💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › lilly-may-federationist-manifesto.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:09:42. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: The Federationist Manifesto Author: Lilly May Date: 07/28/2020 Language: en Topics: anarcho-communism, anarcho-syndicalism, social ecology, federationism Source: Retrieved on 07/29/2020 from https://link.medium.com/9e07fccXu8
The world has been set on fire by the sparks of a revolution. Across the
globe, from villages to cities, from the factory floor to the farm,
there has been a revolution underway for longer than humanity has been
able to write. This revolution has been a revolution for fairness and
dignity, a revolution for cooperation and self-governance, the
revolution for liberation.
Federationism is a movement to synthesize previous and currently
existing movements in order to achieve a template for liberation, taking
elements from each. Federationism additionally adds new ideas, to form a
practical tool for the empowerment of all people. Federationism is
inherently and inextricably anarchist in nature. It further is the
distinct idea that humanity is capable of unifying together, and
addressing all of its grievances at once in an organized fashion. Based
on the principles of radical democracy, universal liberation, and mutual
aid.
Anarchism has been defamed for centuries as being the collapse of
society, a breakdown of morality, the world turning against itself.
These accusations are nothing but myths used to silence those who would
oppose tyranny. Anarchism is the continuous movement to oppose
oppressive hierarchies. Oppressive hierarchies are those which are
coercive, involuntary, and unjust. Unjust hierarchies being those which
have power concentrated unnecessarily, and are easily abusable and
unaccountable. Involuntary hierarchies being those which involve people
who did not give explicit consent to partake in, and have no recourse to
leave or substantively change said structures. While coercive
hierarchies being those which use either violence, or other means of
force to generate compliance to said structures. Principle among the
hierarchies that anarchism seeks to abolish is the state. The state is a
separate entity from a government, and is the institutions and
organizations in a society through which coercive and involuntary
hierarchies are maintained.
The current set of affairs and conditions around the globe are
demonstrating that representative “democracy” is entering into a stage
of degradation. States around the world are turning to outright
authoritarianism, dictatorship, and are welcoming the resurgence of
fascism with open arms. These conditions have rendered the current
status quo inoperable, and have also made any attempts at mere reform
utterly impossible. Radical change is the only way in which true
liberty, true freedom, and true democracy can be saved from these
conditions, rather than the facades which are currently held up as
“liberty, freedom, and democracy”.
Principle in the contribution to this authoritarianism is the fact that
around the world the state is what reigns over people. As the state is
the institutions which create and enforce coercive and involuntary
hierarchies, there is little to wonder as to why such institutions
create and exacerbate oppression and authoritarianism. The ultimate form
of the state is fascism which is characterized by its worship of the
state, to such an extent that the state begins to co-opt and then
subsume religion and religious worship into itself.
One may wonder why rulers don’t understand how to solve problems in ways
that ordinary people are sure they could do better. One may wonder why
rulers act in such greedy and self-destructive ways, while ignoring long
term consequences. This is because while power seems to give people the
ability to act however they want, in reality power acts upon those who
wield it, and selects for those who will be able to wield it for the
longest.
Through the state, liberation can never be achieved, as by the very
nature of what a state is it can only use oppression to achieve its
aims. It creates a violent distance between the people and rulers. No
matter how the rulers come to power, the power of the state will
exercise brutal violence against the people. This is due to the
incentives of the state, as it fundamentally runs on the principle of
“might makes right”. Some potential leaders may promise to not use the
powers of the state for ill, or (as is more often the case) will promise
to “reform” the state to be “not as brutal”. However, these potential
leaders in the long term will be beaten out by those who have no such
qualms, who will brutalize, lie, cheat, steal, and do whatever it takes
to hold onto the reins of power that stem from the state.
Power is derived from one’s ability to make others act on their behalf.
The military, infrastructure, resource collection, laws, and so on are
what make a society work. And as such a ruler must gain the favor of
those who control these vital systems. In dictatorships the number of
people who control vital systems is few, in representative “democracies”
it is many, with a wide range in between. No matter the number, those
who control these vital systems which make society run are the ones that
hold power. In order for a ruler to keep power, they must control
resources and allocate enough of them to the systems, groups, and
individuals who enable their reign.
The inherent incentive structure of the state leads to two extremes, the
most stable dictatorships where the resources are not based on the
productivity of the people they rule over (often called the “resource
curse”), and the most stable representative “democracies” where the
wealth is based almost entirely on the productivity the people ruled
over. In between are the various regimes which are less stable and more
prone to revolt. As such, representative “democracies” are at extreme
risk of dictatorial coups when there is a massive deposit of a valuable
resource which outstrips the productivity of the populace, or the
productivity of the populace falls enough that the country becomes poor.
While it might seem the case that the opposite would be true for
dictatorships, this is where unstable regimes come in. Resources spent
on increasing productivity of the populace are resources that rivals can
promise those who control the systems which make society work, which
make coups far more likely.
Benevolent dictators it is clear are not possible for any real length of
time, as the incentives of power will always allure malicious actors.
Additionally, the longer those in positions of power stay there, the
less their interests intersect with those they rule over, making the
creation of a ruling class inevitable under a state. Within
representative “democracies”, politicians are incentivized to engage in
corruption in order to make deals with powerful interests, and ignore
giving resources to voting blocks which don’t secure their power as
those resources can instead be funneled to those powerful interests. It
is clear then that the state will always trend towards oppression. No
matter how prosperous a country, eventually the bountiful times will end
and the allure of power will pull in the ambitious and ruthless to move
the country towards dictatorship.
Additionally, no matter how noble the revolutionary, once they utilize a
state they are doomed to fall into these same traps. Revolutions are
bloody affairs, and at the end of them rarely will the newly estate
regime have full control. As such new leaders will cull their old
supporters and bring in bureaucrats from the old regime, which while it
seems counter-intuitive is how power works. The people who help win
power are not the same ones who will help keep it, and to keep them
around is just asking for rivals to the ruler and their vision. This can
be seen in the Russian Revolution, the Bolsheviks back stabbed their
comrades of the Free Territory once they outlived their usefulness,
purged the cabinet, brought in bureaucrats who worked under the former
Tzar, and created a system which ultimately became more authoritarian
than that of the Tzar.
