💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › federico-arcos-anarchism-a-definition.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 09:51:39. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Anarchism — a definition Author: Federico Arcos Language: en Topics: introductory Source: sent by friend of author
At this juncture it would probably be helpful to give a summary of the
idea which won me over so completely at such a young age.
Anarchism encompasses such a broad view of the world that it cannot
easily be distilled into a formal definition. Mikhail Bakunin, a man of
action whose writings and example over a century ago did most to
transform anarchism from an abstract critique of political power into a
theory of practical social action, defined its fundamental tenet thus:
‘In a word, we reject all privileged, licensed, official, and legal
legislation and authority, even though it arise from universal suffrage,
convinced that it could only turn to the benefit of a dominant and
exploiting minority, and against the interests of the vast enslaved
majority.’
Anarchism is a movement for human freedom. It is concrete, democratic
and egalitarian. It is rooted in normality as opposed to eccentricity.
It has existed and developed since the seventeenth century, with a
philosophy and a defined outlook that have evolved and grown with time
and circumstance. Anarchism began — and remains — a direct challenge by
the underprivileged to their oppression and exploitation. It opposes
both the insidious growth of state power and the pernicious ethos of
possessive individualism, which, together or separately, ultimately
serve only the interests of the few at the expense of the rest.
Anarchism is both a theory and practice of life. Philosophically, it
aims for the maximum accord between the individual, society and nature.
Practically, it aims for us to organise and live our lives in such a way
as to make politicians, governments, states and their officials
superfluous. In an anarchist society, mutually respectful sovereign
individuals would be organised in non-coercive relationships within
naturally defined communities in which the means of production and
distribution are held in common.
Anarchists are not dreamers obsessed with abstract principles and
theoretical constructs. Events are ruled by chance and people’s actions
depend on long-held habits and on psychological and emotional factors
that are often antisocial and usually unpredictable. Anarchists are well
aware that a perfect society cannot be won tomorrow. Indeed, the
struggle lasts forever! However, it is the vision that provides the spur
to struggle against things as they are, and for things that might be.
Whatever the immediate prospects of achieving a free society, and
however remote the ideal, if we value our common humanity then we must
never cease to strive to realise our vision. To settle for anything less
means we are little more than beasts of burden at the service of the
privileged few, without much to gain from life other than a lighter
load, better feed and a cosier berth.
Ultimately, only struggle determines outcome, and progress towards a
more meaningful community must begin with the will to resist every form
of injustice: In general terms, this means challenging all exploitation
and defying the legitimacy of all coercive authority. If anarchists have
one article of unshakable faith, it is that, once the habit of deferring
to politicians or ideologues is lost, and that of resistance to
domination and exploitation acquired, then ordinary people have a
capacity to organise every aspect of their lives in their own interests,
anywhere and at any time, both freely and fairly.
Anarchists do not stand aside from popular struggle, nor do they attempt
to dominate it. They seek to contribute to it practically whatever they
can, and also to assist within it the highest possible levels both of
individual self-development and of group solidarity. It is possible to
recognise anarchist ideas concerning voluntary relationships,
egalitarian participation in decision-making processes, mutual aid and a
related critique of all forms of domination in philosophical, social and
revolutionary movements in all times and places.
Elsewhere, the less formal practices and struggles of the more
indomitable among the propertyless and disadvantaged victims of the
authority system have found articulation in the writings of those who on
brief acquaintance would appear to be mere millenarian dreamers. Far
from being abstract speculations conjured out of thin air, such works
have, like all social theories, been derived from sensitive observation.
They reflect the fundamental and uncontainable conviction nourished by a
conscious minority throughout history that social power held over people
is a usurpation of natural rights: power originates in the people, and
they alone have, together, the right to wield it.