File spoon-archives/anarchy-list.archive/anarchy-list_2004/anarchy-list.0401, message 224


Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:57:22 -0600
From: Chuck0 <chuck-AT-mutualaid.org>
Subject: Instead of a Meeting


Instead of a Meeting
by someone too irritated to sit through another one
Lawrence Jarach

There is a great deal of confusion among anarchists in terms of what 
anarchism is and, more importantly, what anarchism is not. It is all too 
common for anarchists to mistake tactics for principles. Even worse, 
some mistake opponents for allies. Many anarchists need to be reminded 
that we are against the State and government, and that this fundamental 
stance is the main characteristic that differentiates us from others who 
promote social change. It is my hope to begin a process of analysis and 
discussion about this unfortunate condition by providing a sort of 
primer on anarchism. My use of the term "we" refers to anarchists.

What Anarchism Is

Anarchism as philosophy

Anarchism derives from the philosophical premise that institutionalized 
power and enforcement, especially in the form of the State, is a 
negative method of trying to create and maintain social cohesion. The 
defining aspect of anarchism is a categorical rejection of the principle 
and practice of government. Further, anarchism entails a radical 
critique of the exercise of authority and power. Holding to the 
conviction that cooperation is a better and more just way of attaining 
social harmony than competition, anarchists have promoted voluntary 
cooperation, egalitarian relations, and mutual aid.

Anarchism as politics

In the political realm, anarchism begins from the premise that in order 
to be truly free, people need to dispense with government and its 
institutionalization in the State. The politics of representation, being 
hierarchical, is also considered authoritarian. Instead, anarchists 
promote direct action, which means any action undertaken in one's own 
interest without asking for permission from the State and its agents. 
The ultimate vision is a classless and stateless society, free from all 
forms of exploitation.

Anarchism as resistance

Anarchists promote self-organized alternatives to hierarchical 
institutions. This doesn't mean opening a collective business or 
starting a collective living space. It means the creation of individual 
and collective projects that challenge the legitimacy of government and 
other institutions of social control, not just projects where people 
have the opportunity to become accustomed to making and carrying out all 
the work and play decisions in their lives.

Anarchism as methodology

Critical thinking leads to theory, where life is examined with a mixture 
of objective and subjective analysis. Ideology, on the other hand, leads 
to pat answers that have been previously formulated according to 
particular agendas (while anarchism can easily become ossified into an 
ideology, the constant use of critical theory can work against that). 
Anarchist critical thinking provides a challenge to conformity and 
mediocrity in social and political relations. This challenge enhances 
the place of the individual in relation to the collective.

Anarchist Principles

Every political philosophy contains a set of principles. These are 
perspectives and practices that are not negotiable; they are the 
foundational definitions that make the philosophy distinct from others. 
Anarchist principles are derived from the premises and theories of 
anarchism, as well as the methodology of critical thinking, and they 
reinforce each other. The principles that come out of anarchist theory 
are the following:

Direct Action

This term has become twisted and misused by various political activists 
in the past 30 years. In its original anarchist meaning, the term refers 
to any action undertaken without the permission, and outside the 
interest of, governmental institutions. It can refer to volunteering 
with Food Not Bombs, going on strike (especially without the approval of 
a union), shoplifting, or setting up a micro-powered radio station. It 
doesn't mean engaging in civil disobedience in cooperation with the 
police; it doesn't mean breaking the law or breaking a window if the 
intention is merely to register public disapproval of some governmental 
policy. Breaking things can be examples of direct action-but the 
intention behind these acts are what is important, not the acts 
themselves. Direct action has nothing to do with pressuring any part of 
a government to alter a policy; it is by definition anti-statist. 
Attempting to alter a government policy is called lobbying; it is aimed 
at representatives, and so cannot be direct action. Presenting a list of 
demands or protesting a particular policy, in the hopes of getting 
noticed by the state (whose rulers will then somehow change something 
about the way it operates), is never direct action, even if the means 
used to pressure legislators are illegal. Direct action is when we do 
things for ourselves, without begging, asking, or demanding that someone 
in authority help us.