The only way to avoid the oppression of the state is to spread out the
power in society as much as possible, so that power can only be
exercised if the people want it to be, not based on the whims of petty
rulers.
The second largest hierarchy which has led to the disastrous conditions
around the world is capitalism. Capitalism is built upon the extraction
of surplus value from workers to generate profits, capitalism is also
built on the assumption of infinite growth in order to sustain this
generation of profit. As such capitalism must seek to ruthlessly expand
and take ever more value from workers around the world.
Once capitalists had grown tired of exhausting the value of only Europe
they then utilized colonialism in order to extract the wealth from all
other regions around the world. However, the infinite growth of
capitalism is unsustainable. There is only so much mineral wealth that
can be mined, only so hard one can make people work for an ever
diminishing amount of pay, before the system can no longer grow or
profit. Capitalism simply can only last for so long before it collapses,
and as that time nears ever closer the regular collapses of capitalism’s
market system will trend to grow ever more harsh before the market
system simply can’t recover at all.
Global capitalism is built upon the oppression of countless regions it
has made poor, extracting as much surplus value as it can from the
region. While the age of old colonialism may be dead, neo-colonialism
has taken its place, using “soft” power such as economic and diplomatic
pressures in order to force poorer regions to accept global capital to
pillage their resources and talents. Neo-colonialism gives the facade of
being a “voluntary exchange” however is anything but voluntary. All the
“soft” power exercised in these regions is backed up by the “hard” power
of global empire, the threat of coups, the threat of “needing to restore
order” from the unrest created by the poverty inflicted on the region by
global capital, and so forth. Further, due to the instability of
capitalism and its reliance on the state, means that it will always
ultimately feed into the trend towards the authoritarianism of the
state.
Capitalism needs the state. Throughout history capitalists have relied
on the state to use it’s institutions to protect them and their ill
gotten loot from the workers it has subjugated. Capitalists rely on the
state to break strikes, to enforce its right to private property, and to
generally do the unprofitable dirty work required to keep the population
productive and complacent enough to have its value extracted. Capitalism
is a system based upon the assumption of coercive institutions that will
protect the interests of the wealthy elite from the interests of all
others.
Reformism is the idea that institutions are not fundamentally unworkable
for the benefit of all. The idea behind reformism being if certain
things are changed that the larger institution as a whole can be
salvaged. However, it has been demonstrated that this is impossible. The
inherent nature of the state and capitalism mean that there is an
unchangeable trend towards authoritarianism, oppression, and
exploitation. Reforms can and will always be undone, it may take time
but it always occurs. A few decades may be a long time, but in the large
scheme of the centuries of capitalism and the nation state it is merely
a short detour from the inevitable progressions of these institutions.
Reformists believe that through reform society can break away from these
oppressive institutions. However, the institutions in practice have
numerous ways to stifle and dilute reforms to be ineffective. In
addition, in places where large steps towards breaking away from these
institutions were made, they were swiftly followed by coups and
assassinations. The interests of the state and of capital will stop at
nothing to maintain their grip over people, any real opposition to them
will be met by the swift use of violence to reinstate the status quo.
Rendering reform as a way to escape the state and capitalism impossible.
This can be seen perhaps no better than the Chilean coup in 1973, when
the military ousted the democratically elected socialist president, who
had attempted to swiftly make large reforms towards creating a fully
socialist economic system. It is clear that should reforms ever start
making enough progress, the institutions which uphold the state and
capitalism will act to decisively crush these reforms and roll back not
only the reforms instituted, but earlier reforms as well which had
impeded the power of the state and capitalist institutions.
It can be said with certainty that radical change must be brought about
in order to save the people around the world suffering under the
oppressive systems which bind us, strip us of our humanity and dignity,
and extract our value like leeches. The way in which people are able to
rise up and organize themselves in opposition to oppressive hierarchies
must be carefully considered, and it must be holistic. Historically
revolutions have focused on only one or a few ways in which oppression
must be opposed and overthrown, while freeing some they left others to
their bondage. Federationism seeks to rectify this, by addressing all
the ways in which oppressive hierarchies must be identified and utterly
abolished, creating true liberation for all.
Hierarchy is the birthplace of oppression and inequality. Without the
unjust, coercive, and involuntary hierarchies that exist, it is
impossible that oppression and inequalities could manifest in society.
As such, in order to achieve a society which not only lacks these
horrendous conditions, but is incapable of producing them. The system of
such a society must be staunchly against hierarchies where they are
unnecessary, are violent, and are forced upon people.
Further, one must understand the extent of hierarchies and how they
taint not only societies, but the ways in which people are able to
conceive of the world. The state and capitalism represent clear examples
of oppressive hierarchies, but so too do racism, sexism, queerphobia,
environmental degradation, and more. These hierarchies presuppose that
there are lesser beings that exist, and that as lesser beings they are
not deserving of being treated fairly or with dignity, or that what they
are deserving of is some lesser subjugated position to that of the
“superior” or majority elements of society. With federationism an
interconnected and intersectional understanding of hierarchy is strictly
necessary. The hierarchical societies that can be found around the world
did not spring forth all at once. First came the subjugation of nature
to the wills of humans, then the subjugation of women, and then the
subjugation of those who are different than the increasingly entrenched
idea of who and what is “normal”, as that idea shifted from “normal” to
“superior”.
Perhaps one of the most insidious forms of hierarchy that many will not
recognize is that of hegemony. The culture that surrounds each and every
one of us every day, things which we take for granted because “that is
just how things are”. The assumptions one has about the world depend
almost entirely based on what one is taught and told to expect, from
this phenomena such as “group think” emerge where people uncritically
support positions because it is expected of them to do so. For example,
people invested in party politics may decide how they feel on certain
issues based entirely on what the party they belong to says about it.
Hegemony exists as a hierarchy which attempts to push out those who
think differently and are different from what society in general expects
and does, with threat of ostracization or even violence. Hegemony can
easily become oppressive, as well as is a powerful tool by those in
positions of power that know how to use it to their advantage.
Historically, hegemony has been used to frightening effectiveness by
conservatives and reactionaries in order to block social progress.
