💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anarqxista-goldman-post-anarchist-emancipation.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:04:48. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

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

Title: Post-Anarchist Emancipation
Author: Anarqxista Goldman
Date: 04/22/2022
Language: en
Topics: post-anarchism, egoism, emancipation,
Source: Retrieved on 10/06/2022 from https://archive.org/details/post-anarchist-emancipation

Anarqxista Goldman

Post-Anarchist Emancipation

Imagine society as a giant open air prison. You shouldn’t find it very

hard to do in a capitalist world that’s been artificially chopped up

into arbitrary territories called “countries” whose borders we may not

legally cross without appropriately administered documentation which

identifies and tracks each one of us. These countries are more than

likely also sub-divided down into states, counties, cities or towns,

each with their own bureaucracies of control. Going even more

microscopic still, many people will work for employers who maintain

their own little kingdoms which observe how much work you do or don’t do

and order and control your movements according to their economic

dictates and advantages. Yes, society, especially in the most

capitalist-controlled parts of it, is a giant open air prison that has

police both official, with badges and probably guns and other weaponry,

and not so official. Society functions based on authority and doing as

you’re told. But more than this, if that wasn’t bad enough, it functions

as a tightly knit system that doesn’t enable you to function in any

other way but by taking part in it. One requires money to buy things,

one must adhere to an idea of property as possession that is ultimately

guaranteed by the force of government, one must accept living in a

society that has been imposed upon you and for which your approval or

agreement was never even sought.

There is more to it than this, of course, but this prison that I am

talking about I often refer to in shorthand as “authoritarian

capitalism”. The term is the confluence of two ideas; the first idea is

that of authoritarianism, primarily a political concept, the idea that

political leaders rule based on an authority they imagine to have, or to

have gained, perhaps by some political process by which they justify it

but perhaps not; the second is capitalism itself, an exploitative

economic set of relationships by which resources are exploited and

coerced for private profit and a few rich are inevitably created to the

detriment of the mass who are also exploited and coerced to create the

wealth of this few. Inevitably the rich few and the politically

authoritative flow together, their interests aligned, and then you have

the reason behind the giant open air prison we are all in because you

best believe that the rich and the powerful don’t want to give such

advantages up [regardless of what happens to you].

Some have noted however, as I have increasingly myself been made aware

of as I learned of the ideas of these people, that this “giant open air

prison” actually relies on the cooperation of the mass to keep it going.

The rich and powerful, after all, are relatively few, tiny even, in

comparison to that mass. Even if you add in their police [for they are

surely not ours or about real public service], they are still a drop in

the ocean compared to that mass. Why, if that mass ever for even a

single second realised the power they had in their united action — let

alone acted upon that power and realisation — then the myth of leaders,

of a powerful few, and of their control, would disappear so quickly that

one would wonder how it could ever have taken hold in the first place.

But how did it take hold in the first place? People, over centuries,

came to accept ideas that were injurious to their interests, they were

lulled into social, political and economic formations which became

viewed as “normal” and which they lazily accepted until they found

themselves trapped. The prison had been built around them and now they

found themselves in it, propagandised into its necessity minute by

minute. No way out. Caged.

As I muse on this metaphor of the prison [which is a material fact of

human relationships nevertheless], it occurs to me it can be fleshed out

somewhat. It is not hard to work out who the warden is or who the guards

are. But what about the prisoners? There are several kinds. There are

those who never think about their situation in the prison and just

accept things and get on with the life that’s been assigned to them.

There are those prisoners who try to get on with the guards and do the

best they can, maybe to their advantage, maybe just to “make the best”

of it. There are those who resent being in prison but don’t really ever

do much about it except occasionally grumble or have a generally grumpy

attitude to their prison life. But then there are the more passionate

and extreme. There are the willing collaborators who get friendly with

the guards, hope to be friends with the warden and willingly inform for

both to enforce the prison regime even among the relationships of the

prisoners themselves. Who knows why they do it? Perhaps they hope for

personal salvation or special favours. Perhaps they are just naturally

vindictive or spineless. Perhaps they don’t know any better and have not

the imagination for anything else. But in this prison there are also the

rebels, the insurrectionists, the people who, seeing themselves in

prison, want to get out. And they make plans to get out. They try to get

out. They can imagine life beyond prison walls and views that are not

framed by prison bars. All these kinds of people and more can be found

in the prison and all these kinds of people [bar one or two] keep that

prison ecosystem going for, of course, if they all just rioted then many

of them would probably escape and the prison would be left a burning

ruin, the warden and his guards decimated. [Which, of course, is also

part of the prison propaganda: if you destroy the prison you’ll be on

your own with nothing! You need us and you need the prison!]

