user preferences

Upcoming Events

International

No upcoming events.
Διεθνή / Λαϊκοί Αγώνες / Γνώμη / Ανάλυση Saturday June 24, 2017 17:23 byΜαρία Μπουσδέκη

Οι κρατικές πολιτικές καθυπόταξης και άντλησης κέρδους πέφτουν σε τοίχο συναντώντας τις κοινωνικές αντιστάσεις που ορθώνονται εναντίον τους. Τα κινήματα των κατοίκων τέτοιων γειτονιών έχουν αντισταθεί μαζικά και δυναμικά στις όποιες προσπάθειες επιβολής του κεφαλαίου στους χώρους τους και στις γειτονιές τους. Απέναντι στην αποστείρωση αντέτειναν την αλληλεγγύη και την αλληλοβοήθεια. Απέναντι στην εκδούλευση τη συλλογική δράση και τη συλλογική ζωή. Απέναντι στον έλεγχο και την καταστολή την αντίσταση και τον αγώνα.

Ας μιλήσουμε για το gentrification

Με αφορμή την πυρκαγιά στο Grenfell Tower…

«Η αξία των χτιρίων που είναι χτισμένα τα οικόπεδα αντί να ανεβαίνει, αντίθετα πέφτει προς τα κάτω, και αυτό γιατί τα κτίρια δεν ανταποκρίνονται στις αλλαγμένες συνθήκες. Αυτό γίνεται προπάντων με τις εργατικές κατοικίες που βρίσκονται στο κέντρο, που τα νοίκια τους ακόμη και με το μεγαλύτερο συνωστισμό νοικιαστών δεν μπορούν να ξεπεράσουν ένα ορισμένο ανώτερο όριο. Τα γκρεμίζουν και στη θέση τους χτίζουν μαγαζιά, αποθήκες εμπορευμάτων και δημόσια καταστήματα».
Φ. Ένγκελς

Στις 14 Ιούνη ξέσπασε πυρκαγιά στο Grenfell Tower, σε μια πλούσια γειτονιά της Μεγάλης Βρετανίας. Η έκρηξη αερίου, το χαλασμένο ψυγείο ενός ενοίκου, η κακή καλωδίωση του κτηρίου είναι κάποιες από τις θεωρίες για την αιτία της τραγωδίας. Ο συναγερμός για τη φωτιά δεν χτύπησε, καθώς το κτίριο ήταν από καιρό παραμελημένο. Το μόνο σίγουρο είναι ότι «κολλάει» σε ένα σχέδιο εκκαθάρισης κάθε κατάλοιπου μιας προηγούμενης κατάστασης της περιοχής και τη διατήρηση της νέας πλούσιας και καθαρής εικόνας της.

Το Grenfell Tower αποτελεί ένα απομεινάρι οικιστικών σχεδίων φτηνής στέγασης μιας προηγούμενης πολεοδομικής φάσης της περιοχής, το οποίο είχε καταλήξει να φιλοξενεί φτωχούς ανθρώπους στην πλουσιότερη και ακριβότερη περιοχή στη Μεγάλη Βρετανία. Με το πέρασμα του χρόνου, οι κάτοικοι που ζούσαν στοιβαγμένοι ανέφεραν πως κάθε προσπάθεια που έκαναν να λύσουν τα προβλήματα του κτηρίου μαζί με τη διοίκηση έπεφτε στο κενό. Ποτέ δεν υπήρχαν οι πόροι ή ο χρόνος για να αντιμετωπιστούν οι βλάβες στα ασανσέρ, τους καυστήρες ή τα φώτα έκτακτης ανάγκης. Η διοίκηση τους έδειχνε ξεκάθαρα πως έπρεπε να αισθάνονται τυχεροί και μόνο που έχουν σπίτι, πόσο μάλλον που αυτό βρίσκεται σε μια προνομιούχα περιοχή. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, υπήρχε η γενικευμένη αίσθηση πως οι άθλιες συνθήκες θα δώσουν στο διαχειριστή τη δυνατότητα να κατεδαφίσει το Grenfell. Ο διαγωνισμός για την ανακαίνιση του κτηρίου ήταν μία ακόμη ένδειξη.

Οι σύγχρονες μητροπόλεις είναι προϊόντα του τρόπου λειτουργίας και κίνησης του παγκόσμιου κεφαλαίου και των συνθηκών που αυτό διαμορφώνει σε μια κοινωνία. Το παγκόσμιο κεφάλαιο εξελίσσεται, όπως και η διαχείριση των κοινωνιών στο εσωτερικό των πόλεων. Έτσι και οι πόλεις επανασχεδιάζονται ως καθαρότεροι, εδαφικά προσδιορισμένοι, οικονομικοί παράγοντες της αγοράς, παρά ως εξωτερικά συμπληρώματά της. Η νεοφιλελεύθερη πολεοδομία, η νέα πολεοδομία, είναι συστατικό κομμάτι αυτού του ευρύτερου επαναπροσδιορισμού της κλίμακας των λειτουργιών, των δραστηριοτήτων και των κοινωνικών σχέσεων.

