Anarchism, the Ethics of Practice and the 'Movement of Movements'
- Anarchism is the rejection of the idea that the end justifies the means, and the belief that a revolutionary's role is not to seize state power by force, but to build a new society within the existing one.
- Anarchism has become the fundamental inspiration for the 'movement of movements' which focuses on exposing, delegitimizing, and dismantling mechanisms of rule, while creating spaces of autonomy and participatory management.
- This article examines the ethical principles and practices of anarchism and highlights its significance in the ongoing struggle for social change.
- ベストアンサー
日本語訳を教えてください。
大学のゼミで使っている資料の一部です。日本語訳を教えてください。 above all , the rejection of any idea that the end justifies the means, let alone that the business of a revolutionary is to seize state power and then begin imposing one's vision at the point of a gun. Above all, anarchism, as an ethics of practice-the idea of building a new society "within the shell of the old" has become the basic inspiration of the "movement of movements" [of which are authors are a part], which has from the start been less about seizing state power than about exposing, delegitimizing and dismantling mechanisms of rule while winning ever larger spaces of autonomy and participatory management within it.
- habuna
- お礼率85% (17/20)
- 英語
- 回答数1
- ありがとう数1
- みんなの回答 （1）
- 専門家の回答
質問者が選んだベストアンサー
> above all, the rejection of any idea that the end justifies the means, let alone that the business of a revolutionary is to seize state power and then begin imposing one's vision at the point of a gun. なかんずく、結果が手段を正当化するという考えを拒否することであり、革命ビジネスとは国家権力を掌握することであり、己のビジョンを強制的に押し付け始めることである、という考えについては言うまでもない。 > Above all, anarchism, as an ethics of practice-the idea of building a new society "within the shell of the old" has become the basic inspiration of the "movement of movements" [of which are authors are a part], which has from the start been less about seizing state power than about exposing, delegitimizing and dismantling mechanisms of rule while winning ever larger spaces of autonomy and participatory management within it. なかんずく、アナーキズムは、実際の倫理 -- 『古い枠組みの内部に』 新しい社会を建設するのだという考えが 『運動の中における運動』 というもの [これは筆者も与するものである] の基本的なインスピレーションになり、つまりそれは、初めから、より大きな自治の領域を、特にその内部における管理を勝ち取るというルールのメカニズムを露呈させ、非合法化し、廃止するということ以上に、国家権力を掌握することに消極的であるということであったのだ。
関連するQ&A
- 日本語訳を教えてください。
ゼミで社会運動論を学んでいます。次回の文献が英文となり、どうしても旨く日本語訳できません。日本語訳を教えてください。 On one level it is kind of faith: a belief that forms of irresponsibility that seem to make power necessary are in fact the effects of power itself. In practice though it is a constant questioning, an effort to identify every compulsory or hierarchical relation in human life, and challenge them to justify themselves, and if they cannot-which usually turns out to be the case-an effort to limit their power and thus widen the scope of human liberty. Just as a Sufi might argue that anarchism is the urge for freedom behind all political ideologies. Schools of Marxism always have founder. Just as Marxism sprang from the mind of Marx, so we have Leninists, Maoists,, Althusserians... [Note how the list starts with heads of state and grades almost seamlessly into French professors- who, in turn, can spawn their own sects: Lacanians, Foucauldians....]
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 日本語訳を教えてください。
ゼミの資料の一部です。日本語訳を教えてください。 Schools of anarchism, in contrast, almost invariably emerge from some kind of organizational principle or form of practice: Anarcho-Syndicalists and Anarcho-Communists, individualists, and so on. Anarchrists are distinguished by what they do, and how they organize themselves to go about doing it. And indeed this has always been what anarchists have spent most of their time thinking and arguing about. They have never been much interested in the kinds of broad strategic or philosophical questions that preoccupy Marxism such as Are the peasants a potentially revolutionary class? [anarchists consider this something for peasants to decide] or what is the nature of the commodity form? Rather, they tend to argue about what is truly democratic way to go about a meeting, at what point organization stops empowering people and starts squelching individual freedom. Is "leadership" necessarily a bad thing? Or alternately, about the ethics of opposing power: What is direct action? Should one condemn someone who assassinates a head of state? When is it okay to throw a brick?