Hierarchy works its way into all levels of society, interactions between
individuals, and even the very thoughts of individuals. It creates the
impossibility of a just society while it is allowed to persist, and as
such federationism recognizes the need to reject unjust, coercive, and
involuntary hierarchies.
Capitalism as has already been discussed is a form of hierarchy which
brings with it many forms of oppression within societies, including to
those which don’t participate in it. Federationism opposes capitalism on
these grounds, as well as based on the economic realities that it is not
only an undesirable system but an unsustainable one as well.
The system of capitalism is built upon the accumulation of wealth. In
order to do this capitalists must have produced for them products or
services with a value which consumers will pay for. In order to create a
profit a capitalist must factor in the cost of the materials required to
produce their goods or services, and the cost of the labor that their
workers must be paid for. As such a capitalist who wishes to stay in
business must reduce costs as much as possible, pay their workers as
little as possible, and charge as much as possible for their goods or
services. This inherently means that capitalism is inherently parasitic.
A capitalist must pay the workers a minuscule fraction of the value of
what they produce, and then turn around and charge consumers more than
the value of what has been produced, taking for themselves the surplus
value, the value extracted from their workers which exceeds what they
have been paid. A capitalist which is able to stay in business must
therefore leech off not only their workers but their customers, pay one
less than their value, while charging the other more than the value of
what they are purchasing.
In addition there is the factoring of the cost of the materials which
the workers will use to produce goods or services which create the
surplus value for capitalists. It is far cheaper for capitalists to
spread out the production of goods into as specialized roles as
possible. This creates large supply chains within capitalism in which
workers will do the same repetitive tasks over and over and over.
Alongside relegating workers to repetitive tasks, they are also denied
the full value of their labor which creates alienation. Workers are
alienated from the fruits of their labor, either being unable to see the
products they create, unable to receive the value of what they have
produced for others, or both. This alienation creates within workers an
angst, frustration, and exhaustion, significantly reducing the quality
of life for workers. At the same time capitalists thrive, only having to
work far less to earn the cumulative surplus value of their workers
which generate far more money for them. Despite at most having them only
providing an initial investment for the business while the actual work
of running and maintaining production, which is the lifeblood of any
business is handled by those who are alienated.
This angst produced by the alienation of capitalism if left unattended
by the capitalist ruling class will turn to anti-capitalist sentiment,
class consciousness, and eventually to revolt and revolution. The ruling
class having a vested interest in maintaining their parasitic lifestyle
must prevent this. Capitalists turn to three main tools; the state,
hegemony, and bigotry to address this. The state is relied on to
violently suppress any attempts by workers to organize or rise up
against their oppressive conditions, keeping workers fearful of
attempting to change the systems which oppress them. Hegemony is used to
ingrain within workers loyalty to the ruling class, reliance on
hierarchical systems, and general complacency with the status quo,
creating conditions which make it difficult for workers to conceive of
challenging oppressive institutions. And bigotry while not created by
capitalism is maintained by it, directing the angst that comes from
alienation of the workers at each other and causing infighting in order
to distract workers from who and what are the true source of their
suffering.
Capitalism represents a refinement of the long history of oppressive
hierarchies, creating an amoral system which is centered around the
deification of collecting money, which is a stand in for power.
Additionally, unlike previous systems, as money is so ubiquitous in
capitalism it gives the illusion that everyone has a little power and
that anyone could gain more power. As such it creates an obsession with
the procurement of more and more power in society, which is most
consistently obtained through the oppression of others, creating
perverse incentives to mentally devalue the lives of people in order to
control them.
Often anarchism is portrayed, when not outright defamed, as a utopian
pipe dream. One is told Anarchism is nothing but wishful thinking, and
that its tactics and theories offer no tangible benefits or routes to
success. Such accusations are patently false. Additionally, such
accusations ignore the fact that the tactics and organizational
structures that anarchism utilizes are the same as those that would have
to exist under communism. If such accusations are levied by those who
consider themselves to be communists they are neglecting to consider how
their ultimate goal would actually function, to their own detriment.
To demonstrate the successes of anarchist praxis four examples will be
put forward: the CNT-FAI in revolutionary Catalonia, the EZLN in
Chiapas, the AANES in Syria, and the CHAZ in the United States.
The CNT-FAI was the Iberian Anarchist Federation (FAI), which was
composed of militant anarchist affinity groups within the National
Confederation of Labor (CNT), a confederation of anarcho-syndicalist
labor unions in Spain. During the 1936 Spanish Civil War, CNT-FAI
revolutionaries based primarily in the region of Catalonia rose up
against the Nationalists and agreed to an uneasy coalition with the
liberal Republicans and Soviet Union backed communist groups such as the
PCE. These groups went on to later betray the anarchists in a
counter-revolution which cost the coalition a total defeat to the
Nationalists in 1939. However, during that time the CNT-FAI and other
anarchist groups made considerable gains both to the war effort and in
building socialism. The CNT-FAI in areas it controlled were able to
achieve an approximately 75% rate of worker ownership and direct control
of businesses and firms, the highest of any region during the civil war.
Businesses were run by worker committees, and agrarian areas had the
land collectivized and shared between previously independent farmers who
organized into communes. The collectivization of farm land, and the
communal system to organize life in rural areas, resulted in harvests
that ranged from about 30% to 50% larger than before the civil war.
Reports also indicated that industrial production had nearly doubled
compared to before the civil war. These boons allowed for the CNT-FAI to
distribute goods in accordance with decentralized planning and according
to the communist principle of ‘from each according to their ability, to
each according to their need’. Additionally, in some places money was
able to be eliminated and replaced by a voucher system, while some areas
were able to outright abolish the use of any currency, which for a time
meant in those areas communism had effectively been achieved. Though it
is fair to note, such achievements did not apply everywhere under
CNT-FAI control, and the communism enjoyed by some at that time was an
outlier compared to the more prevalent anarchist socialism. The CNT-FAI
stands as arguably the most successful attempt at an anarchist
revolution in history.