Η βασικότερη «στρατηγική των πόλεων» που έχει αναδειχθεί τις τελευταίες δεκαετίες ως έκφραση της νεοφιλελεύθερης πολεοδομίας αποτελεί το φαινόμενο του gentrification. Η διαδικασία του gentrification είναι μια διαδικασία παραγωγής κοινωνικών και χωρικών συνθηκών και προσδίδει στο χώρο μια αναδιαρθρωμένη ταυτότητα και νέα χαρακτηριστικά προς όφελος του κτηματομεσιτικού και κατασκευαστικού κεφαλαίου, καθώς και των ανώτερων κοινωνικών τάξεων. Το φαινόμενο φαίνεται να βασίζεται στη ροή επένδυσης και αποεπένδυσης στον αστικό χώρο αλλά και στις νέες κτηματομεσιτικές στρατηγικές για την αποκόμιση κέρδους από εκεί, οι οποίες προετοιμάζουν τον δρόμο για επεμβάσεις κεντρικότερες και ευρύτερες.

Βασικό χαρακτηριστικό της διαδικασίας αποτελεί ο εκτοπισμός πληθυσμών. Η Μεγάλη Βρετανία, άλλωστε, έχει αποτελέσει ιστορικό παράδειγμα στην ιστορία του gentrification, με την καθοριστική συμβολή της Μάργκαρετ Θάτσερ, η οποία και προετοίμασε πολιτικά το έδαφος με έναν άνευ προηγουμένου κατακερματισμό της δημόσιας κατοικίας και των υπηρεσιών. Σε διάφορες περιοχές του Λονδίνου, όπως στο Γουέστμίνστερ, το gentrification έγινε επίσημη κρατική πολιτική με απώτερο σκοπό την εκδίωξη κατοίκων προσκείμενων στο εργατικό συνδικάτο και την εισροή νεοσυντηριτικών γιάπηδων. Στο Στάμφορτντ Χίλ, τον Μάρτιο του 1988, εκδιώχθηκαν εκατοντάδες καταληψίες με πρόσχημα την ανάπτυξη της περιοχής.

Σε όλες τις περιπτώσεις, πριν από την εξόντωση και τον εκτοπισμό προηγείται μια περίοδος πλήρους κρατικής παραμέλησης και στοχοποίησής τους. Κάτι που φάνηκε να έγινε, ξεκάθαρα, και στην περίπτωση των κατοίκων του Grenfell Tower. Υποβαθμισμένες περιοχές, που έχουν επέλθει σε αυτήν την κατάσταση από κρατική, λοιπόν, παραμέληση μπαίνουν σε διαδικασίες gentrification, κατά τις οποίες τεράστιος αριθμός ανθρώπων, προηγούμενων κατοίκων των περιοχών αυτών, εκτοπίζονται άμεσα ή έμμεσα, περισσότερο ή λιγότερο βίαια. Δεν είναι λίγα τα παραδείγματα αστυνομικών επιχειρήσεων εναντίον αστέγων, τοξικοεξαρτημένων, μεταναστών σε τέτοιες περιοχές και μαζικών εξώσεων σε χρόνιους κατοίκους που δεν μπορούν, πλέον, να πληρώσουν το ενοίκιό τους. Οι αναίτιες πυρκαγιές είναι και αυτές ένα μέσο που έχουμε ξανασυναντήσει σε τέτοιες διαδικασίες. Αυτό, βέβαια, είναι αναμενόμενο εφόσον στον παγκόσμιο ανταγωνισμό για την ανάδειξη παγκόσμιων οικονομικών και πολιτικών κέντρων πρέπει η «εικόνα» της πόλης να είναι «καθαρή» και απαλλαγμένη από οτιδήποτε την υποβαθμίζει και δεν διευκολύνει τη ροή του κεφαλαίου. Οι «παραβατικοί» πληθυσμοί εξαφανίζονται. Εκτοπίζονται, άμεσα ή έμμεσα, και μεταφέρονται σε άλλες γειτονιές, σε άλλα γκέτο που αύριο μπορεί και πάλι να περισσεύουν ανάλογα με τα σχέδια του παγκόσμιου κεφαλαίου…

Είναι ένας ακόμη ταξικός φραγμός, που αυτή τη φορά αφορά την πρόσβαση στην ίδια την πόλη, την πρόσβαση στην κατοικία, την ίδια την επιβίωση των πληβείων, των εργατών, των μεταναστών, των μειονοτήτων και των αποκλεισμένων. Το gentrification δεν είναι κάτι ξένο ή κάτι που δε βλέπουμε και στην ελλαδική περίπτωση με άλλους τρόπους, απλά η ένταση του φαινομένου αλλάζει σε σχέση με τους παγκόσμιους οικονομικούς συσχετισμούς. Οι επιχειρήσεις σκούπα κατά μεταναστών και τοξικοεξαρτημένων το 2012 στην περιοχή του κέντρου της Αθήνας και άλλων πόλεων, η μετάλλαξη της περιοχής του Γκαζιού, η σταδιακή αλλαγή του Μεταξουργείου που συμβαίνει τα τελευταία χρόνια είναι κάποια στίγματα μιας στρατηγικής διάθεσης πλήρους εξόντωσης όποιου περισσεύει. Η πρόταση για δημιουργία γραμμή μετρό στην περιοχή των Εξαρχείων, σε συνδυασμό με την ένταση της δράσης των ναρκομαφιών εκεί και την ραγδαία αύξηση της βιομηχανίας τη διασκέδασης έχουν ως πρόσχημα την ανάπτυξη και εκκαθάριση της περιοχής, αλλά σαν πραγματικό στόχο έχουν την καθυπόταξη όποιου αντιστέκεται σε μια περιοχή ιστορικά συνδεδεμένη με τους κοινωνικούς, ταξικούς και πολιτικούς αγώνες.