The prison, of course, is the prison of authoritarian capitalism and

many are those within it who apparently see it as so inevitable that

they keep turning up to work in jobs they hate and which help to destroy

this planet, and propagate human misery, a little more each day. They

are the ones who keep authoritarian capitalism going by their obedience,

freely given or coerced doesn’t really matter. If you acquiesce to the

prison guards and their threats of violence [authoritarian capitalism

is, of course, inherently and naturally violent] that’s all they really

care about. We could even say, then, that this prison is both

self-inflicted in its acceptance and self-maintained in the obedience of

those who keep showing up for work. Such, at least, is the theory of

those who, in the past, have talked about “voluntary servitude”. Such

voluntary servitude is not only bad for you of course, in that you

simply give your obedience away, but it is also bad for everybody else

for the more who simply obey, the harder it is for anyone else to

disobey — since they will stand alone. This is exactly what the warden

and the guards want, naturally enough, for isolated refuseniks can

easily be dealt with one by one. The more obedient and subservient the

mass are, the harder it is for anyone to revolt at all. If you’ve seen

any shallow Hollywood film about a rag tag band of rebel heroes you

already know this, right? [And remember, real life ISN’T Hollywood: “the

good guys” — whatever that actually means — don’t inevitably win or

necessarily even win at all.]

The post-anarchist take on all this, coming after an interpretation of

Max Stirner’s idea of “The Unique” and aligned with the core values of

anarchism which eschews [and has always eschewed] the legitimacy of

states and their laws, is that we should not give authoritarian

capitalism our servitude, voluntarily or otherwise, at all. Finding

ourselves in the prison, anarchists should be at the forefront of those

who rebel, make plans, and fully intend to break out, instigating an

insurrection against the guards and the warden as they do. They value

their autonomy and agency almost as the founding ideas of their very

beings and they despise the very idea that they should be living

incarcerated lives of “do as you are told” in forced associations they

have no control over. Rather than inflicting incarceration on themselves

by their voluntary servitude, they insist on forming relationships of

free association in an emancipated outside. This, in fact, is the point

they think every other prisoner has to reach — intellectually, socially,

morally, politically — a point of no return in which only their

emancipation from the prison, only freedom beyond its walls, will ever

do. To get there these people realise they will have to embrace the

illegal, the insurrectionary, the point of a deliberate and purposeful

disrespect for all authority, the very rejection of it as an idea in

itself. They must become those who invent and nurture a habit of civil

and political disobedience all the better to make obedience increasingly

impossible. They must become enthusiastic bandits and willing vagabonds,

saboteurs of the prison system that seeks to keep all within it.

They do this largely from themselves for this is a matter of

self-education, self-actualisation, self-realisation. They do it because

they must, because that “point of no return” is reached as they observe

the conditions under which they are coerced to exist and egoistically

reject them. Yet they also know that, rebelling against the prison

conditions into which they, and everybody else, have been forced, it

will surely benefit more than merely them if the cell doors are opened,

the guards defeated and the walls breached. They welcome this but it

isn’t their motivation. If one must be free, if one must be emancipated

from forced and arbitrary conditions which oppress, exploit and coerce,

then one must be free regardless of if anyone else feels the same way

too. One finds associates and accomplices where one can but one does not

rely on them. One is also concerned not to find false friends, fake

allies and straight up collaborators for the status quo [which will

always be many]. One knows that one must primarily rely on oneself and

that real accomplices will only emerge as they themselves demonstrate

that they too are powered by the eternal flame of emancipation which

serves as fuel for a never-ending rebellion against every authoritarian,

whatever they call themselves and wherever they might be found. Such

people are those who work to banish the very concept of “servitude” from

their vocabulary, replacing it with passion for freedom and love for

those who love it just as much as they do. They want accomplices and

they want lovers in the fight for personal autonomy and free association

but they let these things come to them and they don’t force them.

Anarchy is what happens when you go about your business uncoerced, they

reflect, and so they go about their business which is sabotaging the

prison’s regular functioning and hatching their escape plan to get, and

remain, outside its walls.

Leaving the metaphor behind, what does this mean? It means ACTUALLY

EXITING CAPITALISM if we say we are anarchists. It means an end to

excuses for why we must keep turning up to work. It means if anarchists

won’t show the way to anarchy THEN WHO WILL? It means BEING ILLEGAL if

that’s what we must be. It means BEING AN INSURRECTION, moral, social,

political, economic, intellectual. It means FORGING NEW RELATIONSHIPS

that aren’t merely reproductions of the authoritarian capitalist ones of

the prison but that are ones of emancipated love. It means BEING SERIOUS

about breaking down prison walls and escaping prison confines. But it

doesn’t mean any of this will be easy. Of course it doesn’t. Yet the

ease of our passage from one set of circumstances to another is only a

condition of our activity; it is not a reason to give up everything an

anarchist has ever stood for. It is not a reason to abandon anarchist

values of autonomy, agency, free association or decentralised living. It

is about reaching that point of no return at which the very idea of

SERVITUDE is definitively rejected and, becoming aware of that, setting

course for a place, beyond good and evil, beyond law and state, beyond

coercion and government, where servitude for anyone must be made

absolutely beyond the pail.

ANARQXISTA GOLDMAN X