A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours || of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013 | of 2014

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF | How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) Anarkismo.net: A bit of self-criticism by Esteban Vieira - Libertarian League (pt) [machine translation]

Date Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:36:03 +0300


It is always necessary to remember them with honesty the Anarchism derives from the historical tradition (or as they call the older, revolutionary tradition), and as a set of ideas, proposals, criticisms and solutions that run counter to the Marxists advocate scientific method - setting mere "fable", as they claim in bad faith his political opponents - prioritizes above all the practical guidance of ideas, aiming solely to social revolution, especially by achieving your goal finalist reorganization of society. This paper proposes a reflection on our responsibility as propagators and supporters of the movement. ---- It is always necessary to remember them with honesty the Anarchism derives from the historical tradition (or as they call the older, revolutionary tradition), and as a set of ideas, proposals, criticisms and solutions that run counter to the Marxists advocate scientific method - setting mere "fable", as they claim in bad faith his political opponents - prioritizes above all the practical guidance of ideas, aiming solely to social revolution, especially by achieving your goal finalist reorganization of society ¹.

Anarchism historically took shape and own identity through internecine debate promoted by the working class and peasant still in the mid-nineteenth century, and sought an outlet in the political field to their dilemmas, conflicts and struggles. During this period (Industrial Revolution, 2nd phase of the French Revolution, the Paris Commune, etc..), Workers and their movements, leagues and unions still incipient ripening their fighting positions. Socialism idea presented itself as representative of the desires of employees, and such a discussion within the AIT revealed a clear dissatisfaction with the other socialist currents - the reformist, statist and legalistic. Ie anarchism consolidates, defines and builds within the socialist trunk, but featuring his libertarian sector, which lays the foundations of theoretical orientation and practical application through the anti-authoritarianism, anti-capitalism, anti-statism and popular protagonism.

We can see there, investigating its historical references, that Anarchism is not nearly as presents individualist ideology, or, as is common to hear nowadays, as a negation of the class struggle. Such deformations are absurd: Anarchism, from the cradle, is social.

It is certain, however, that anarchism presents trends - and disagreements - diverse and profound generated from its debates, which is common to any ideology / political theory. Even more certain is that anarchism is not dogmatic, is not a free school policy interpretations. As a political movement, it adapts to your time, looking fit and insert their aspirations to contingent reality, giving them practical flow. Incidentally, this has always been the subject of extensive discussion among anarchists: Get Organized? And how? - We will not discuss here the principle or methods of organization - because they rest on the internal conflicts that cause the creation of trends and dissent known by everyone.

However, it is important to draw attention to the erroneous approach that makes Anarchism, whether by design flaws (of their own supporters), or evil intentions (his political opponents). For lack of space and not to dwell so much, do not analyze here the second case of misrepresentation anticonceitual coming "pseudomarxistas" (exclude the minority and there não-bolchevique/socialdemocrata sector, which cares for the social ownership, worker and peasant organization by bases away from political parties), but the first, in my view more urgent. The grossest distortions derived from ahistorical perspective: one that does not take into account political and ideological concepts historically constructed, reducing anarchism to an empty caricature, only taking into account the etymology of the term "anarchy / anarchism" and through this analysis simplistic, only reinforcing the idea of denial, as if there is concern of anarchists to build something in place of what is intended to destroy. Ignores their principles and theoretical load (class struggle, economic equality, popular power, socialism, anti-capitalism, etc..), And the revolutionary practices in countries or regions where it was predominant (Ukraine, Russia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Manchuria, Spain, to name a few).

This approach - especially taken by his Bolsheviks, Liberals, pós-estruturalistas/pós-modernos political opponents - gave rise to the creation of various ideological assumptions, schools and movements that call themselves "libertarians", born there a constellation of anarchism, each obedient to an adaptation / strain / own review, but marked by a characteristic common to all, that is the clear ideological emptiness, then becoming anarchism an abstract concept, an individualist philosophy with mystical, idealistic aspirations, imprisoned in subjectivity, ethical relativism and individuality of the subject; uncompromising political projects with large and serious revolutionary organizations.

