Talk:Contemporary anarchism

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 one external links on Contemporary anarchism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1930s/xx/toanarchy.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070514.wxlanarchist14/BNStory/lifeWork/home
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080317082822/http://www.zmag.org:80/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=41&ItemID=4796 to http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=41&ItemID=4796
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130902055046/http://www.soliobrera.org/pdefs/cuaderno4.pdf to http://www.soliobrera.org/pdefs/cuaderno4.pdf#search=%22Antonia%20Maym%C3%B3n%22
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101007160139/http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionJ3 to http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionJ3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Contemporary anarchism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604120204/http://www.katesharpleylibrary.net/dnckhs to http://www.katesharpleylibrary.net/dnckhs
 * Added tag to http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/ifa-hist-short.html
 * Added tag to http://www.cnt-ait-fr.org/CNT-AIT/ACCUEIL.html%20Website%20of%20the%20Conf%C3%A9d%C3%A9ration%20Nationale%20du%20Travail%20-%20Association%20Internationale%20des%20Travailleurs
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5zcwSjuqw?url=http://www.acracia.org/1-23a58lainsumision.pdf to http://www.acracia.org/1-23a58lainsumision.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/9258

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:18, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

what happened to the post-left page?
it appears that the entire page for post-left anarchism has disappeared. all links to it redirect to contemporary anarchism, which has a small blurb on the same subject but doesn't cover everything the page did. is there a reason the page is gone? if so, please tell me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egghjj (talk • contribs) 21:09, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Removing the "Post-left anarchism" dedicated article to replace it with a redirect to the wiki/Contemporary_anarchism#Post-left_anarchy is in my opinion a mistake. The text it is redirected to does quite the incomplete job at explaining what post-left anarchism is. Not only was the original article way larger, it was also well-enough sourced and in my opinion did a good job at introducing the subject it titled. --TryCreatingThisNothing (talk) 00:43, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Definitely a mistake. Here's the "latest" archive of it and you can see it is much more detailed. Who the hell deleted that article? Even worse, I just looked at the old talk page and the short snippet has the worst issues covered, such as that supposedly post-left anarchists are all anarchist-primitives, which is wrong considering what post-left anarchism critiques. --DefendingFree (talk) 11:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Not only that. It's description of it is really bad, or at best is extremely poor in quality. I would even say completely non-factual or dishonest. For example, saying post-leftists in general focus on things such as "deconstructing gender" while ignoring a large number of important post-leftist figures who primarily focus their criticisms against mainstream ideals of the "left" or the mainstream "progressive" movement, such as identity politics and gender politics. To me it seems like certain users on the wiki either have biases opposed with the post-leftist ideology and criticisms regarding certain aspects of the "mainstream" left, want to inject their personal political ideas to represent the whole of post-leftism by glossing over all the conflicts they have with other left-wing and anarchist groups, or are just very misinformed about the focuses post-leftist ideology as well as the views a majority of it's adherents subscribe to. Either way it is extremely uncharitable for an entire sub-sect of anarchist thought with numerous different theorists and thinkers with their own unique ideas and perspectives to be entirely disregarded, for it to only be briefly introduced as a tiny sub-article with a couple of extremely vague and extremely overgeneralized paragraphs that misrepresent a lot of their ideas, and which don't even mention some of the most basic aspects of their ideology such as with criticisms of the mainstream left, their view on promoting individualism, rejection of our current understandings of morality, promoting action through insurrection or their criticisms regarding modern civilization. In short. The post-left page in its current state is completely unacceptable as I argue it isn't even for the most part factual and it's current role as a tiny sub-section should be completely reconsidered. --Special:Contributions/72.53.87.239 (talk) 06:37, 24 March 2022 (EST)


 * It's coming directly from Marshall's Demanding the Impossible. Is the book incorrect? If there are additional reliable, secondary sources that discuss the topic, you're welcome to add them. The previous page on this topic was sourced entirely to primary sources, which is fine for another wiki but not fit for an encyclopedia. Wikipedia bases dedicated articles on significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources. czar  15:54, 15 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Citing a single book to describe in a single paragraph an intellectual tendency which required an entire article with an extensive bibliography to fully explain and then dismissing that article as having an insufficient number of secondary sources strikes me as using the letter of the law to go against its spirit, if you will. Rather than delete the post-left anarchy article entirely, it seems to me that more secondary reliable sources should have been sought out to supplement the primary sources, with the issue raised in the Talk page and so forth, which appears not to have been done—a move which I find extremely problematic from an editorial standpoint, and perhaps even a bit suspect given the internecine feuding which surrounds the subject.100.14.1.119 (talk) 14:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

This single paragraph entry is a terrible substitute for the more comprehensive article that used to exist. What kind of discussion, if any, was had regarding the deletion of the old article? Was there a vote? Is it archived anywhere? I'd like to see what justification there was for its removal, since as it stands, the current section is barely a sketch, and begs for elaboration - of the kind that would typically be handled by linking to a more detailed article (which unfortunately no longer exists). Fiftypigs (talk) 01:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * So I dug around to answer my own question and the talk page of the now-deleted article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Post-left_anarchy And no, there was no discussion or vote on deleting or redirecting the article, just a blanket assertion by exactly one editor that it had to be done. Doesn't seem particularly confidence-inspiring. Fiftypigs (talk) 01:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)