Moving forward in time to 1994 is the Zapatista Army of National
Liberation (EZLN) often shortened to the Zapatistas. To begin with, it
is important to note that while the Zapatistas incorporate some
anarchist theory and praxis into their ideology and systems, the
Zapatistas do not wish to be labeled by outsiders, and instead only want
to be considered as following the thought and praxis of Neozapatismo.
Neozapatismo draws inspiration from many sources and defies being
labeled as anything other than Neozapatismo, and as such should have
that be respected. That being said, there are important lessons to learn
from their application of thought which was inspired by anarchism. The
Zapatistas occupy the majority of the Chiapas region in Mexico. The
Zapatista uprising began as a protest against the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which placed the Zapatistas in a de facto state
of war with the Mexican state. Since the uprising failed to spark a
further revolution against the Mexican state, in 2001 after many years
of armed conflict a peace agreement was brokered between the Zapatistas
and the Mexican state. The peace agreement has allowed the Zapatisatas
to focus more heavily on increasing autonomy and prosperity in the
region without having to fight an unfavorable war for independence. The
conflict has shown how anarchist means of organizing armed revolution,
and a decentralized means of governance are effective. The decentralized
and highly accountable nature of the Zapatistas’ armed forces has shown
that when organized in accordance with principles shared by anarchists
allow for much smaller forces to adequately defend themselves from
larger militaries which would seek to crush revolutions.
Going even further in time to 2012 brings one to the Autonomous
Administration of North and Eastern Syria (AANES), which is colloquially
referred to more commonly as Rojava, the region which first gained de
facto autonomy in 2012 due to the Syrian Civil War. The AANES is an
anarchist autonomous region operating under the ideological system of
democratic confederalism. It is important to note that democratic
confederalism is not strictly speaking fully anarchist, as it is based
on the ideology of communalism which synthesized marxism and anarchism.
However, the parts of democratic confederalism which don’t follow
anarchist ideology are part of its pre-revolutionary praxis, principally
its willingness to actively participate in elections prior to a
revolution. That being said, all of democratic confederalism’s stances
on revolutionary activities and how to organize society fall in line
with anarchist principles, as such the AANES is effectively operating as
an anarchist revolutionary society. The AANES is, at the time of
writing, involved in the ongoing Syrian Civil War. It gained de facto
autonomy in the region of Rojava in 2012. By 2014 it had expanded
considerably into other regions and its subdivisions known as cantons
all declared autonomy from the Syrian government. In 2016 the cantons
announced a formal autonomous federation. And in 2018 a new
administration for the federation was declared at which point it
received the new official name of the AANES (from 2012–2018 the
autonomous region underwent various changes in official names). At the
time of writing the Syrian Civil War is still being fought, and it is
unclear what will be the ultimate fate of the autonomous region.
However, in the midst of the turmoil engulfing the Middle East, the
AANES has stood out as a beacon of what might hopefully win out. The
AANES has made massive strides in implementing a system of direct and
semi-direct radical democracy, through a series of communes and councils
which federate to form cantons, which in turn federate with each other
to form the federation as a whole. The region due to the anarchist ideas
of democratic confederalism has been able to tackle many oppressive
hierarchies. Of particular importance to the AANES is ending sexism and
gender discrimination, the revitalization of the region’s ecosystems,
and ending ethnic tensions. The AANES has excelled at their goals
through systems of empowering localities through directly democratic
communes, as well as a system of rehabilitative and restorative justice.
With a population of over two million people at the time of writing, the
AANES is the largest currently existing anarchist society, and one of
the largest to ever exist. The AANES admittedly has fallen shorter in
terms of economic development in comparison to other anarchist
societies, though this is mostly intentional. The AANES in order to
address ethnic tensions and prevent infighting has decided to commit to
not expropriate or collectivize land or businesses except by voluntary
means, and incentivize voluntary collectivization through a series of
economic advantages given to those who choose to do so. So while the
AANES has moved at a slower pace to institute socialism and communism
than comparable anarchist societies, it is still making steady progress
towards that goal as more and more land and business owners voluntarily
hand property over to be collectivized. It has shown how effective
stateless decentralized militias and community defense committees are at
protecting anarchist societies from outside threats and internal crimes,
with the AANES being responsible for the vast majority of on-the-ground
fighting and victories against the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and
the Levant which had started its first offensives after declaring itself
a “Worldwide Caliphate” in 2014. Additionally, the AANES has resisted
military advances by the Syrian state, as well as the Turkish state,
much larger and better equipped forces which have found little success
against the AANES, further demonstrating how effective anarchist militia
tactics can be.
Finally, in 2020 during a new round of Black Lives Matter protests
against the United States’ police force and government, in parts of the
Capitol Hill neighborhood of the city Seattle, a self-proclaimed
autonomous zone was created. The autonomous area has been called
primarily the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), as well as Free
Capitol Hill, and the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest (CHOP). The CHAZ
lasted only a few weeks, and was largely ineffective at being truly
autonomous, but it presents something far greater. It is clear the
United States is nearing the final stages of complete decay and will
likely fall apart in the relatively near future, and it is the anarchist
organized CHAZ which is signalling to people within the core of the most
powerful imperialist state in history that anarchism is a viable
alternative. Following the implementation of the CHAZ several other
protesters around the United States attempted to form their own
autonomous zones to varying degrees of success. The CHAZ signaled that
anarchism can work and is a viable alternative to the brutal police
state of the United States. It demonstrates that as global capitalism is
falling apart, a better future is possible anywhere. It will be the
people themselves who will usher in that better future, rather than some
charismatic leader or politician or political party that wishes to
enforce some other form of oppressive hierarchy.
As seen in the brief overview of just some of the historical successes
of anarchism there are in fact a great many forms of anarchism and
anarchist inspired ideologies and movements. There are two broad
categories for anarchism, social anarchism which sees mutual aid and
more formal yet decentralized federations as the cornerstone of its
theory and praxis, and individualist anarchism which emphasizes
individual action and more informal and temporary methods of social
organization as the center of its theory and praxis. Federationism seeks
to unify schools of social anarchist thought, in order to reduce
infighting as well as provide a more cohesive ideological basis for
social anarchists which broadly agree on most things or who may find
picking between the different schools challenging due to various parts
of different schools appealing to them. Federationism believes in the
implementation of more formal though still flexible institutions. This
being due to informal institutions being more readily able to be abused
and taken advantage of to consolidate power, and as such formal rules
and limits must be placed upon institutions and positions of power so
that they can’t be abused. For example, the President of the United
States is a position not well defined, and has over the past few
centuries despite it originally being intended as the weakest branch of
the government has become by far the most powerful. With various
presidents throughout the history of the United States wielding near
dictatorial powers, and scholars referring to the modern era of the
presidency as “The Imperial Presidency” despite none of the formal
powers of the position having changed. It merely consolidated informal
powers as the position has very little in the way of formal
restrictions.