- 締切済み
- 英語
- 日本語訳を!c13-5
お願いします!続き In sculpture,Vishnu often has four hands,each holding a symbol of his power.Two hands are not enough to rid the world of evil.In one hand he holds a conch shell which,just like Shiva's,symbolizes his power.In another hand,he wields a razor-sharp disk,a weapon that symbolizes the way intelligence can destroy all evil(the disk is called a chakra).In another hand,Vishnu holds a lotus,a flower that grows in water.Lotuses are rooted in mud but they blossom above the water.Vishnu's lotus is a symbol of his creative force and lordship over the universe.In his fourth hand,Vishnu holds a club or mace,which is a symbol of his power and knowledge. Shiva and Vishnu are sometimes shown together with Brahma in art.Brahma,who should not be confused with Brahman,the Ultimate Supreme Being,is the oldest of the three major Hindu deities.Although all three deities are mentioned in the Vedas,Shiva and Vishnu didn't become really popular until later.In the Ramayana,Brahma himself says that“Of the Trinity,I am the Creator,Shiva is the Destroyer,and Vishnu is the Protector.” Brahma rides a swan or goose to symbolize purity,detachment,and divine knowledge.Brahma represents the balance between forces that destroy and fragment the universe and those that create and unite.He is usually shown with four heads,facing north,south,east,and west,so that he can see everything(at one point he actually had a fifth head,but that was cut off by Shiva during a fight).His heads also represent the four Vedas and the four groups that people are divided into(called varnas).He is often shown with four arms that hold symbolic objects: a special pot with a spout that is used for ritual cleansing and represents the earth,the sustainer of all things; palm-leaf manuscripts,which represent the Vedas; prayer beads that he uses to recite prayers; and the sacred conch shell that calls the deities to sacrifices.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 日本語訳を教えてください。
ゼミで社会運動論を学んでいるのですが、次の参考文献が日本語訳できなくて困っています。日本語訳を教えてください。 Schools of anarchism, in contrast, almost invariably emerge from some kind of organizational principle or form of practice: Anarcho-Syndicalists and Anarcho-Communists, individualists, and so on. Anarchrists are distinguished by what they do, and how they organize themselves to go about doing it. And indeed this has always been what anarchists have spent most of their time thinking and arguing about. They have never been much interested in the kinds of broad strategic or philosophical questions that preoccupy Marxism such as Are the peasants a potentially revolutionary class? [anarchists consider this something for peasants to decide] or what is the nature of the commodity form? Rather, they tend to argue about what is truly democratic way to go about a meeting, at what point organization stops empowering people and starts squelching individual freedom. Is "leadership" necessarily a bad thing? Or alternately, about the ethics of opposing power: What is direct action? Should one condemn someone who assassinates a head of state? When is it okay to throw a brick?
