💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › shusui-kotoku-letter-from-prison.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:04:16. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

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

Title: Letter from Prison
Author: Shūsui Kōtoku
Date: 1910
Language: en
Topics: Japan, japanese anarchists, letter, revolution
Source: From Robert Graham (Ed.), Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas; Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE to 1939). https://libcom.org/library/anarchism-documentary-history-libertarian-ideas-volume-1-2

Shūsui Kōtoku

Letter from Prison

Editor’s Note: Kōtoku [Denjiroj Shūsui (1871–1911) was one of the first

Japanese socialists and, later, one of the founders of the Japanese

anarchist movement. He began as an orthodox Marxist Social Democrat but

moved away from parliamentary socialism, declaring himself an anarchist

in 1905 Upon his release from jail for publishing subversive literature.

He went to the United States and established contacts there with various

anarchists and members of the Industrial Workers of the World. Upon his

return to japan he became a prominent advocate of direct action. He was

involved in the publication of several anarchist papers and translated

the writings of European anarchists into Japanese, including Kropotkin’s

The Conquest of Bread (Selection 33). He was subjected to constant

harassment by the Japanese authorities and was charged with high treason

in 1910, along with many other Japanese anarchists, including his

companion, Kanno Sugako. Kōtoku, Kanno and 9 otller anarchists were

executed in January 1911. Several others were sentenced to death but had

their sentences commuted to life in prison. The following excerpts are

from his “Letter from Prison,” written to his attorneys in December

1910. The translation by Yoshiharu Hashimoto, originally published in A

Short History of the Anarchist Movement in Japan (Tokyo: Idea

Publishing, 1979). has been modified by the editor for stylistic

reasons.

---

WHENEVER THE ANARCHIST MOVEMENT is mentioned, there are many people who

understand it as assassination of a sovereign by pistol or bomb, which

shows their ignorance of anarchism. You, the attorneys, know already

that anarchism is a kind of philosophy similar to that of Lao Tzu and

Chuang Tzu, which taught us we must progress in accordance with the

general tendency to fulfill our freedom and happiness, because that

tendency is natural in human society, to be realized with mutual aid and

communal life, united by morality and charity, without government

compulsion as it is now.

Therefore, it is needless to say that the anarchist hates oppression,

disdains bondage as well as violence, and no one else loves freedom and

justice like him ..

In truth, assassins did emerge from among the anarchists, but that does

not mean all anarchists without fail are assassins. Furthermore, many

assassins came not only from the anarchists, but also from the state

socialists, the republicans, the Minkenka, patriots and loyalists ...

the number of assassinations by anarchists is few in comparison to the

other parties ... If an idea is declared terrorist due to the appearance

of an assassin, there is no more violent idea than the loyal or

patriotic one ... violence is usually initiated by government officials,

the rich and the aristocrats, while the militant and the worker are

provoked, so exploited that they are compelled to revolt with violence

as a last resort...

The problem is how to make an anarchist revolution when you do not

attack the sovereign with a bomb ... [our] REVOLUTION ... means a

fundamental transformation of political and social institutions, not a

change of rulers ... the revolution occurs spontaneously, neither

individual nor party can induce it ... Therefore, we cannot plan in

advance how to initiate a revolution and how to proceed with it ...

Based on the presupposition ... that the institutions and hierarchy of

today will not keep up with the advance and development of society and

humanity ... their overthrow and the creation of new institutions will

become inevitable ...

Considering this evolutionary process, we believe that after the decay

of individual competition and the institution of private property, a

communistic society will follow, with anarchistic libertarian

institutions driving away modern state despotism; thus, we want to have

such a revolution ...

Although we cannot predict under what conditions a revolution shall be

realized and how it will be achieved, in any case the participants in

the revolution for freedom and peace for the masses must try to limit

the use of violence ... such [violent] collisions have in fact been

provoked usually by the obstinate conservative elements fighting against

the general tendency [of evolutionary progress] ...

The revolutionary anarchist movement, properly so-called, does not seek

to induce a revolution immediately, nor is it a mutinous assault. Far

from it, it includes all efforts such as the cultivation of one’s

understanding and knowledge, and the discipline to contribute one’s

service to the coming revolution. Publishing newspapers and journals,

writing and distributing books and leaflets, speeches and meetings, all

of these means are used to explain the reasons for and the vicissitudes

of the tendency of social evolution, thereby cultivating the knowledge

related to them.

In addition, organizing trade unions with various cooperatives is an

advantageous vocation for us to develop the capacity of living in a

commune either at the time of or in the aftermath of a revolution ...

Some may say that a movement is useless if the revolution can only come

spontaneously, but that is not true. Whenever an old regime and the old

institutions have reached their apogee, society has begun to decline on

its own accord. Where there is no idea and knowledge of the general

tendency [of social evolution], of the new institutions and organization

that will replace the old, and no ability to participate, society

withers away along with the old regime, without sprouting the new bud of

revolution. In contrast, if we are prepared with knowledge and ability,

a new bud will spring forth even though the original stock shall have

died ...

There are no institutions or organizations that do not ceaselessly

fluctuate and evolve, for the human being is dynamic as well as society.

It is necessary to advance and to renew in accordance with the times. A

small period of such advancement and renewal is called a reformation or

an innovation; a big one, a revolution. In order to prevent the decay

and downfall of society, I believe it is necessary to propagate new

ideas and new thinking; in other words, a revolutionary movement is

indispensable ...

I was surprised to hear that direct action was understood as synonymous

with violent revolution and bomb throwing ... What it means is that the

workers, in order to promote their own advantage, as a group, for the

sake of the trade union, must act for themselves without relying on slow

moving parliaments; not indirect action through the intermediary of the

parliamentarian, but direct action by the workers themselves, without

representatives ...Instead of asking parliament to make factory laws to

improve or regulate the work place, the workers negotiate directly with

the owners; if the latter refuse to negotiate, the former push on to the

general strike ... Another example: a protester advocating the

expropriation of food from the rich when the hungry workers lie on the

street ... Then expropriation is another method of direct action ...

Just because someone is in favour of direct action does not mean that he

supports everything not subjected to parliamentary procedure; nor should

direct action be confused with riot, murder, robbery or even fraud

because they do not go through parliament either ...

I believe it does not serve as a revolution to raise a disturbance

without any cause in a peaceful country, causing vain sacrifice with

destruction of property and human lives. But when the tyranny of the

rich and the government reaches its zenith, and the people are driven to

the verge of ruin, it is worthwhile for a future revolution to help

them.