Εν κατακλείδι, οι κρατικές πολιτικές καθυπόταξης και άντλησης κέρδους πέφτουν σε τοίχο συναντώντας τις κοινωνικές αντιστάσεις που ορθώνονται εναντίον τους. Τα κινήματα των κατοίκων τέτοιων γειτονιών έχουν αντισταθεί μαζικά και δυναμικά στις όποιες προσπάθειες επιβολής του κεφαλαίου στους χώρους τους και στις γειτονιές τους. Απέναντι στην αποστείρωση αντέτειναν την αλληλεγγύη και την αλληλοβοήθεια. Απέναντι στην εκδούλευση τη συλλογική δράση και τη συλλογική ζωή. Απέναντι στον έλεγχο και την καταστολή την αντίσταση και τον αγώνα.

*Αναδημοσίευση από ipposd.wordpress.com

international / anarchist movement / feature Thursday June 22, 2017 22:55 byAnarkismo Network
featured image

When we have to deal with disagreements, conflicts and faults, these problems must be solved with a justice that is based on our libertarian ethical values. What does this concretely mean? That we have to hear all the parties involved and make sure to provide physical and psychological protection too all, especially if someone has – at least presumably – been hurt. In cases of sexual violence – for instance – we should not reproduce the bias of bourgeois patriarchal so-called “justice” that too frequently isolates (female) survivors and dismisses their feelings and words. It means that we have to establish means to examine the different positions and eliminate any doubts. That we have to have democratic and collective processes to deal with that and to take decisions and make recommendations. And, mainly, that we must first try to reeducate people instead of punishing or isolating them. Not that in some cases punishment or isolation couldn’t be the only solution, but, at least, we have to make (re)education a priority over punishment and isolation, which should be last resorts.
To deal with these problems within our movement instances of ethical justice that aim to resolve major disagreements, conflicts and faults are necessary. These instance, such as an “ethics commission” for example, could be convened and articulated whenever one or more militants within our movement or organizations identify a problem of this kind and ask formally for the establishment of a commission. The establishment of a commission (or the denial) would be the result of a collective decision made by the deliberative and decision-making bodies of the respective organizations. If a commission is established, then a certain number of militants not involved with the case could be mandated to constitute the commission and be given a deadline to listen to the different parties involved, to develop positions, eliminate doubts and then to produce a written document with a position and recommendations to the respective organization.
To “solve the problem” means, here, to find ways to reach agreements, to find solutions to conflicts, to deal with faults and to eliminate doubts. Although giving preference to (re)education, the commission could decide for issuing a warning, suspension, sanction or even expulsion or "excommunication".


internacional / imperialismo / guerra / enlace a video Friday June 16, 2017 16:53 byRevolución Internacional / World Revolution

¡VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN INTERNACIONAL DE LOS PUEBLOS!, ¡SOLIDARIDAD MUNDIAL CON LA REVOLUCIÓN EN ROJAVA Y EL KURDISTÁN!

Revolución Internacional / World Revolution - Ruptura Colectiva (RC)

El Congreso Nacional de Kurdistán -KNK- y el Movimiento de Mujeres Libres de Kurdistán visitaron distintos territorios de México, llevando la palabra del gran ascetismo revolucionario del pueblo kurdo que abarca varios territorios autónomos y liberados del DAESH en las fronteras de Siria, Irak, Turquía e Irán. Tras pasar por la vía de la lucha armada desde la década de los 70's, el Partido de los Trabajadores del Kurdistán (PKK) y las comunidades que se adhirieron a su propuesta revolucionaria, fueron tomando un nuevo rumbo hacia la idea del autogobierno comunitario e incluyente, la participación libre de las mujeres, el ecologismo social con base en las ideas de Murray Bookchin y la autodefensa armada a través de las Milicias de Protección Popular conformadas por mujeres -YPG- y de manera mixta -YPG- en alianza con las Fuerzas Democráticas Sirias (SDF) que se enfrentan constantemente a las fuerzas imperialistas de varios países.

En esta compartición titulada "La Revolución en Kurdistán y las mujeres de armas tomar", Sivan Zerdesti y Melike Yasar, realizaron una dinámica de aprendizaje colectivo sobre la lucha de sus pueblos en Medio Oriente, así como buscar puentes de similitud con las resistencias en México y América Latina.

