There is a very brief article at Anarchism in China; I would suggest just deleting that page and redirecting here, except that the name "Anarchism in China" is more consistent with other Anarchism by country pages (e.g. Anarchism in the United States). So, I would suggest we move the content here to Anarchism in China. Thoughts? VoluntarySlave 04:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree wholeheartedly. That content is useless, and it's where this one should be. Supersheep 22:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Anarchism in China starts off more neutral, and the scope is more relevant in terms of the title. What I suggest is importing content from this article into that article: this article (Chinese anarchism) should redirect to Anarchism in China, because there is no single Chinese anarchism as a single ideology per se. John Riemann Soong 17:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree, i'm no expert on Chinese anarchism but i think a merger of the two articles would be a huge improvement. Blockader 18:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree that "Anarchism in China" should be the title of main page with "Chinese Anarchism" title re-directing there. Content of current Chinese anarchism should reside instead at Anarchism in China. I don't have much opinion on current content at Anarchism in China. -- RayBirks 19:12, 12 September 2006 (UTC)