Anarchism
Anarchism[a] is a libertarian socialist tendency which espouses opposition to all forms of hierarchy and authority and which seeks the total and immediate abolition of the state. Anarchism has been criticized by Marxists for its idealist views which omit any form of class analysis, utopianism, and individualism.
“The philosophy of the anarchists is bourgeois philosophy turned inside out. Their individualistic theories and their individualistic ideal are the very opposite of socialism. Their views express, not the future of bourgeois society, which is striding with irresistible force towards the socialization of labor, but the present and even the past of that society, the domination of blind chance over the scattered and isolated small producer. Their tactics, which amount to a repudiation of the political struggle, disunite the proletarians and convert them in fact into passive participators in one bourgeois policy or another, since it is impossible and unrealizable for the workers really to dissociate themselves from politics.” —Vladimir Lenin, Socialism and Anarchism
Ideology
Revolutionary spontaneity
Anarchists believe that a social revolution will derive from spontaneous actions on the part of the working class and reject the need for a revolutionary vanguard party. The anarchist concept of spontaneity without organized revolutionary efforts results in the impotence of the proletarian movement as, without the formation of a vanguard of its most politically advance members, is relegated to trade union consciousness and sporadic and ultimately futile actions against the bourgeois state.[1]
Individualism
Anarchism is heavily grounded in individualist positions, viewing the emancipation of the individual as being of primary concern over emancipation of the collective masses, often viewing the main contradictions in society as those between authority and the desires of the individual.[2] In this position, anarchists overlook class analysis and understanding the circumstances resulting in oppression. Marxism, on the contrary understands that the liberation of individual persons can only come when the class is liberated as a whole.[3]
Statelessness and opposition to authority
Anarchists premise their views on opposition to all forms of authority and hierarchy, seeking to abolish all hierarchies with the exception of those deemed necessary for society to function. Consequentially, anarchists are distinguished from Marxists in seeking the immediate abolition of the state without implementing a dictatorship of the proletariat to defend and expand revolutionary gains nor eliminating the material conditions (class struggle) which gave rise to the state. The anarchist conception of authoritarianism is vague and ill-defined; basic functions of society such as industry or agriculture require authority[b] to be maintained, and processes such as a social revolution are highly authoritative against the exploiting classes which are being overthrown.[4]
Utopianism and idealism
Variations
Communist anarchism
Anarcho-communism is an anarchist sub-ideology which seeks to create a communistic society in the immediate aftermath of a socialist revolution, using institutions such as a gift economy. One of the most popular proponents of anarchist communist was Peter Kropotkin, who formalized many aspects of this tendency in his book The Conquest of Bread. Anarcho-communism broadly emphasizes communalism and localized economic distribution.
Collectivist anarchism
Anarcho-collectivism is a tendency inspired by the works of Michael Bakunin and James Guillaume with additional influence from Proudhonian economics. It puts emphasis on workers' autonomy and holds that the exchange of goods between communities should be determined based on the cost of labor established by communal banks. Other anarchists have described this variant as a limited form of anarchist communism.[5]
Syndicalism
Anarcho-syndicalism is a sub-variety of anarchism involving organizing revolutionary trade unions that will lead a general strike in order to overthrow capitalism and the state, and will form the basis for a socialist society.
Analysis
Comparison to Marxism
Anarchism has always been a large failure in comparison to Marxism. While revolutionary movements following Marxist doctrine have been able to conquer state-power and build successful socialist societies, anarchists possess not a single example of an "anarchist society" which ever survived longer than a few years (with their most cited examples of the Ukrainian Free Territory and Anarchist Catalonia only being able to exist as small war-time entities).
This is due to a number of reasons. The mundane reason being that anarchist tactics are inherently unproductive. Without a centralized vanguard party to secure revolutionary gains, organize militant workers, coordinate actions, etc. anarchists are left only with ineffective "direct action" (largely street-violence and terrorism) as usable tactics. Further, even if anarchists were ever to overthrow the bourgeois state in one area, bourgeois states would still exist in other parts of the world. While Marxists would be able to defend a revolution from the forces of external capitalist states and internal counter-revolution via the development and empowerment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, anarchists, on account of their inflexible idealist notions, would (and have) quickly be defeated. As Joseph Stalin said in Foundations of Leninism:
"The victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat signifies the suppression of the bourgeoisie, the smashing of the bourgeois state machine and the substitution of proletarian democracy for bourgeois democracy. That is clear. But by means of what organisation can this colossal work be carried out? The old forms of organisation of the proletariat, which grew up on the basis of bourgeois parliamentarism, are inadequate for this work-of that there can hardly be any doubt. What, then, are the new forms of organisation of the proletariat that are capable of serving as the gravediggers of the bourgeois state machine, that are capable not only of smashing this machine, not only of substituting proletarian democracy for bourgeois democracy, but also of becoming the foundation of the proletarian state power?"
See also
Further reading
- Anarchism or Socialism? (1907), by Joseph Stalin
References
- ↑ Vladimir Lenin (1901). What Is To Be Done?, II., The Spontaneity of the Masses and the Consciousness of the Social-Democrats. Available on the Marxists Internet Archive
- ↑ Donald Rooum (1986). Anarchism is about individuals. The Anarchist Library. Retrieved October 14, 2024.
- ↑ Joseph Stalin (1907). Anarchism or Socialism?.
- ↑ Friedrich Engels (1872). On Authority.
- ↑ Jeff Stein (1992). The Collectivist Tradition. Libertarian Labor Review, from the Anarchist Library.
Notes
- ↑ Ultimately derived from the Ancient Greek word ἀναρχία, translating to "without ruler".
- ↑ Authority as elaborated by Engels:
"Authority, in the sense in which the word is used here, means: the imposition of the will of another upon ours; on the other hand, authority presupposes subordination. Now, since these two words sound bad, and the relationship which they represent is disagreeable to the subordinated party, the question is to ascertain whether there is any way of dispensing with it, whether — given the conditions of present-day society — we could not create another social system, in which this authority would be given no scope any longer, and would consequently have to disappear."