File: secAint.html

package info (click to toggle)
anarchism 9.5-1
  • links: PTS
  • area: main
  • in suites: woody
  • size: 12,192 kB
  • ctags: 493
  • sloc: makefile: 40; sh: 8
file content (137 lines) | stat: -rw-r--r-- 7,901 bytes parent folder | download
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<TITLE>Section A - What is Anarchism? </TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<p>

<H1>Section A - What is Anarchism?</H1>
<p>

Modern civilisation faces three potentially catastrophic crises: 
(1) social breakdown, a shorthand term for rising rates of poverty,
homelessness, crime, violence, alienation, drug and alcohol abuse, social
isolation, political apathy, dehumanisation, the deterioration of
community structures of self-help and mutual aid, etc.; (2) destruction of
the planet's delicate ecosystems on which all complex forms of life
depend; and (3) the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
particularly nuclear weapons. 
<p>
Orthodox opinion, including that of Establishment "experts," mainstream
media, and politicians, generally regards these crises as separable, each
having its own causes and therefore capable of being dealt with on a
piecemeal basis, in isolation from the other two. Obviously, however, this
"orthodox" approach isn't working, since the problems in question are
getting worse. Unless some better approach is taken soon, we are clearly 
headed for disaster, either from catastrophic war, ecological Armageddon,
or a descent into urban savagery -- or all of the above. 
<p>
Anarchism offers a unified and coherent way of making sense of these
crises, by tracing them to a common source. This source is the principle
of <B>hierarchical authority</B>, which underlies the major institutions of all
"civilised" societies, whether capitalist or "communist." Anarchist
analysis therefore starts from the fact that all of our major institutions
are in the form of hierarchies, i.e. organisations that concentrate power
at the top of a pyramidal structure, such as corporations, government
bureaucracies, armies, political parties, religious organisations,
universities, etc. It then goes on to show how the authoritarian
relations inherent in such hierarchies negatively affect individuals,
their society, and culture. In the first part of this FAQ (<B>sections A -</B>
<B>E</B>) we will present the anarchist analysis of hierarchical authority and
its negative effects in greater detail. 
<p>
It should not be thought, however, that anarchism is just a critique of
modern civilisation, just "negative" or "destructive." Because it is much
more than that. For one thing, it is also a proposal for a free society. 
Emma Goldman expressed what might be called the "anarchist question" as
follows: <I>"The problem that confronts us today. . . is how to be one's 
self and yet in oneness with others, to feel deeply with all human beings 
and still retain one's own characteristic qualities"</I> [<B>Red Emma Speaks</B>,
pp. 133-134]. In other words, how can we create a society in which the
potential for each individual is realised but not at the expense of
others? In order to achieve this, anarchists envision a society in which,
instead of being controlled "from the top down" through hierarchical
structures of centralised power, the affairs of humanity will <I>"be managed by individuals or voluntary associations"</I> [Ben Tucker, <B>Anarchist Reader</B>,
p. 149]. Later sections of the FAQ (sections I and J) will describe
anarchism's positive proposals for organising society in this way, "from
the bottom up." However, some of the constructive core of anarchism will
be seen even in the earlier sections. 
<p>
As Clifford Harper elegantly puts it, <I>"Like all great ideas, anarchism is pretty simple when you get down to it -- human beings are at their best 
when they are living free of authority, deciding things among themselves 
rather than being ordered about."</I> [<B>Anarchy: A Graphic Guide</B>, p. vii]
Due to their desire to maximise individual and therefore social freedom,
anarchists wish to dismantle all institutions that repress people:
<p><blockquote>
<I>"Common to all Anarchists is the desire to free society of all political and social coercive institutions which stand in the way of the development 
of a free humanity"</I> [Rudolf Rocker, <B>Anarcho-Syndicalism</B>, p. 16] 
</blockquote>
<p>
As we'll see, all such institutions are hierarchies, and their repressive
nature stems directly from their hierarchical form. 
<p>
Anarchism is a socio-economic and political theory, but not an ideology.
The difference is <B>very</B> important. Basically, theory means you have
ideas; an ideology means ideas have you. Anarchism is a body of ideas,
but they are flexible, in a constant state of evolution and flux, and open
to modification in light of new data. As society changes and develops, so
does anarchism. An ideology, in contrast, is a set of "fixed" ideas which
people believe dogmatically, usually ignoring reality or "changing" it so
as to fit with the ideology, which is (by definition) correct. All such
"fixed" ideas are the source of tyranny and contradiction, leading to
attempts to make everyone fit onto a Procrustean Bed. This will be true
regardless of the ideology in question -- Leninism, Objectivism,
"Libertarianism," or whatever -- all will all have the same effect: the
destruction of real individuals in the name of a doctrine, a doctrine that
usually serves the interest of some ruling elite. Or, as Michael Bakunin
puts it: 
<p><blockquote>
<I>"Until now all human history has been only a perpetual and 
bloody immolation of millions of poor human beings in honour of some 
pitiless abstraction -- God, country, power of state, national honour, 
historical rights, judicial rights, political liberty, public welfare."</I>
[<b>God and the State</b>, p. 59] 
</blockquote>
<p>
Dogmas are static and deathlike in their rigidity, often the work of some
dead "prophet," religious or secular, whose followers erect his or her
ideas into an idol, immutable as stone. Anarchists want the living to
bury the dead so that the living can get on with their lives. The living
should rule the dead, not vice versa. Ideologies are the nemesis of
critical thinking and consequently of freedom, providing a book of rules
and "answers" which relieve us of the "burden" of thinking for ourselves.
<p>
In producing this FAQ on anarchism it is not our intention to give you the
"correct" answers or a new rule book. We will explain a bit about what
anarchism has been in the past, but we will focus more on its modern forms
and why <B>we</B> are anarchists today. The FAQ is an attempt to provoke
thought and analysis on your part. If you are looking for a new ideology,
then sorry, anarchism is not for you.
<p>
While anarchists try to be realistic and practical, we are not
"reasonable" people. "Reasonable" people uncritically accept what the
"experts" and "authorities" tell them is true, and so they will always
remain slaves! Anarchists know that, as Bakunin wrote: 
<p><blockquote>
<I>"[a] person is strong only when he stands upon his own truth, when he speaks and acts from his deepest convictions. Then, whatever the situation he may be in, he always knows what he must say and do. He may fall, but he cannot bring shame upon himself or his causes"</I> [<B>Statism and Anarchy</B> - cited 
in Albert Meltzer, <b>I couldn't Paint Golden Angels</b>, p. 2]. 
</blockquote>
<p>
What Bakunin describes is the power of independent thought, which is the power
of freedom. We encourage you not to be "reasonable," not to accept what
others tell you, but to think and act for yourself!
<p>
One last point: to state the obvious, this is <B>not</B> the final word on
anarchism. Many anarchists will disagree with much that is written here,
but this is to be expected when people think for themselves. All we wish
to do is indicate the <B>basic</B> ideas of anarchism and give our analysis of
certain topics based on how we understand and apply these ideas. We are
sure, however, that all anarchists will agree with the core ideas we
present, even if they may disagree with our application of them here and
there.
<p>
</BODY>
</HTML>