Voluntary Cooperation

Anarchists believe that cooperation is more beneficial than competition. 
Further, we believe that cooperation, in order to be authentic, must be 
voluntary. Guidelines and cultural norms are agreed upon and adhered to 
by the individuals who are interested in creating and maintaining them, 
and there are no coercive institutions to enforce them. Voluntary 
cooperation includes voluntary association. Each individual retains the 
choice to join or not to join any particular association of people; and 
the people in any association reserve for themselves the ability to ask 
another individual to join them, or to refuse her/him admittance.

Mutual Aid

There are perhaps as many misunderstandings concerning mutual aid as 
there are about direct action. Mutual aid doesn't mean automatic 
solidarity with whoever asks for it, nor does it mean that anarchists 
have an obligation to enter into relationships with other oppositional 
forces. It doesn't mean a tit-for-tat arrangement; rather it means to be 
able to give freely and take freely: from each according to her/his 
ability, to each according to her/his need. Mutual aid is only possible 
between and among equals (which means among friends and trusted 
long-term allies). Solidarity, on the other hand (since it is offered to 
and asked for by ad hoc allies), needs to include the reality of 
reciprocation; otherwise it is nothing but charity.

Critical Thinking as Anarchist Methodology

It is important to look at how critical thinking operates in terms of 
developing a course of action in the real world. The crucial components 
to critical thought are the following:

Critique

We notice that there is injustice and suffering in the world, and so we 
ask the question, "What's wrong?" We look at the mechanisms, 
institutions, and social dynamics that create and perpetuate injustice, 
and analyze them thoroughly, down to their root causes-hence the term 
radical. For example, there is violence in the world. We need to examine 
what we mean when we use the term and what other people mean when they 
use it; an anarchist definition will probably be different than that of 
a statist. We need to figure out why that is. Next we need to try to 
discover the main causes of violence, and who benefits from its 
continued existence.

Analysis

We try to understand how a particular injustice is created and 
perpetuated, and why it's wrong. We study, discuss, and interpret the 
relevant facts and history of the problem, and begin to formulate a 
reasonable solution based on those facts. Using the example of violence, 
we develop our analysis by tracing its widespread practice by the 
various institutions that exist in the US, and what they have in common 
with other formal and informal institutions around the world. We will 
probably discover that, as the world has become more dominated by 
industrial capitalism, it has become increasingly more violent. A 
possible solution to the continued existence of violence, therefore, 
might begin with the idea of abolishing industrial capitalism.

Strategy

We devise a set of goals for how we want to change the situation into 
one that fits our principles and analyses. This is where our overall 
vision is based. We try to figure out how to implement our ideas 
practically. A major goal of an anarchist strategy is to undermine 
people's belief in the legitimacy of the State, to make it possible for 
all people to gain confidence in retaking control of all aspects of our 
lives. Is one of the goals of anarchism to create a world where violence 
is minimized, or to create a world completely without violence? This 
will depend on how we define violence with our critique and analysis.

Tactics

We come up with actions that are compatible with our strategy. The main 
question to ask is "What methods/tools can be used to achieve the goal?" 
The answer is whatever helps to make the goal(s) a reality; whatever is 
expedient at the moment depending on who's involved and what exactly we 
are trying to accomplish. Of course our tactics must be in keeping with 
our principles. But it is important to remember that tactics are not the 
same thing as principles. Non-violence is not an anarchist principle; it 
is a tactic. Depending on the situation, we decide when it's 
convenient-or not-to adhere to non-violent guidelines. At times we may 
decide that it makes more sense to fight back with force. Morality plays 
no part in deciding upon which tactics to use in a given situation-it 
only matters what is compatible with our strategy and principles.