¡VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN INTERNACIONAL DE LOS PUEBLOS!, ¡SOLIDARIDAD MUNDIAL CON LA REVOLUCIÓN EN ROJAVA Y EL KURDISTÁN!

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5inanUtFAg0&t=429s

Publicado el 16 de Junio de 2017 en:

http://rupturacolectiva.com/video-la-revolucion-en-kurd...omar/

international / history of anarchism / opinion / analysis Sunday June 11, 2017 09:58 byWayne Price

There are recent histories of the First International researched from anarchist perspectives, which balance the dominant Marxist narrative. Both sides had their strengths and weaknesses, but overall the anarchists had the better program.

Both anarchism and Marxism developed in the 19th century out of movements for democracy, workers’ rights, and socialism. With this common background, they had a great deal of overlap—plus deep divisions. They split in a bitter faction fight in the First International—officially called the International Workingmen’s Association. The International was founded in 1864 and their fight took place in the early 1870s, in the same period as the rebellion of the Paris Commune (1871). The anarchist movement, strongly influenced by Mikhail Bakunin, developed through the First International. On the other hand, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had been working out their views since the 1840s, but Marxism expanded theoretically and practically in the First International.

By and large, most available accounts of the conflict in the International are written from the point of view of the Marxists. However, in recent years there have been a number of histories of the conflict in the International from the viewpoint of the anarchists. (See Berthier 2015; Eckhardt 2016; Graham 2015—all excellent.)

Like other political fights within left-wing groups, there were personality clashes, misrepresentation of other’s views, sharp dealing, and undemocratic manipulation—on both sides. But the issues were real and important. A century and a half later, the issues still resonate. Radicals today can still learn from this clash among giants of our history. Personally, I identify with the anarchist tradition, while also being influenced by Marxism. I find this history fascinating.

Years after the final split in the International, Errico Malatesta, a colleague of Bakunin’s, stated that both the anarchists and the Marxists “sought to make use of the International for our own party aims….We, as anarchists, relied chiefly on propaganda…while the Marxists…wanted to impose their ideas by majority strength—which was more or less fictitious….But all of us, Bakuninists and Marxists alike, tried to force events rather than relying upon the force of events.” (quoted in Graham 2015; 137) (By “party” he meant movements or tendencies.)

What were the issues? In the abstract, Bakunin was to declare, once the conflict broke out, that it was “a great struggle between two principles: that of authoritarian communism and that of revolutionary socialism.” (quoted in Eckhardt 2016; 77) But actually, there was little direct discussion of theoretical disagreements between Marxism and anarchism. For example, the question of whether there should be a transitional “workers’ state” (“dictatorship of the proletariat”) after a revolution did not come up in any major debate. Nor did the question of whether socialism would come about through centralized state ownership or through popular decentralized associations. (The one really political issue will be discussed in a moment.)

The Charges

Instead, Marx and his friends accused Bakunin of organizing a secret conspiracy behind the scenes, whose aim was to take over the International—or, if it could not, to destroy it from within. In his turn, Bakunin claimed that Marx already dominated the General Council of the International and manipulated its congresses, in order to push for his agenda.

The anarchists and Marx (and other tendencies) agreed that the International should promote labor unions everywhere. Marx’s additional program was to demand that every national branch of the International form a political party to run in elections. He rammed through a resolution stating this at a completely unrepresentative gathering in London in 1871. However, Bakunin and the anarchists did not insist that the branches be forbidden to organize parties. Instead they proposed that each section be able to decide for itself whether to run in elections (which was how the International had been operating from its inception). But Marx wanted the organization to be more centralized in order to demand party-building.

Marx’s justification for this electoralist strategy has never been clear to me. After the Paris Commune rebellion of 1871 (which was before the London congress), Engels wrote a new introduction to the Communist Manifesto, quoting from Marx’s Civil War in France: “One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that ‘the working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery, and wield it for its own purposes’.” (Marx & Engels 1955; 6) This insight would seem to point to a rejection of an electoral strategy. It implies that the working class and oppressed either could not take over the capitalist state, or, if it did, the working class could not use it for its liberation. It means the existing state must be overturned and replaced with other institutions. Yet Marx and Engels continued to push for workers’ electoral parties, and even argued that they might get elected to state power in some countries, such as Britain and the U.S.

On the other hand, “Bakunin’s argument [was] that participating in politics would result in the labor movement being tied to the state and thus make carrying out their social-revolutionary demands impossible….Freedom can only be obtained by refusing to participate in the existing power structures, destroying those power structures, and creating new forms of community.” (Graham 2015; 15)

The Marxist David Fernbach writes, “Marx hoped to transform the International’s organizations in the various countries into political parties centered on London. Already in 1867…Marx had written to Engels, ‘In the next revolution…we (i.e. you and I) will have this powerful engine in our hands.’ …The remaining condition for transforming the International into a more centralized and disciplined body was a certain degree of ideological homogeneity…. [At congresses of the International] Marx and Engels…were certainly not above using foul means when political necessity demanded.” (“Introduction,” 1992; 47 & 49) (I am deliberately quoting the pro-Marx Fernbach, an authority on Marx’s life and work, rather than from pro-anarchist texts. But when referring to weaknesses of Bakunin and the anarchists, I will cite from pro-Bakunin sources.)

