The Meaning of Anarchism
Daibhidh
[From The Anarchist Theory FAQ at
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/]
A.1.1 What does "anarchy" mean?
The word "anarchy" is "from Greek, prefix *a*, meaning "not," "the want
of," "the absence of," or "the lack of", plus *archos*, meaning "a
ruler," "director", "chief," "person in charge," "commander." The Greek
words *anarchos,* and *anarchia* meant "having no government -- being
without a government" [Angeles, Peter A.; _The Harper Collins Dictionary
of Philosophy_, Second Edition, pp. 11-12.].
As can be seen, the strict, original meaning of anarchism was not simply
"no government." "An-archy" means "without a ruler," or more generally,
"without authority," and it is in this sense that anarchists have
continually used the word. For this reason, rather than being purely
anti-government or anti-state, anarchism is primarily a movement against
*hierarchy.* Why? Because hierarchy is the organizational structure that
embodies authority. Since the state is the "highest" form of hierarchy,
anarchists are, by definition, anti-state; but this is *not* a sufficient
definition of anarchism.
Reference to "hierarchy" in this context is a fairly recent development
--
the "classical" anarchists did not use the word. However, it's clear from
their writings that theirs was a philosophy against hierarchy, against
any inequality of power or privileges between individuals. Bakunin spoke
of this when attacked "official" authority but defended "natural
influence," and also when he said:
"Do you want to make it impossible for anyone to oppress his fellow-man?
Then make sure that no one shall possess power" [Maximoff, G. P., ed.,
_The Political Philosophy of Bakunin: Scientific Anarchism_, p. 271].
As Jeff Draughn notes, "while it has always been a latent part of the
'revolutionary project,' only recently has this broader concept of
anti-hierarchy arisen for more specific scrutiny. Nonetheless, the root
of this is plainly visible in the Greek roots of the word "anarchy" [Jeff
Draughn, _Between Anarchism and Libertarianism: Defining a New Movement_]
A.1.2 What does "anarchism" mean?
To quote Peter Kropotkin, Anarchism is "the no-government system of
socialism. . . ." [_Anarchist Communism: Its Basis and Principles_].
Anarchists maintain that anarchy, the absence of rulers, is a viable form
of social system and works for the maximisation of individual liberty and
social equality. They see the goals of liberty and equality as mutually
self-supporting. Or, in Bakunin's famous dictum:
"We are convinced that freedom without Socialism [i.e. anarchism] is
privilege
and injustice, and that Socialism without freedom is slavery and
brutality."
The history of human society proves this point. Liberty without equality
is only liberty for the powerful, and equality without liberty is
impossible and a justification for slavery.
Therefore, anarchism is a political theory which advocates the creation
of anarchy, a society based on the maxim of "no rulers." To achieve this,
"[i]n common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private
ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is
condemned to disappear: and that all requisites for production must, and
will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by
the producers of wealth. And. . . they maintain that the ideal of the
political organization of society is a condition of things where the
functions of government are reduced to minimum. . . (and) that the
ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government
to nil -- that is, to a society without government, to an-archy" [Rudolf
Rocker, Op. Cit].
Thus anarchism is both positive and negative. It analyses and critiques
current society while at the same time offering a vision of a potential
new society -- a society that maximises certain human needs which the
current one denies. These needs, at their most basic, are liberty,
equality and solidarity, which will be discussed in section A.2.
Anarchism unites critical analysis with hope, for, as Bakunin pointed
out,
"the urge to destroy is a creative urge." One cannot build a better
society without understanding what is wrong with the present one.
A.1.3 Why is anarchism also called libertarian socialism?
Many anarchists, seeing the negative nature of the definition of
"anarchism," have used other terms to emphasize the inherently positive
and constructive aspect of their ideas. The most common terms used are
"free socialism," "free communism," "libertarian socialism," and
"libertarian communism." For anarchists, libertarian socialism,
libertarian communism, and anarchism are virtually interchangeable.
Considering definitions from the _American Heritage Dictionary_, we find:
LIBERTARIAN: one who believes in freedom of action and thought; one who
believes in free will.
SOCIALISM: a social system in which the producers possess both political
power and the means of producing and distributing goods.
Just taking those two first definitions and fusing them yields:
LIBERTARIAN SOCIALISM: a social system which believes in freedom of
action
and thought and free will, in which the producers possess both political
power and the means of producing and distributing goods.
However, due to the creation of the Libertarian Party in the USA, many
people now consider the idea of "libertarian socialism" to be a
contradiction in terms. Indeed, many "Libertarians" think anarchists are
just attempting to associate the "anti-libertarian" ideas of "socialism"
(as Libertarians conceive it) with Libertarian ideology in order to make
those "socialist" ideas more "acceptable" -- in other words, trying to
steal the "libertarian" label from its rightful possessors.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Anarchists have been using the
term
"libertarian" to describe themselves and their ideas since the 1890's. It
was first used in France in an attempt to get round anti-anarchist laws.