What Anarchism Is Not

Anarchism is not extreme Liberalism

Liberalism is based on the theory of the Social Contract, where citizens 
give up full liberty in exchange for political and economic security. 
This security is supposed to be provided by the State, which regulates, 
mediates, and enforces the Social Contract. More generically, Liberalism 
can be equated with Republicanism, which stands for the rule of law. The 
liberal wing pays lip service to rule of the people, while the 
conservative wing is more honest in wanting rule of some people. The 
principles of Liberalism include majority rule, various civil liberties 
like free speech, tolerance, and equality before the law, as well as 
free enterprise and private property. These principles are legislated 
and guaranteed by the State, which is seen as the same thing as the 
People. Liberals who are unsatisfied with certain policies and wish to 
remedy them use tactics that are compatible with liberalism: petition 
and demonstration. Liberals believe that whatever injustices exist 
within the Social Contract can be fixed by electing better or wiser 
legislative representatives who will enact better laws to be enforced by 
better cops.

Anarchism is not extreme Social Democracy

The realm of Social Democracy is not really that much different than 
that of Liberalism; the main aspect that has differentiated the two used 
to be a commitment to socialism (meaning "social" ownership of property, 
but really meaning state ownership) instead of capitalism (private 
ownership). Since the mid-'60s, however, almost all social democrats 
have abandoned this commitment in favor of what they call a mixed 
economy. Social Democrats also consider that they are carrying out the 
will of the people through the State, only the Social Democratic State 
has even more regulatory power than the classical Liberal State. Social 
Democrats are committed to the tactics of peaceful and legal changes 
within a parliamentary State; like Liberals, they see the solutions to 
injustice coming from the election of better and wiser representatives.

Anarchism is not extreme Leninism

In the economic sphere, Leninism is the most extreme form of Social 
Democracy, while in the political sphere, it more closely resembles 
conservative Republicanism. Leninists don't waste time with any sort of 
private ownership; the State owns and controls all production (and most 
other realms of social activity). The principle of Democratic Centralism 
limits the number of people who have decision-making power to a small 
group. The various derivatives of Leninism (from the infinite varieties 
of Trotskyism through Stalinism and Maoism) all have as a goal a strong 
centralized and bureaucratic State. The goals of Leninism are the 
expropriation of private property, the seizing of State power, and the 
eventual global triumph of their ideology. Tactically, Leninists don't 
care if their methods are compassionate or nasty. Leninists want to win, 
and that's all that counts; anyone who stands in their way is an enemy 
and deserves no mercy. All Leninist parties and governments have a 
record of brutality and repression against perceived enemies-especially 
anarchists.

Anarchism is not any form of Statism

What all these different forms of Republicanism have in common is a 
belief that the State can and must control its citizens. The Leftist 
trajectory from Liberalism, through Social Democracy, and up to Leninism 
is a continuum of increasingly intrusive government. The principles of 
these forms of Statism vary only slightly, and all of them have much 
more in common with each other than anarchism has with any one of them. 
Leftists rely upon legislation and representation; anarchists, adhering 
to the principle of direct action, are the objective opponents of 
Liberalism, Social Democracy, and Leninism-and the Leftists know it. If 
anarchists forget (or worse, don't even know) what their principles are, 
it's all too easy for them to get sucked into manipulative alliances in 
which these principles play absolutely no part. Without knowing and 
using anarchist principles, we can't recognize authentically anarchist 
tactics or methods, so that when non-anarchists adopt anarchistic 
methods (like affinity groups and spokescouncils), many anarchists 
become confused. They think that the liberals or socialists have 
transformed themselves into quasi-anarchists because of the use of 
familiar tools. But Leftists use these tactics because they function 
well, not because the Leftists have suddenly become promoters of 
anti-statism. Anarchists, being history's most consistent losers, need 
to approach non-anarchist oppositionists with suspicion, not solidarity; 
we need to look beyond form, refusing to be hoodwinked by 
familiar-looking tactics. Anarchists need to know, remember, and 
maintain anarchist principles. From that position of strength, we can 
then decide when-or whether-to enter into short-term alliances with 
those who'd rather see us disappear.


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005