Marx’s “foul means” included calling congresses to which few of those on Bakunin’s side could attend, printing blank delegate papers in order to stack the congresses, passing on false information about Bakunin’s forces, using name calling and slander. For example, Marx denounced Bakunin as being a “pan-Slavist” reactionary, even though Bakunin had abandoned that viewpoint years ago. Marx blamed Bakunin for evil deeds carried out by a young psychopath and nihilist named Nechayev, whom Bakunin had befriended, “…although they knew that Bakunin was guilty of nothing worse than crass misjudgment and gullibility.” (Fernbach 1992; 49) This was used as a justification for expelling Bakunin, his comrade James Guillaume, and other anarchists from the International in 1872. This caused an organizational split in the International.

As for Bakunin, it was true that he had initiated an international political organization, one which worked inside and outside of the First International. It went under various names, sometimes the “International Brotherhood,” but mostly the “International Alliance of Socialist Democracy.” In general, it was a network of Bakunin’s fellow-thinkers and friends, spread throughout Europe. At times it had a mass membership, particularly in the Jura region of Switzerland and in Spain. Originally it had asked to join the International as a body, but this was not allowed. The Swiss section was accepted as a branch of the International.

Although claiming to be dissolved, the Alliance really continued. In itself, this does not seem to be such a terrible thing. Why couldn’t the anarchists (or anyone else) have a transnational socialist caucus inside the International? Marx argued that this secret conspiracy existed to take over (or to destroy) the International. Actually members of the Alliance were known to have worked hard to build sections of the International in Switzerland, in Spain, and in Italy.

Part of the problem here was that Bakunin was notorious for constantly creating, on paper and in his imagination, secret conspiracies run by hierarchical authorities, with himself at the top—conspiracies which were to act behind the scenes of the mass movement. “Our aim is the creation of a powerful but always invisible revolutionary association which will prepare and direct the revolution.” (Bakunin quoted in Dolgoff 1980; 10) “ We must be the invisible pilots guiding the Revolution…by the collective dictatorship of all our allies [members].” (same; 180). This was balanced by contrary statements that he did not want this association to rule over the workers or to be an overt dictatorship. Yet, as Morris, a pro-Bakunin writer, puts it, “Bakunin’s writings on secret societies often seem to contradict his own anarchist principles….” (1993; 150) Dolgoff, an admirer of Bakunin, writes, “Bakunin’s…closest associates…considered his schemes for elaborate, centralized secret societies incompatible with libertarian principles.” (1980; 182) This says something about the peculiarities of Bakunin, but not much about the movement. Almost all the other anarchists (or “federalists” or “revolutionary socialists” as they often called themselves) saw the Alliance as a loose association of comrades.

For that matter, Marx and Engels also had a loose network of friends and allies which they sought to build. They had regular correspondence with the German social democrats. They sent one of Marx’s sons-in-law into Spain to try to out-organize the anarchist sections, and to split them if necessary (this failed). Marx was also willing to ally himself with the Blanquist sect, which was highly centralized and secretly conspiratorial; they supported his drive to centralize the International.

In theory, Marx had declared that he was against the formation of sects, with their own dogmas, inside the workers’ movement. He claimed that they would dissolve in the actual course of the popular struggle. The historical process would produce the correct general direction. Therefore he opposed any factions based on specific, pre-established, political views, within the International.

But Marx believed that he knew the course which history would take. He was sure that the workers would form political parties and run in elections; that this would lead, somehow, to the workers forming their own states and then nationalizing the economy as the beginning of communism. Marx did not see this as a program which he was proposing to the workers, so much as the more-or-less inevitable course of history which the workers needed to take to move toward workers’ power and socialism. It was, I believe, this certain belief in a foreordained future which justified (to Marx) his authoritarian and “foul” methods. Similarly, it was this sense of absolute surety which was to rationalize the later Marxist-Leninists in carrying out their atrocities of dictatorship, mass murder, and super-exploitation. They were sure that it would come out right in the end, in a free and cooperative society.