Federationism, while committed to formal institutions and systems to
prevent corruption and abuse of powers, firmly opposes inflexible
institutions and systems, as they violate the anarchist principle of
opposing involuntary hierarchies. People must be able to alter and
change institutions and systems that affect them in ways they do not
like, and it must be relatively easy to do so assuming popular support
for the changes. Federationism therefore supports flexible formal
institutions specifically, as any worthwhile ideology must be flexible
to changing or unpredicted conditions, and be capable of implementing a
diversity of tactics in order to achieve its goals.
There are two main alternatives that one might consider in comparison to
federationism, those being marxism and individualist anarchism. Marxism
is a staple among leftist thought, and influences a variety of schools
of thought including anarchism to a degree, as well as has its own
multitude of different schools of thought. Individualist anarchism as
previously gone over is a different branch of anarchist thought than
social anarchism, and contains a vast amount of diversity in thought and
praxis.
Marxism has a long history, and arose to be the most prominent form of
leftist thought in the early 20^(th) century. However, there is a
particular flaw which makes marxism a non-viable method of seeking
liberation, that being its insistence on the use of a “transitive
state”. Marxism conceives of history as a series of developments that
occur through a process of dialectics, which are the contradictions in
the material realities of society. When the contradictions grow large
enough social change occurs through a synthesis of ideas to replace the
old system. Marxism then points to events in history in which the
changing from one hegemonic system to the other had transitional phases.
Marxism conceives of the transitional phase from capitalism to socialism
as requiring a “transitive state”, wherein there will be a ‘weak’ state
apparatus led by the working class which will slowly dissolve itself
over time as the transition to socialism makes more progress. This
conception is however wrong, while anarchists agree that a transitional
phase is necessary, the use of a transitive state not only jeopardizes
the achievement of socialism but actively obstructs it. As has been gone
over previously, the state apparatus is only capable of reinforcing its
powers. This is why in every marxist revolutionary attempt in which a
transitive state has been achieved, the so-called transitive state
became a permanent fixture, and took on more and more power rather than
relinquishing it.
The states which attempted a marxist version of the transitive phase
include but are not limited to: the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
the People’s Republic of China, the Democratic People’s Republic of
Korea, and the Republic of Cuba. All of the states which have attempted
to transition to socialism have instead only consolidated state power
and over time moved increasingly closer back towards capitalism, as the
corrupting power of the state dictates.
There are those which defend some or all of these states, claiming that
the state is necessary for defense from outside invasion and internal
subversion, and as such socialism cannot be achieved until a critical
mass of countries around the world have also had a revolution. Such an
assertion is incorrect however, as gone over in the section on the
historical successes of anarchism. Stateless anarchist societies have
shown to be completely capable of waging war, defending territory, and
warding off reactionaries just as well as any system which utilizes a
state. Stateless societies have also consistently made more progression
towards socialist and communist economies than those with states.
It then follows that the dialectical conversation Marx started on the
state actually needs to be continued further. It is clear from a
materialist analysis of history that the most likely way in which to
achieve socialism and communism will need to be through a stateless
transitional phase. Thus the only way to achieve a successful revolution
will be through methods outlined by anarchists, through a rejection of
the state, centralization, and oppressive hierarchy generally.
Further, marxism places too much emphasis on a purely economic analysis
of society. There is nothing particularly wrong with the analysis
itself, however the focus of the ideology is almost purely economic. The
marxist analysis neglects the various other oppressive aspects of
society if they aren’t tied to economics, oppression of women and queer
gendered people, oppression of different races and ethnic groups,
oppression of minority sexualities, and so on. With so many forms of
oppression which do not directly relate to economics they cannot be
fully addressed by an ideology based around economics. Only through a
holistic anarchist analysis of hierarchy and oppression can these issues
be adequately faced and addressed.
Individualist anarchism is the counterpart to social anarchism, while
not opposites the two branches have significant differences.
Individualist anarchism emphasizes individuals and their ability to
exercise their wills over external entities and constructs, such as
traditions, groups, ideology, and society in general. The praxis of
individualist anarchists either falls in line with that of social
anarchism due to that being the desire of those particular individuals,
or focuses on actions that individuals can take on their own. The reason
why individualist anarchism is not a viable path towards revolution is
that revolutions inherently require a large amount of people organizing
together, which is clearly at odds with a focus on individual actions.
In contrast to marxism, individualist anarchism frequently takes on the
character of not focusing enough on economics. While this is far from
true of all forms of individualist anarchism, it is the case that
various schools of thought within it do not have a solid anti-capitalist
foundation. Particularly of note in this regard is mutualism, which
posits that the problem with capitalism is the existence of bosses. That
is neglecting that capitalism and market economies more generally are
predicated on the impossible notion of infinite growth due to the need
for producers to get some sort of a profit. Such issues cannot be
resolved by the individualistic oriented reforms that are proposed by
these schools of thought.
Further, some individualist anarchists in this vein even reject the idea
of revolution, and instead propose what they call insurrection instead.
Insurrection being the idea that an undermining of hierarchies can be
achieved by enough individuals refusing to participate under them. This
idea being woefully unfounded, as in the history of movements for social
change, individual action has never brought about significant change. It
further ignores that one of the primary purposes of the state is to use
violence to force participation to the systems it enforces.
Individualist anarchism does provide a valuable ideological foil to
social anarchism, and pushing it to consider things from different
points of view. However, it ultimately is unable to bring about change
through its individual oriented praxis, its general aversion to
organization, and rejection of more formalized institutions causes it to
fall short.
