💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › errico-malatesta-pro-government-anarchists.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 09:42:52. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Pro-Government Anarchists
Author: Errico Malatesta
Date: April 1916
Language: en
Topics: anti-militarism, anti-war, critique, war, the state
Source: Freedom (London) 30, no. 324 (April 1916). http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/malatesta/ForgottenPrinciples.html

Errico Malatesta

Pro-Government Anarchists

A manifesto has just appeared, signed by Kropotkin, Grave, Malato, and a

dozen other old comrades, in which, echoing the supporters of the

Entente Governments who are demanding a fight to a finish and the

crushing of Germany, they take their stand against any idea of

“premature peace.”

The capitalist Press publishes, with natural satisfaction, extracts from

the manifesto, and announces it as the work of “leaders of the

International Anarchist Movement.”

Anarchists, almost all of whom have remained faithful to their

convictions, owe it to themselves to protest against this attempt to

implicate Anarchism in the continuance of a ferocious slaughter that has

never held promise of any benefit to the cause of Justice and Liberty,

and which now shows itself to be absolutely barren and resultless even

from the standpoint of the rulers on either side.

The good faith and good intentions of those who have signed the

manifesto are beyond all question. But, however painful it may be to

disagree with old friends who have rendered so many services to that

which in the past was our common cause, one cannot—having regard to

sincerity, and in the interest of our movement for emancipation—fail to

dissociate oneself from comrades who consider themselves able to

reconcile Anarchist ideas and co-operation with the Governments and

capitalist classes of certain countries in their strife against the

capitalists and Governments of certain other countries.

During the present war we have seen Republicans placing themselves at

the service of kings, Socialists making common the cause with the ruling

class, Labourists serving the interests of capitalists; but in reality

all these people are, in varying degrees, Conservatives—believers in the

mission of the State, and their hesitation can be understood when the

only remedy lay in the destruction of every Governmental chain and the

unloosing of the Social Revolution. But such hesitation is

incomprehensible in the case of Anarchists.

We hold that the State is incapable of good. In the field of

international as well as of individual relations it can only combat

aggression by making itself the aggressor; it can only hinder crime by

organising and committing still greater crime.

Even on the supposition—which is far from being the truth—that Germany

alone was responsible for the present war, it is proved that, as long as

governmental methods are adhered to, Germany can only be resisted by

suppressing all liberty and reviving the power of all the forces of

reaction. Except the popular Revolution, there is no other way of

resisting the menace of a disciplined Army but to try and have a

stronger and more disciplined Army; so that the sternest

anti-militarists, if they are not Anarchists, and if they are afraid of

the destruction of the State, are inevitably led to become ardent

militarists.

In fact, in the problematical hope of crushing Prussian Militarism, they

have renounced all the spirit and all the traditions of Liberty; they

have Prussianised England and France; they have submitted themselves to

Tsarism; they have restored the prestige of the tottering throne of

Italy.

Can Anarchists accept this state of things for a single moment without

renouncing all right to call themselves Anarchists? To me, even foreign

domination suffered by force and leading to revolt, is preferable to

domestic oppression meekly, almost gratefully, accepted, in the belief

that by this means we are preserved from a greater evil.

It is useless to say that this is a question of an exceptional time, and

that after having contributed to the victory of the Entente in “this

war,” we shall return, each into his own camp, to the struggle for his

own ideal.

If it is necessary to-day to work in harmony with the Government and the

capitalist to defend ourselves against “the German menace,” it will be

necessary afterwards, as well as during the war.

However great may be the defeat of the German Army—if it is true that it

will be defeated—it will never be possible to prevent the German

patriots thinking of, and preparing for, revenge; and the patriots of

the other countries, very reasonably from their own point of view, will

want to hold themselves in readiness so that they may not again be taken

unaware. This means that Prussian Militarism will become a permanent and

regular institution in all countries.

What will then be said by the self-styled Anarchists who to-day desire

the victory of one of the warring alliances? Will they go on calling

themselves anti-militarists and preaching disarmament, refusal to do

military service, and sabotage against National Defense, only to become,

at the first threat of war, recruiting-sergeants for those Governments

that they have attempted to disarm and paralyse?

It will be said that these things will come to an end when the German

people have rid themselves of their tyrants and ceased to be a menace to

Europe by destroying militarism in their own country. But, if that is

the case, the Germans who think, and rightfully so, that English and

French domination (to say nothing of Tsarist Russia) would be so more

delightful to the Germans than German domination to the French and

English, will desire first to wait for the Russians and the others to

destroy their own militarism, and will meanwhile continue to increase

their own country’s Army.

And then, how long will the Revolution be delayed? How long Anarchy?

Must we always wait for the others to begin?

The line of conduct for Anarchists is clearly marked out by the very

logic of their aspirations.

The war ought to have been prevented by bringing about the Revolution,

or at least by making the Government afraid of the Revolution. Either

the strength or the skill necessary for this has been lacking.

Peace ought to be imposed by bringing about the Revolution, or at least

by threatening to do so. To the present time, the strength or the skill

is wanting.

Well! There is only one remedy: to do better in future. More than ever

we must avoid compromise; deepen the chasm between capitalists and wage

slaves, between rulers and ruled; preach expropriation of private

property and the destruction of States as the only means of guaranteeing

fraternity between the peoples and Justice and Liberty for all; and we

must prepare to accomplish these things.

Meanwhile it seems to me that it is criminal to do anything that tends

to prolong the war, that slaughters men, destroys wealth, and hinders

all resumption of the struggle for emancipation. It appears to me that

preaching “war to the end” is really playing the game of the German

rulers, who are deceiving their subjects and inflaming their ardor for

fighting by persuading them that their opponents desire to crush and

enslave the German people.

To-day, as ever, let this be our slogan: Down with Capitalists and

Governments, all Capitalists and Governments!

Long live the peoples, all the peoples!