Unfortunately, Bakunin had other authoritarian traits which made his cause “foul.” Especially this included his writings (many not published at the time) which denounced Marx for being a German Jew, and denounced both Germans and Jews in vicious racist terms. An anarchist biographer writes, “This anti-Semitism was a vile and disturbing theme in some of his writings in this period.” (Leier 2006; 247) In 1869, he was accused by Hess of trying to destroy the International and associating with a police spy. Bakunin responded to this slander by “writing a lengthy response [which] degenerated into an anti-Semitic rant….” (Graham 2015; 125)

Bakunin wrote of Marx that he showed, “subterranean intrigues, vain grudges, miserable personal animosities, dirty insults and infamous slurs, which moreover characterize political struggles of almost all Germans….” (quoted in Berthier 2015; 159; my emphasis) Bakunin wrote, “Mr. Marx is a [German] patriot no less ardent than Bismarck….He desires the establishment of a great Germanic state, one that will glorify the German people….Marx…considers himself at least as Bismarck’s successor….What unites them…is the out-and-out cult of the State….” (in Dolgoff 1980; 314—315) He claimed that the Slavs and Latin “races” were naturally libertarian, while the Germanic people were invariably authoritarian. “The anti-Jewish sentiments [of] Bakunin’s…were often a byproduct of his anti-German attitude….Such remarks are not in keeping with the anarchist ideas which Bakunin became famous for.” (Eckhardt 2016; 196) (In his letters, Marx sometimes made national chauvinist and racist comments, but they were nothing compared to Bakunin’s tirades, nor do they justify Bakunin.)

This anti-Germanism was not unique to Bakunin. His closest comrade, James Guillaume, wrote a book, Karl Marx, Pan-Germanist. This racist anti-Germanism later played a part in persuading a minority of prominent anarchists to support the imperialist Allies against the imperialist Germans in World War I—including Kropotkin and Guillaume.

The Problem of Power

Overall I believe that the anarchists had the better opinions and practice in the fight inside the First International. History has shown that the electoral strategy of the Marxist parties led to accommodation to capitalism and its state. The anarchists were correct to oppose this strategy.

Marx was actually not a worshipper of the state. He agreed with the anarchists on the goal of ending the state. But his strategy was for the workers to use the state as the key instrument for workers’ rule and the beginning of socialism. The anarchists were correct in opposing the Marxist perspective of seizing state power (whether by election or through a revolution which replaces the capitalist state with a new state).

This issue was somewhat confused, in my opinion, due to the anarchist approach to “power.” Anarchists often declare that they are not in favor of the workers “taking power.” Actually they generally favor the workers creating councils and assemblies, in workplaces and neighborhoods, federated to replace the state and capitalism. They are for working people overturning all capitalist institutions, and replacing them with a new society. I would call this “taking power.” The key difference with the Marxists is that the Marxists wanted to “take state power.” They sought to create a new, “workers’ state”—but the state is an alienated social machine, with bureaucracies, regular military and police, professional politicians, etc., standing over the rest of society and holding down the population. This is what anarchists are absolutely against.

As Berthier puts it, the Marxists sought “the conquest of political power through elections,” while the anti-authoritarians aimed to “conquer social power, creating new and radically different forms…through which it would be able to go forward to social reconstruction.” (2015; 13) The anarchists’ goal was “having working class social power replace bourgeois political power.” (same; 80)

Further Developments

At the time of the split in the International, the anarchists had most of the membership and national sections. Even groupings which had worked with Marx, such as the Blanquists and the British union officials, fell away from him. Outside of the German socialists (who had played little role in the International) there were few Marxists. However, over time the Marxists came to have the largest section of the international workers’ movement. Up until World War I, the anarchists still were the mainstream of the far left within the movement. But with the Russian Revolution, when the Marxists seemed to have shown that they could make a revolution, the anarchists were reduced to a minority even on the far left.

What weaknesses did the anarchists display which led to this relative marginalization? One problem was the lack of theoretical development among the anarchists, who often succumbed to anti-intellectualism. Bakunin had often expressed great admiration for the theoretical work of Marx. Even in his most bitter attacks on Marx, Bakunin would repeat his respect for Marx’s political economy. Other anarchists were similarly impressed by Marx’s theories (but not his politics). Yet this was not built on by the anarchist movement. There were valuable works by Kropotkin and others which discussed what an anti-authoritarian society might look like. But there was little or no analysis of how capitalism worked and how the workers’ movement should react to it under varying conditions. “The disappearance of a mass movement went hand in hand with a breakdown in the theoretical level of the movement.” (Berthier 2012; 133)

Berthier cites what he regards as one major problem in the anarchist/anti-authoritarian movement. He believes that the anarchists overreacted against Marx’s drive for bureaucratic centralization of the International by becoming opposed to almost all authority and organization. “There developed opposition to all forms of organization as a reaction against the centralization and bureaucratization put in place by Marx….The very basis of the doctrine elaborated by Proudhon and Bakunin—with federalism as its center of gravity—would be abandoned….The great theoreticians of the libertarian movement…advocated federalism, i.e. an equilibrium between…the autonomous action of basic structures, and…centralization.” (Berthier 2015; 154-5) While not anti-organizational, Graham (2015) has a somewhat different opinion, but I agree with Berthier’s analysis.

A rejection of specific anarchist self-organization was consistent with a perspective of individual or small group actions. Instead of working to build mass movements, through propaganda and union organizing, many anarchists turned to small scale “propaganda of the deed,” which was often interpreted as unsupported little insurrections or individual terrorist actions. They had hoped to inspire revolution but instead this orientation led to isolation for the anarchists. Others (particularly the anarcho-syndicalists) reacted to this isolation by returning to support of mass actions, including union organizing and strike participation.