Federationism is an intrinsically intersectional ideology. It
recognizes, incorporates, and synthesizes different theories and
movements in order to truly address all oppressions, and to end them
all. As such, these are the pillars of federationism, and what are at
the heart of its mission of liberation.
Anarchism is fundamental to federationism, the total abolition of
oppressive hierarchies is the only path towards true liberation for all
peoples. Core to social anarchism is the principles of mutual aid and
decentralized federations.
Mutual aid is a voluntary and reciprocal exchange of resources and
services for the mutual benefit of all parties involved, without concern
for profiting over the other parties.
Decentralized federations are a stateless model for administration which
are based upon a voluntary federation of local communities, which in
turn have those federations voluntarily federate with other such
federations, and so on and so forth. In decentralized federations powers
are concentrated at the very bottom in the local direct democracies
which make nearly all decisions. If an issue arises that requires the
cooperation of more than what localities are equipped to deal with it is
handled based on the principle of subsidiarity.
Subsidiarity being the principle that with the consent of lower levels
of administration, higher levels of administration may act to address an
issue, this being necessary due to the nature of the issue requiring the
pooled resources from more than just one locality to handle. With the
goal to flatten hierarchies as much as possible so as to prevent the
concentration of powers away from the direct democracies of the people.
Social anarchism offers a way in and of itself to escape the
hierarchical mindsets which enforce oppression in one’s life, and offers
a viable alternative administration to the state, which is infinitely
scalable and can completely replace the use of the state and oppressive
hierarchies.
Communism is the ultimate form of anti-capitalist and anti-hierarchical
economic systems. It ensures a fair distribution of goods and services
based on what people actually need, rather than what is profitable for a
handful of parasitic individuals. It creates a sustainable economic
system, which does not alienate laborers. Communism rejects hierarchical
organization, and exists to liberate people from the drudgery of working
for the benefit of someone else who does not care for them in the least.
Federationism therefore embraces communism as it provides the ultimate
economic framework for the economic liberation of all people.
Syndicalism is an ideology which seeks to create a decentralized
federation of unions called syndicates, based upon which industry each
union belongs to, and use this system as a basis for the decentralized
planning and allocation of resources. Federationism includes this
ideology as it allows for the faster enabling of socialism and then
communism, as was shown by the CNT-FAI in Revolutionary Catalonia.
However, federationism advocates for a supplemented version of
syndicalism, which includes participatory decision making. Participatory
decision making would allow for individuals, groups, and communities
with a stake in the outcome of the decision to be a part of the process
of decentralized planning, allowing them to voice their interests and
ensure that the planning is able to accommodate their needs.
As such syndicalism should be used as the system to bring together
people in their capacity as workers, in order to better enable the
development of communism. By including syndicalism in the system
federationism proposes, it becomes possible to fully and properly
address economic oppression. Syndicalism being used to synthesize with
anarchism and communism, addresses the issues of overemphasizing
economic oppression to the detriment of other aspects of oppression, and
underemphasizing economic oppression which prevents addressing the vast
wealth disparities in society.
Social Ecology is the study of the interdependence between people,
groups, their environment, and the institutions in their societies.
Social Ecology provides a holistic approach to the environmental issues
which face humanity, while connecting them to humanity’s understanding
of their environment, their institutions, and interpersonal
interactions. It posits that the domination and destruction of nature by
humans is in fact the result of the domination and destruction of humans
by other humans, and that the only way to solve environmental issues is
to solve the issues of domination between humans.
Social Ecology reimagines the environmental destruction that humanity
has brought upon the world and itself as another form of a social
problem. Through unification and mutual aid between people humanity will
be able to address ecological problems and reverse the damage that has
been brought upon nature. For nature is not a separate being from
humanity, and is certainly not its opposite, rather it is one
interconnected whole.
Formalized institutions are utilized by federationism because they
provide clear outlines of what institutions are and what they have the
ability to do. In this way anyone can understand any administrative or
organizational institution they encounter. Additionally, no person can
claim powers that they do not have, and were not given to them by the
community, this prevents the concentration and abuse of power.
As previously stated just because institutions should be formal, does
not imply they should be inflexible. Institutions must also be flexible
to adapt to changes in situation and to the desires and needs of the
community, provided that there is enough support from the community and
it is not the will of those who have ambition for more power.
The principle of prepared revolution is something unique to
federationism. Simply stated, the theory is as such that the goal of
pre-revolutionary organization is to create the conditions for which at
any time the population can rise up in revolution and have immediately
in place the core systems of that new revolutionary system. This comes
from the idea that a revolution is by definition not just a change or
transfer of political (and sometimes socioeconomic) power or control,
but a radical transformation of the whole society and its systems.
What this would entail is the drafting of a simple set of universal
rules for the population which would clearly set the tone for liberation
of the people, basic provisions for the day to day maintenance of a
society, as well as provisions for the sort of governmental system
people would be using under the revolutionary society that we wish to
establish. These rules would then be immediately in place upon a popular
revolution, making clear revolutionary intentions, providing a sense of
direction, and immediately setting the foundations of the revolutionary
society which we shall create.
The reasoning for this is two fold. First, by coming to a consensus of
such things before the revolution it will dramatically reduce any
possible infighting on such topics, allowing focus on further securing
the revolution. Second, is the fact that throughout history the tone for
the outcome of an uprising is set by the means by which the movement
conducts itself during the struggle. The Continental Congress of the
fledgling United States, while not an entirely efficient body, did lay
down the foundations for the sort of oligarchic republic that the United
States would become. Conversely, there are dozens if not hundreds or
thousands of examples of revolutionaries with large promises, some of
which may have meant to keep them, but during the struggle to assert the
revolution ruled by a de facto “might makes right” mentality.
Subsequently those societies once secure in their position were left
with a system in which the ideals of liberation were not upheld. Instead
those strong men continued to govern in the same fashion as they had
fought the enemy, in turn meaning their revolutions had failed in their
mission as soon as they had begun.
There are four foundational elements of a prepared revolution that
federationism proposes as absolutely necessary for any revolutionary
attempt. First, is creating directly democratic communes, comprising up
to about 150 households. These communes will be able to set their own
additional rules that don’t conflict with the universal rules, and will
handle the general affairs of the community.
