Sovereign Commands, Anarchistic Demands
The anarchist always targets a specific institution--a business, law enforcement, a university. In each case, there has to be a command structure, however corrupted or degraded--something makes a university a university and not a PR firm. In defending a command structure, you are defending it as well, maybe even more, against the forces within as those without. So you're right that it may be more a virtual than actual command structure--still, if the institution persists, there must be some actuality.
---
All true, but I suspect bobbyburnaby is addressing my suggestion that we, in saying all this about the BLM activist, have an at least tacit (absolutist) command structure of our own that enables us to expose theirs. By including the Hungarian nationalist in the tentacular anarchist command structure, you add urgency to that question. Where is the bearer of absolutist ontology to be found? How do we "become worthy"? That is, I think the question he is pressing, and it is indeed one I find central.
---
This is exactly the issue, your answer is a good one with which I take no issue, but this must be a continuing area of work. The implications of "being aware of it," of "operating within their realm," of identifying the initial shoots of an alternative command structure, working in "exile"--this all raises central questions which I don't imagine can be completely answered immediately. I just want us to have them in mind, as part of the project.
---
Thanks. Yes, to put it briefly in the terms I have been using, the "solution" is an attempt to solve, by "declarative" means, a "problem" (conflict, really) that can only be "settled" through a clear command structure, i.e., properly aligned imperatives.
---
Much of what you say is unfamiliar to me, but I'll try to respond. The generation of scale can be either centrifugal or centripetal--it can create new power centers that are less controlled and feel compelled to test, break with or undermine the center. But it can also give back to the center which is, after all, the basis for increases in productivity and reward for discipline. We can look to the sovereign center to integrate increases in scale across the board. This would involve constant formalizing and nominalizing--that, indeed, may be the main job of the sovereign, giving titles.
---
I don't know, but I'd be inclined to say there is always something consolidated through the collapse. What are the implications?
---
For these kinds of questions I work with the originary hypothesis of Eric Gans, and in particular his The End of Culture:
https://www.amazon.com/End-Culture-Toward-Generative-Anthropology/dp/0520051815/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1493413507&sr=8-9&keywords=eric+gans