Some continued (or revived) the tradition of Bakunin’s Alliance by organizing specific anarchist federations—in democratic forms. Over time, this became “dual-organizationalism” (or “neo-platformism” or “especifismo”): that revolutionary anarchists who agree with each other form a “specific” federation. This was to improve their effectiveness when being involved in broader organizations, such as unions or community groups or antiwar movements.

Conclusion

After the split in the International, the Marxists went on to build fairly large social democratic parties in Germany and other major countries. Most of these parties were to betray socialism by supporting their imperialist states in World War I and to oppose revolutions afterward. Today they have abandoned any pretense of advocating a new society. Part of the Marxist movement tried to revive its revolutionary heritage, under the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky. This wing ended up creating monstrous authoritarian mass-murdering state capitalisms, before collapsing back into traditional capitalism. So far, Marxism has utterly failed in its original aim of working class revolution in the industrialized countries.

Anarchism spread throughout the world, at various times and places creating major unions, popular armies, and anarchist federations. Yet anarchism has so far also failed, in that it has not led to successful revolutions of the working class and other oppressed people.

We who believe in freedom need to learn from our mistakes and our successes if we are finally to succeed in making revolutions, before the final crises of capitalist collapse, nuclear war, or global ecological catastrophe. Therefore we must study our history, going back at least to the First International.


References

Berthier, Rene’ (2015). Social Democracy and Anarchism in the International Workers’ Association 1864—1877. (Trans. A.W. Zurbrug.) London: Anarres Editions.

Dolgoff, Sam (ed.) (1980). Bakunin on Anarchism. Montreal Canada: Black Rose Books.

Eckhardt, Wolfgang (2016). The First Socialist Schism; Bakunin vs. Marx in the International Working Men’s Association. (Trans. R.M. Homsi, J. Cohn, C. Lawless, N. McNab, & B. Moreel.) Oakland CA: PM Press.

Fernbach, David (ed.) (1992). Karl Marx; The First International and After; Political Writings; Vol. 3. London: Penguin Books/New Left Review.

Graham, Robert (2015). We Do Not Fear Anarchy, We Invoke It; The First International and the Origins of the Anarchist Movement. Oakland CA: AK Press.

Leier, Mark (2006). Bakunin; The Creative Passion. NY: Thomas Dunne Books.

Marx, Karl, & Engels, Friedrich (1955). The Communist Manifesto. (Ed. S. H. Beer.) Northbrook IL: AHM Publishing.

Morris, Brian (1993). Bakunin; The Philosophy of Freedom. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Black Rose Books.

*written for www.Anarkismo.net

internacional / community struggles / llamado / petición Saturday June 10, 2017 14:30 byRevolución Internacional / World Revolution

¡VIVA LA SOLIDARIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LOS PUEBLOS!, ¡QUE SE VEA ESE APOYO A LA REVOLUCIÓN DEL KURDISTÁN!

¡Compañeras, mujeres trabajadoras, cooperativas y colectivas feministas!

Les compartimos la noticia de que este 15 de junio se realizarán una serie de conferencias tituladas "Hacia una economía de la mujer"en Turquía y el Norte de Siria por parte del Kongreya Star de Rojava (la confederación revolucionaria en donde convergen todos los movimientos de mujeres de esta región).

Desde ese lado del mundo, se ha invitado a nuestras compañeras organizadas del campo y la ciudad de Latinoamérica a enviar un video en el que saluden solidariamente -y sororariamente- y se abrace desde nuestros territorios a la revolución femenina en el Kurdistán (a las combatientes de las Unidades Femeninas de Protección "YPJ", al Movimiento de Mujeres Libres, a las mujeres que hacen posible el pueblo feminista de Jinwar, etc.) así como narrar un poco de las iniciativas de emancipación que tengan las participantes en sus respectivos movimientos. También se puede participar con un saludo escrito, ya sea en inglés o turco. Todo el material se proyectará/leerá públicamente en estos encuentros.

Extendemos esta invitación a todas las compas que quieran enviar su video/texto a más tardar el 12 de junio a esta dirección: en.ruptura.colectiva@gmail.com

* En caso de ser posible, enviar un documento adjunto con el mensaje en idioma inglés para facilitar el trabajo de edición y colocación de subtítulos en kurdo.

** Se recomienda la grabación en 1080 HD y en una velocidad de 24fx.


¡VIVA LA SOLIDARIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LOS PUEBLOS!, ¡QUE SE VEA ESE APOYO A LA REVOLUCIÓN DEL KURDISTÁN!

/// Revolución Internacional / World Revolucion, Ruptura Colectiva (RC) ///


Publicado el 09 de Junio de 2017:

http://rupturacolectiva.com/campana-internacional-de-vi...java/

This page has not been translated into 한국어 yet.