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 日本語訳を教えてください。
ゼミの資料の一部です。日本語訳を教えてください。 these changes have been difficult to document because so far anarchist ideas have received almost no attention in the academy. There are still thousands of academic Marxists, but almost no academic anarchist. This lag is somewhat difficult to interpret. In part, no doubt, it’ because Marxism has always had a certain affinity with the academy which anarchism obviously lacked: Marxism was, after all, the only great social movement that was invented by Ph.D. Most accounts of the history of anarchism assume it was basically similar to century thinkers [Proudhon, Bakunin, Kroptkin…] that then went on to inspire working-class organizations, became enmeshed in political struggles, divided into sects…
- 締切済み
- 英語
- 日本語訳お願いします。
You will want some explanation of why the six behaviors mentioned above reflect these constructs. Brazil and India are collectivist countriés, though in different degrees. France, the United States, and Germany are individualistic countries, also in different degrees. Nevertheless, one can find both collectivist and individualistic elements in all these countries, in di fferent combinations. In (c), the waiter infers that each person has personal preferences that must be respected, whereas in (d) , the waiter assumes that the senior member of the group will decide what to eat and that ultimately consuming the same food will intensify bonds among the members of the group. (c).(d)に当てはまる国名を答えてほしいです。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 日本語訳を教えてください。
ゼミで社会運動論を学んでいます。次回の文献が英文となり、どうしても旨く日本語訳できません。日本語訳を教えてください。 Anarchism, in the standard accounts, usually comes out as Marxism's poorer cousin, theoretically a bit flat-footed but making up for brains, perhaps, with passion and sincerity. Really the analogy is strained. The "founders" of anarchism did not think of themselves as having invented anything particularly new. The saw its basic principle-mutual aid, voluntary association, egalitarian decision-making-as as old as humanity. The same goes for the rejection of the state and of all forms of structural violence, inequality, or domination [anarchism literrally means "without" rulers]-even the assumption that all these forms are somehow related and reinforce each other. None of it was seen as some startling new doctrine, but a longstanding tendency in the history human thought, and one that cannot be encompassed by any general theory of ideology. On one level it is kind of faith: a belief that forms of irresponsibility that seem to make power necessary are in fact the effects of power itself. In practice though it is a constant questioning, an effort to identify every compulsory or hierarchical relation in human life, and challenge them to justify themselves, and if they cannot-which usually turns out to be the case-an effort to limit their power and thus widen the scope of human liberty. Just as a Sufi might argue that anarchism is the urge for freedom behind all political ideologies. Schools of Marxism always have founder. Just as Marxism sprang from the mind of Marx, so we have Leninists, Maoists,, Althusserians... [Note how the list starts with heads of state and grades almost seamlessly into French professors- who, in turn, can spawn their own sects: Lacanians, Foucauldians....]
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 日本語訳お願いします。
When the Lord Townshend was Minister of State，a brother of his was content to be a City merchant ; and the time that the earl of Oxford governed Great Britain ，his younger brother was no more than a factor in Alleppo, where he chose to live, and where he died. This custom, which begins, however, to be laid aside, appear monstrous to Germans, vainly puffed up with their extraction. These think it morally impossible that the son of an English peer should be no more than a rich and powerful citizen, for all are princes in Germany. 英語の得意な方、日本語訳よろしくお願いします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 【至急】英文の日本語訳を教えてください
タイトル通りです。よろしくお願いいたします。 (1) What kinds of stories are there in this book? There are stories about a flying island a country of giants and a country of horses. (2) Which Japanese cities did Gulliver visit? He visited Nagasaki and Kannonzaki. (3) Which city is "Nagasac”? Is Nagasaki.
- 締切済み
- その他（語学）
- 17-1日本語訳
お願いします。 Have you ever gone camping? People who love to camp often talk about how well they can see the stars away from city lights.They talk about noticing how early some birds wake up in the morning,and how after a few days they have figured out the best places to find lizards or wild blueberries.When you're camping,you're living close to the earth.(Some people think too close!)You have the time to see patterns that you wouldn't notice in ordinary life－like the way mint stems are square,with leaves that stick out opposite each other,and that the best time to find salamanders is after it has rained.When you go camping,you can't help noticing and wondering about the natural world.You can't help being a scientist. The peoples of ancient India lived close to the land all the time.In a way,they were all scientists.They may not have had the tools that modern scientists do.They never learned about magnifying lenses,so they had no microscopes or telescopes.They certainly didn't have any laboratories with gleaming glassware and stainless steel sinks.But they were curious about the world in which they lived,they paid attention,and they discovered some wonderful things. The earliest and longest lasting of their discoveries are included in the traditional Indian medicine form called Ayurveda.Ayurveda has been around in one form or another for 5,000 years.It includes all kinds of treatments,such as herbal medicine,surgery,yoga,meditation,and massage,and teaches that disease often starts first in the mind.A lot of people still use Ayurveda.For example,many Indian mothers massage their babies with oils and apply heavy black eyeliner around their children's eyes.They believe that the massages help soothe their children and prevent stomabh pains,and that the eyeliner protects their children's eyes from infections and the bright Indian sun.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
お礼
御丁寧にありがとうございます！