Second, is creating local assemblies which represent the communes of an
area such as in a town, city, or rural area. These assemblies will be
composed of recallable delegates to discuss issues facing the area,
however assemblies will lack the ability to make any decisions or
actions without the direct democratic consent or ratification of the
people in the communes. Each commune will send three delegates, one
woman, one man, and either someone who is either transgender or
non-binary if possible, or the position will alternate each term between
being held by a woman or man. Delegates may not serve consecutive terms,
and the terms will last for no more than three months in order to
encourage full community participation. Additionally, federations of
these assemblies will be created which will form into larger and larger
assemblies until all communities are represented in a general assembly,
with each assembly receiving three delegates from each constituent area
it represents using the same system as communes sending delegates to
local assemblies.
Third, is creating worker syndicates which will have parallel levels to
the assemblies. Syndicates will be divided based on the different
industries, and will consist of councils to coordinate the economy
within industries and specific professions. The various levels of
syndicates will work with their corresponding assemblies in order to
address the needs of the communities they serve.
Fourth, is the creation of councils which will focus on specific groups
and tasks that will assist in the dismantling of oppressive hierarchies,
there will be parallel councils to each level of assembly. These
councils will be the Defense Council for community defense through
teaching all willing and able community members community defense, self
defense, and de-escalation techniques. The Ecological Council which will
manage and restore local ecosystems. The Education Council which will
manage the education of students. The Health Council for providing
medical care and education. The Labor Council which will help coordinate
the economy of the assembly region between industries. The Peace and
Justice Council for resolving disputes in a restorative and
rehabilitative manner. The Disability Equality Council which will work
towards the empowerment of disabled people and creating full
accommodations for disabled people. The Gender Equality Council which
will work towards empowering women, transgender, and non-binary people
and creating equality between all genders. The Racial Equality and
Reconciliation Council which will work towards empowering people of
color and ending the legacies of racism and colonialism through
reconciliation. The Queer Equality Council which shall work towards
empowering queer people and creating equality between queer and
non-queer people. The Youth Council for organizing and amplifying the
voices of young adults. And the Elder Council for organizing and
amplifying the voices of elderly adults.
The issue of praxis has been hotly contested within leftist circles
since the very beginning. Opinions range from reformist to
revolutionary, from a scattershot method to an intensely focused
application of resources, from working in groups to acting on one’s own.
Federationism takes the stance that praxis must be fully revolutionary
in intention, is best done in groups, and should focus on a triad of
tactics.
The first tactic is community outreach. No revolution can truly take
place without the mass support of the people. As such federationists
should strive to endear themselves to the community, by providing
tangible help and resources. This tactic was utilized to great effect by
the Black Panther Party in the United States, and by democratic
confederalists in Rojava. By providing communities with resources
outside of the parameters of the state, communities will become more
self-reliant. It also makes communities more interested in listening to
the ideas of federationism. Examples would be the creation of a free
breakfast program for children, creating a community garden to reduce
the amount spent of food by the community, checking simple things on
motor vehicles to avoid expensive breakdowns or traffic tickets, holding
community meetings, and so on.
The second tactic is building dual power. Dual power is the creation of
institutions which operate outside of capitalism, the state, or both.
Examples of this would be the creation of cooperatively run businesses
focused on providing for the community, radicalizing trade unions,
community crime watch, and even creating community assemblies to address
matters that the local government does not. This allows for the
undermining of the state, and the education of communities on directly
democractic systems, mutual aid, and the lack of necessity of the state.
The third and final tactic is demonstrations, strikes, and protests to
undermine the state both physically and in the minds of the populace.
Reforms that come through elected officials will have the opposite
effect and instead only reinforce the power and imagined legitimacy of
the state. However, immediate gains and concessions which improve the
conditions for the people are important. Making conditions worse, or
just letting the conditions flow without making them worse or better are
both not viable paths as they limit the revolutionary abilities and
potential of the populace due to the populace needing to spend more
energy on basic survival and less on being able to organize against
oppressive hierarchies. So instead of reformism or ignoring the present
conditions, federationsits must instead focus on direct action and
organizing demonstrations, strikes, and so forth in order to force the
state to hand over concessions. This will serve the purpose of both
improving immediate conditions to aid in furthering the goals of the
movement, as well as demonstrate that there are viable alternatives to
electoralism in order to achieve social progress.
The liberal conception of rights acts as a form of concession to the
people in order to reduce resistance to the state, and following the
western tradition replaced the “divine right of kings” in order to lend
legitimacy to the state. So long as people’s rights are respected that
they have no grounds on which to replace the government or state except
through systems which the state has rigged to maintain its power. Rights
under liberalism are solely protective from the actions of others, which
contribute to the atomization of individuals as not connected to others.
However, rights as an abstracted concept of what individuals and groups
are entitled to are not inherently harmful. Federationism posits a
different theory of rights, rights are those which individuals and
groups are entitled to as they promote and facilitate the participation
of individuals and groups within society and making decisions, to the
full form and scope that those individuals and groups wish to
participate. These rights are both protective and empowering.
Rights for federationists are not used as they are in liberalism, where
they are virtual replacement for the “divine right of kings” to rule.
Rather they are an understanding of what constitutes creating a fair and
just society, as well as what gives people dignity. As such it is
important to note that the rights of individuals supersede the interests
of any administrative body, and further that it is the duty of all
people and all administrative bodies to prevent and stop the violations
of the rights of individuals by any other person or administrative body.
As such the non-comprehensive list of rights which federationism
recognizes as universally applicable is:
self
culture, religious beliefs, national origin, sex, sexual orientation,
gender, disability, or voluntary relationship status
three future generations
available
will of the people by any means necessary, except in the case of the
administration enforcing rights
So often when speaking of liberation, one thinks of scrappy young
revolutionaries taking up arms, fighting jackbooted soldiers, and
overthrowing the evil empire. However, that is just one form of
liberation, and often is to the detriment of considering the ways in
which individuals perpetuate oppression in their own lives. One of the
most omnipresent ways in which this sort of oppression rears its head is
in the form of gender discrimination. As Abdullah Öcalan stated, women
were the first colony. Domination on the basis of gender is a near
constant across cultures, with women receiving the majority of this
oppression, oftentimes denied personhood altogether. Those with queer
genders as well have been the victim of this oppression, rejected on all
fronts as not even people. This has carried over into the modern day,
while women are generally given equal theoretical status as men, this is
rarely the case in practice. In practice men will have ingrained the
subliminal lessons passed down to them by a male dominated society, that
all other genders are lesser and ought to be subservient to them, that
others are nothing but objects for their control. This sort of thinking
must be stamped out, just as much as any tyrannical government or evil
empire.