This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Català Ελληνικά Deutsch



Employees at the Zarfati Garage in Mishur Adumim vote to strike on July 22, 2014. (Photo courtesy of Ma’an workers union)

Employees at the Zarfati Garage in Mishur Adumim vote to strike on July 22, 2014. (Photo courtesy of Ma’an workers union)

International

Tue 27 Jun, 03:04

browse text browse image

grenfelltowerfire1704hero.jpg imageΑς μιλήσουμε για ... Jun 24 17:23 by Μαρία Μπουσδέκη 0 comments

anarkismo_banner.jpg imageANARCHISM, ETHICS AND JUSTICE: THE MICHAEL SCHMIDT CASE Jun 22 22:55 by Anarkismo Network 3 comments

18922089_10209855634884530_8003731333480120319_n.jpg image(Video) La Revolución en Kurdistán y las mujeres de armas tomar Jun 16 16:53 by Revolución Internacional / World Revolution 0 comments

marxbakunin.png imageThe First International and the Development of Anarchism and Marxism Jun 11 09:58 by Wayne Price 3 comments

textCampaña internacional de video-mensajes en solidaridad con la Confederación de Mujeres de ... Jun 10 14:30 by Revolución Internacional / World Revolution 0 comments

textMay 2017 Kate Sharpley Library Bulletin online May 31 17:47 by KSL 0 comments

12042017lasgrietas115.jpg imageMensaje del Subcomandante Moisés y el EZLN tras creación del Concejo Indígena de Gobierno May 30 18:03 by Ruptura Coleciva (RC) 0 comments

23.jpg imageΚριτική Μαρξιστι... May 30 17:39 by Μιχαήλ Μπακούνιν 0 comments

p_04_03_2017.jpeg imageEl alma esquizofrénica del proyecto europeo May 16 18:55 by José Antonio Gutiérrez D. 0 comments

5cd9d0f29899b5bac8d85cefeb738470.jpg imageWhat is an Anarchist? Am I an Anarchist? May 11 12:34 by Wayne Price 1 comments

4.jpg imageΕθνικά ζητήματα - &#... May 09 17:39 by Dmitri 0 comments

18342441_324922137923599_3232661247811023757_n.jpg imageΚαμίλλο Μπερνέρι... May 06 15:46 by Φρανκ Μίντζ 0 comments

dangerous_times_2_small.png imageDangerous times: authoritarianism and crisis May 05 17:10 by Shawn Hattingh 0 comments

revpoets.jpg imageΓια τα μέσα αντιπ ... May 05 16:17 by Ké Huelga Radio 0 comments

makhno_group.jpg imageΟ Νέστωρ Μαχνό γι ... May 01 19:54 by Νέστωρ Μαχνό 0 comments

2.jpg imageMay Day 2017 May 01 08:56 by Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group (MACG) 0 comments

18052473_120332000281462827_1754088053_o.jpg imageΟι ταξικοί αγώνε`... Apr 30 20:52 by ΕΣΕ - FAU 0 comments

adfc85c713894e38b9c7188c19f79fe6.jpeg imageBeyond May Day Parades: Building a Counter-Movement in Malaysia and Worldwide Apr 28 17:23 by Muttaqa Yushau Abdulra’uf, Sian Byrne, Warren McGregor and L 0 comments

16298555_10212261780281913_7935719123289947709_n.jpg imageΜεταλλάξεις του ]... Apr 26 20:54 by Dmitri 0 comments

textTERRORE DI STATO CONTRO IL POPOLO CURDO Apr 26 05:59 by Gianni Sartori 0 comments

textIn the Shadow of Social Democracy: Right-Wing Challenges and Left Alternatives Apr 24 18:12 by Ingo Schmidt 0 comments

textSOSPESO LO SCIOPERO DELLA FAME DELLE PRIGIONIERE E DEI DEI PRIGIONIERI CURDI Apr 24 14:59 by Gianni Sartori 0 comments

kropotkinijwfkf1bg.jpg imageΝόμος και Εξουσί^... Apr 21 17:17 by Πιοτρ Κροπότκιν 0 comments

refugiados.jpg imageNinguna guerra del Imperio es una guerra del Pueblo Apr 18 15:52 by Arnoldo Díaz 0 comments

textGERNIKA: 1937 - 2017 Apr 18 02:32 by Gianni Sartori 0 comments

banksyflowerthrower92718.jpg imageOn the Question of Violence and Nonviolence As a Tactic and Strategy Within the Social Pro... Apr 13 03:36 by David Van Deusen 0 comments

bakunin_merlin.jpg imageBook Review: Bakunin. Selected Texts 1868-1875 (Edited and Translated by A.W. Zurbrugg) Apr 11 02:24 by José Antonio Gutiérrez D. 0 comments

img_6763.jpg imageTabqa Dam: The key to Capturing Raqqa Apr 08 20:25 by Ercan Ayboga with Farah Azadi 0 comments

teaserbox_43338713750x500.jpg imageΆμεση Δημοκρατία... Apr 07 19:17 by Αλέξανδρος Σχισμένος 0 comments

240690x426.jpg imageO Μπακούνιν για το&#... Apr 04 17:28 by Εφημερίδα δρόμου 0 comments

more >>
© 2005-2017 Anarkismo.net. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Anarkismo.net. [ Disclaimer | Privacy ]