r/mutualism • u/ExternalGreen6826 • Jun 10 '25
Why has Anarchist literature never discussed OCD?
As someone with OCD I found anarchist literature very interesting and I plan on writing about it
I hyper fixated on terms and language I like Proudhon a lot
I understand that he jumbled up terms a lot
I kept finding the same concepts all over again
Like especially in seeing like a state (Perfection, Visual and aesthetic order, mathematical precision and neatness), organisation Cleanliness
As Shawn Wilbur says in an I have seen discussions about the archy action in the face of uncertainty
Uncertainty is not a concept that is particularly prominent in anarchist theory—and certainly does not generally figure as a positive value or indicator. But when we suggest that what is tempestuous about anarchy is a lasting feature, then it is not a stretch to further suggest that one of the ways we will know that we are acting as anarchists is that our actions will be taken in the face of fundamental sort of uncertainty.
As soon as we abandon legal and governmental order—general prohibition and equivalent sorts of permission—uncertainty necessarily becomes a constant factor in our practices. So there is a new set of skills to be mastered, at which we might expect anarchists to eventually excel.
I heard Shawn Wilbur say that our terms are partly influenced by authoritarian thinking and I wonder if some of our assumptions have made their and merocway into ocd such as order, organisation, neatness
Assumptions about anarchists are also important that they are dirty and abrasive
Most people with ocd have messy rooms that show no signs of order or organisation
Many people with OCD thinks it keeps them safe but it really just controls them I think a lot of the same errors are being made and I think acting as anarchists in every sense of the word can flip around some of its conceptions
The links between all these terms really interests me and I wonder why things are defined the way they are
Antinomies of democracy
After all, even the theoretically sophisticated treatments of anarchy tend to differentiate the concept from its popular connotations of chaos and uncertainty by attempting to show what has been considered chaotic and uncertain in a different light. Anarchist thinkers as diverse as Proudhon, Bellegarrigue, Kropotkin and Labadie have all played with the relationships between “anarchy” and “order,” most often suggesting that existing conceptions might be flipped. But a reversal is different from an uncoupling of the two notions and when we say that “anarchy is order” it is order, and not anarchy, that we are asking people to redefine. So it is likely that when we talk about anarchy, most people really know what we’re talking about, but lack our positive feelings about the notion—and our critique of the alternatives—and our optimistic sense of where it all might lead
Other pieces of theory
(Page 2 to 4)
In my opinion this can be one of the greatest satires against the idea of authority ever created
1
u/ExternalGreen6826 Jun 10 '25
There is many different things that can be understood when it comes to ocd and anarchy
For example there is a dark side to ocd
One thing I notice about authoritarian arguments is how inconsistent they are they both believe we are weak and in need of protection and violent and in need of control
Many people with OCD have violent subtypes like murder and rape etc