プロが教える店舗&オフィスのセキュリティ対策術

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?

A 回答 (1件)

> 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.



 アナーキズムの流派は、それとは対照的に、必ずといっていいほどにある種の組織原理とか実践の形態とかいうものとして出現した -- たとえばアナーキズム的サンディカリズムとかアナーキズム的コミュニズムとか。

> Anarchrists are distinguished by what they do, and how they organize themselves to go about doing it.

 アナーキストは、彼らの行動様式によって、そしてそれを実行するのにどのように自らを組織化するかということによって、区別される。

> And indeed this has always been what anarchists have spent most of their time thinking and arguing about.

 そしてこれは確かにアナーキストたちが常に考えたり論議したりしてきたことである。

> 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?

 彼らはマルクシストが没頭した "農民は有効な革命的階級であるか" (アナーキストはこれを農民が決めることだと考える) とか "商品というものの本質は何か" などという広い意味での戦略的あるいは哲学的な種類の事柄には、まるで関心を抱いて来なかった。

> 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.

 むしろ、会合を開く民主的方法であるとか、どの時点で人民を制圧して個人的自由を抑圧するのか、といったことを論じる傾向がある。

> 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?

 "統率すること" は果たして良くないことか? あるいは、敵対勢力の倫理についてとか、直接行動とは何かとか、国家の頂点に立つ者を暗殺した者を責めるべきかとか、いつ決起すればいいのか、などといったことを交互に。
    • good
    • 0
この回答へのお礼

bakanskyさん、何度も本当にありがとうございます(><)

お礼日時:2012/01/11 23:15

お探しのQ&Aが見つからない時は、教えて!gooで質問しましょう!