Anarchism is then no longer functioning as an instrument of struggle of the working class and oppressed for his defense and emancipation, but as a mere hobby, exquisite object of scholarly debate, the affirmation of personal and intelligentsia mostly inserted in the set of phenomena counter cultural; in punk music, rock aggressive, clubby and critic. This interpretation of harmful way, stripping Anarchism his revolutionary sense.

But why the phenomenon? In troubled times between the great wars of the twentieth century and in the midst of dictatorial action, anarchism lost its social vector (the union). Came the need to find a new identity for the movement and its militancy, and, inevitably, not new social vector, unsuited for this troubled period, there was found the workers themselves fed practices and misunderstandings about Anarchism. For many former militants and sectors engaged in the struggle, the loss of future prospects announced large losses, which led gradually to nihilism and the puzzling inaction. What is left of all the theoretical arsenal created by Malatesta, Bakunin, Makhno, Kropotkin, etc.., And it offers a serious militancy, is merely the negation of the state, while many subjects begin to flirt with trends post modern. Then it creates and prioritizes it a "lifestyle anarchism", unaccustomed to militancy and without commitment to social revolution, which has always been led by him since its origin. Added to this the gap of the lack of organizational structure, going to be valued much more affective and personal relationships instead of collective action and the cultivation of political responsibilities.

Jo Freeman, a feminist activist, tells us: "To all people have the opportunity to engage in a given group and participate in its activities, it is necessary that its structure is explicit, rather than implicit. The rules of deliberation must be open and available to everyone, and this can only happen if they are formalized. This does not mean that the normalization of a group structure will destroy the informal structure. She usually does not destroy, but it prevents the informal structure from having predominant control and makes available some means of attacking it. The lack of structure is organizationally impossible. "²

Urge then we, social activists, trade unionists and other revolutionary comrades committed to the revolutionary cause with the oppressed sectors, resgatemos serious activism, we work by libertarian ethics and revolutionary discipline, demystifying stereotypes, harmful addictions, caricatures to anarchism by our political opponents and enemies from their theoretical frameworks.

It is not today that within the anarchist movement such deformations have been criticized by many militants From the classics, Bakunin is opposite the bourgeois conception of freedom, noting its own concept of essentially collective character; Malatesta also rivals the antiorganizacionistas and individualistic that were contrary to the principle of organization in his time (seconds, considered a marginal phenomenon, a 'petty-bourgeois exoticism "within anarchism, completely harmless to capitalism and the state were restricted to artists, bohemians, writers and other figures who decided to depart from the purposes of the working class). Nestor Makhno and the Delo Truda in controversy in its Organisational Platform and the Notion of Synthesis, make clear the incompatibility of such deformations with the militant and revolutionary anarchism; Luigi Fabbri, weaving severe as what he himself called "bourgeois influences in anarchism" criticism; Camilo Berneri in "cretinism Anarchist" and until recently Murray Bookchin on "Criticism and self-criticism", "Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism". Why not highlight the struggle and effort of libertarian and revolutionary political groups through the redemption of serious and committed militancy among the people? All this just to cite the most notable examples.

Finally, did not propose here an article prepared and academic, can even be mistaken on some propositions. In any way intend to create a separation, or qualify an anarchism "X" or "Y" as superior to other proposals and schools, but I do want to somehow propose to the comrades who are concerned with the direction that the cause is taking, reflection and self-criticism about the same, reaffirming the quest for redemption ethics, commitment and discipline libertarian (concepts so forgotten nowadays), based on experience and the accumulation of years of militancy left to us by previous generations. And of course, most importantly, that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past.

----

Notes and references:

¹ MALATESTA, Errico - Revolutionary Writings, 2008.
² FREEMAN, Joe - The Tyranny of Organizations Without Structure, 1970.
MINTZ, Frank - Social Anarchism, 2006.
Bookchin, Murray - Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism, 2001.
FARJ / DA SILVA, Rafael - Against Anarchism Anarchism, 2011.

Related Link:http://www.ligalibertaria.org/2013/12/um-pouco-de-autocritica.html
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://lists.ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en


A-Infos Information Center