Federationists must remove their preconceived notions of gender, and
adjust their own thinkings and actions to allow for true liberation of
gender. The toppling of the patriarchy is as much a revolutionary and
necessary act as toppling the dictator. Emma Goldman wrote “true
emancipation begins neither at the polls nor in courts. It begins in
women’s souls”. Oppression cannot be overcome simply through symbolic
victories. Only through the concerted efforts of those dedicated to
emancipation is liberation possible. Liberation must come from education
and rectification in attitudes and beliefs, just as much if not more
than from the replacing of governments.
The oppression of people based on race and ethnicity is one that goes
back to the early days of humanity. Racism is a tool of division, to
attribute falsehoods and lies to those whose skin or face look different
than one’s own. It is a tool to keep people angry with each other rather
than their mutual oppressors, focusing on superficial differences rather
than shared injustices. Historically, this can come together with the
idea of colorism, which is the oppression of others in proportion to how
dark their skin is, the darker one’s skin the more oppression they are
subjected to. Darker skin becomes associated with the hard labor forced
upon people, and soon they are liken to animals. Darker skin becomes
associated with the lack of education, of which they were denied, and
then are likened to barbarians. And so on and so forth, oppressors
plundered a wealth of experiences and lessons, turning them into
material wealth through subjugation, division, and lies of races and
ethnicities they have deemed for their own purposes to be inferior.
Federationists must come through against the attitudes taught to them by
an oppressive society, and unite with those who are different from
them.It is imperative to learn from and accept the differences of
others, and grow with them. Not merely imagine that there is no
difference between people, but embrace that diversity as a strength. As
said by Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin “[the Black Liberation movement] must
ultimately unite its forces with similar movements like Gays, Women,
radical workers and others who are in revolt against the system. For
example, in the late 1960s the Black Liberation movement acted as a
catalyst to spread revolutionary ideas and images, which brought forth
the various opposition movements we see today”. It is not enough to
merely topple the tyrant, and release only the women from their
drudgery, it is just as important to set free every race and ethnicity.
Queer people are those who do not fall into the neat artificial boxes of
society, those who are not born into either sex, those who do not love
in the same way as most people, those who love different people than
most others of their gender, those who are not the gender they were
assigned by society, and any combination of those things. To be queer is
to be different that the expectations of society. And throughout history
queer people have been discriminated against for that difference, for
going against the values of their society, for defying the roles of
their society, for refusing to conform to what they “ought” to be, and
so on and so forth. This once again is a form of oppressive hierarchy
that must be opposed, the oppression of queer people is inherently
rooted in the attempt to violently maintain power structures. Everyone
must be in their place as determined by those in power, or they become a
threat to their control.
Federationists must accept that there is no single type or small set of
people. The expression of the human experience cannot be contained to
rigid boundaries of what those who are in power feel is normal. As
simply put by J. Rogue “[t]here is a significant amount of coercion
employed by these institutions to police human experiences, which
applies to everyone, trans and non-trans alike”. Humanity must be
allowed to exist as it is, not as one should expect it should, if one is
not free to express their very personhood then the act of removing the
despot, smashing the patriarchy, and emancipating all races, will have
been for not.
Colonization was one of the great evils that formed the basis of modern
society. Across the globe there are hundreds of countries, and tens of
thousands of groups of peoples who even centuries after the colonization
of their homes, ways of living, ecosystems, and so much more had
supposedly taken place, are still subjected to the reverberations of the
centuries of brutal theft. Colonialism was the act of powerful countries
using violence and coercion to extract from around the world resources
and people, and use them as tools to enrich themselves. These actions
have not ended but have merely taken on different forms known as
neocolonialism, as well as gained something new, denial. The descendants
of colonizers deny their history, and the histories of those they
robbed. They continue their conquests by other names, while denying they
ever did it to begin with, making their lies on stolen land in buildings
made of stolen resources.
Federationists set about to rectify these conditions, it is not merely
enough to oppose the oppression that you may yourself not face, true
liberation comes through taking on the struggles of others and making
them your own as well. Decolonization does not take the form of
colonizing the colonizers, but through education and reconciliation,
ending the way in which peoples around the globe are still subjected to
the legacy of colonialism and boot of neocolonialism. It is not enough
to merely be an ally to those who seek decolonization, one must become
an accomplice, as stated by the group Indigenous Action “[t]he risks of
an ally who provides support or solidarity (usually on a temporary
basis) in a fight are much different than that of an accomplice. When we
fight back or forward, together, becoming complicit in a struggle
towards liberation”. Decolonization is the uniting of colonized peoples
and their former colonizers turned accomplices, restoration of the land,
respecting self determination and sovereignty, and growing together as a
united people. Decolonization and reconciliation is just as important as
any other form of overthrowing oppression, without it the actions to
oust authoritarians, raise all genders to an equal status, crush racism,
and embrace queerness, will have not been enough to ensure a truly
liberated society.
All across the world, people are crying out. People are demanding
freedom, not just escape from one oppressor to be swapped in with
another, but true liberation. Every single voice is calling out to end
the suffering under the yoke of capitalism, the jackboots of the state,
the drudgery of sexism, the bondage of racism, the hate of queerphobia,
the erasure of colonialism, and all the denials of decency and justice.
The oppressed of the world must rise up, together as one community.
It is time to do away walls and barriers, with hate, with greed, and
with intolerance. You the people have the power to make a better world.
A better world is possible when we unite not in spite of our differences
but because of them. A better world is within our grasp.
A BETTER WORLD WILL COME WHEN WE LIBERATE OURSELVES!!!