Since then, particularly outside America, it has *always* been associated
with anarchist ideas and movements. Taking a recent example, in the USA,
anarchists organised "The Libertarian League" in July 1954, which had
staunch
anarcho-syndicalist principles and lasted until 1965. The US-based
"Libertarian" Party, on the other hand has only existed since the early
1970's.
It is that party, not the anarchists, who have "stolen" the word. Later,
in Section B, we will discuss why the idea of a "libertarian" capitalism
(as desired by the Libertarian Party) is a contradiction in terms.
As we will also explain in Section B, only a libertarian-socialist system
of ownership can maximise individual freedom. Needless to say, state
ownership -- what is commonly *called* "socialism" -- is, for anarchists,
not socialism at all. In fact, as we will elaborate in Section H, state
"socialism" is just a form of capitalism, with no socialist content
whatever.
A.1.4 Are anarchists socialists?
Yes. All the major branches of anarchism are opposed to capitalism,
because the latter is based on domination and exploitation (see section
C).
"Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily
a
socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man."
[Daniel Guerin, _Anarchism_]
Individualists like Ben Tucker along with social anarchists like Proudhon
and Bakunin proclaimed themselves "socialists." They did so because the
word "socialist" was originally defined to include "all those who
believed
in the individual's right to possess what he or she produced" ["Ayn Rand
and the Perversion of Libertarianism," in _Anarchy: A Journal of Desire
Armed_, no. 34]. Ben Tucker, for example -- the anarchist most influenced
by liberalism (as we will discuss later) -- denounces the capitalist as
"the
usurer, the receiver of interest, rent and profit." Tucker held that in
an anarchist, non-capitalist, free-market society, capitalists will
become
redundant, since "labour. . . will. . . secure its natural wage, its
entire product." Such an economy will be based on mutual banking and the
free exchange of products between cooperatives, artisans and peasants.
Even Max Stirner, the arch-egoist, had nothing but scorn for capitalist
society and its various "spooks," which for him meant ideas that are
treated as sacred or religious, such as private property, competition,
division of labour, and so forth.
While social and individualist anarchists do disagree on many issues --
for example, whether a free market would be the best means of maximising
liberty -- they agree that capitalism is to be opposed and that an
anarchist society must, by definition, be based on associated, not wage,
labour.
However, the meanings of words change over time. Today
"socialism" almost always refers to *state* socialism, a system that all
anarchists have opposed as a denial of freedom and genuine socialist
ideals. All anarchists would agree with Noam Chomsky's statement on this
issue:
"If the left is understood to include 'Bolshevism,' then I would
flatly dissociate myself from the left. Lenin was one of the greatest
enemies of socialism" [_Red and Black Revolution_, issue 2].
Anarchism developed in constant opposition to the ideas of Marxism,
social
democracy and Leninism. Long before Lenin rose to power, Mikhail Bakunin
warned the followers of Marx against the "Red bureaucracy" that would
institute "the worst of all despotic governments" if Marx's
state-socialist ideas were ever implemented.
Nevertheless, being socialists, anarchists do share *some* ideas with
*some* Marxists (though none with Leninists). Both Bakunin and Tucker
accepted Marx's analysis
and critique of capitalism as well as his labour theory of value (see
section C). Marx himself was heavily influenced by Max Stirner's book
_The Ego and Its Own_, which contains a brilliant critique of what Marx
called "vulgar" communism as well as state socialism. There have also
been
elements of the Marxist movement holding views very similar to social
anarchism (particularly the anarcho-syndicalist branch of social
anarchism) -- for example, Anton Pannekoek, Rosa Luxembourg, Paul Mattick
and others, who are very far from Lenin. Karl Korsch and others wrote
sympathetically of the anarchist revolution in Spain. There are many
continuities from Marx to Lenin, but there are also continuities from
Marx
to more libertarian Marxists, who were harshly critical of Lenin and
Bolshevism and whose ideas approximate anarchism's desire for the free
association of equals.
Therefore anarchism is basically a form of socialism, one that stands in
direct opposition to what is usually defined as "socialism" (i.e. state
control). Instead of "central planning," anarchists advocate free
association and oppose "state" socialism as a form of state capitalism.
The anarchist objection to the identification of "central planning" with
socialism will be discussed in section H.
=========================================================================
http://pubweb.acns.nwu.edu/~dtn307/anarchy.html
"In a word, we reject all legislation, all authority, and all privileged,
licensed, official, and legal influence, even though arising from
universal suffrage, convinced that it can turn only to the advantage of a
dominant minority of exploiters against the interests of the immense
majority in subjection to them."
--Mikhail Bakunin, _God and the State_
=========================================================================