Os Cangaceiros
27th November 2011, 00:57
(this is not a thread about the merits of either "anarcho-individualism" or "class struggle anarchism", it's a thread about the historic relationship between those anarchists who's focus was on egoism/individualism and those anarchists who's focus was on the class struggle.)
Anyway, anyone have a good idea of just how much overlay there was between the schools? It seems to me that there was a lot...anarchism, for one thing, has always expressed itself not just as a political/economic doctrine, against capital/exploitation etc. but also as a more philosophical doctrine; even the most class struggle-y anarchists like Malatesta gave favorable lip-service to the concept of liberty and the individual's relationship to that liberty. Here's a good quote illustrating this from CGT militant and anarcho-syndicalist Fernand Pelloutier:
We are men without God, without Masters & Fatherland, irreconcilable enemies of any despotism, moral or collective, i.e. laws & dictatorships (including that of the proletariat), & impassioned lovers of the culture of oneself.
pretty much says it all
Beyond that, though, I've noticed that the anarchists of today who profess themselves to be CSA's kind of shrug aside "individualism", or seem perplexed when egoism is brought up, or bring up the tired "lifestylism" canard(yes, there are people who identify with politics as a kind of bohemian identity, but they're not really any kind of threat to your political project, so who cares?)
The individualists were often interested in what the communists were writing...the American individualist Stephen Pearl Andrews was one of the first to publish "The Communist Manifesto" in the USA and Emile Armand translating Alexandra Kollontai are two examples. Renzo Novatore seems to be considered to be an admirable figure by both anarchist communists and anarcho individualists. Rudolf Rocker praised Max Stirner in "Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice"; Emma Goldman praised Nietzsche. Joseph Labadie was affiliated with the American individualists, but he was also an important labor organizer. Miguel Gimenez and Enrico Arrigoni were both working class anarcho-individualists who were also involved in radical actions/agitation and fought in the Spanish civil war. Lysander Spooner (not really an anarchist, but part of the American individualist school) wrote article defending the Haymarket Martyrs. etc.
There were also feuds, though. The American individualist Benjamin Tucker was probably the worst...on two occassions he was kind of a dick to communists. Once when he declined to categorize Kropotkin as a an anarchist, even though Kropotkin had categorized Tucker as part of the worldwide anarchist movement, and once when Emma Goldman sent Tucker a solidarity petition supporting Alexander Berkman after the failed assassination of Henry Frick, which Tucker declined to sign. Both were totally dick moves. Tucker and Johann Most were also famous opponents.
Anyway, anyone have a good idea of just how much overlay there was between the schools? It seems to me that there was a lot...anarchism, for one thing, has always expressed itself not just as a political/economic doctrine, against capital/exploitation etc. but also as a more philosophical doctrine; even the most class struggle-y anarchists like Malatesta gave favorable lip-service to the concept of liberty and the individual's relationship to that liberty. Here's a good quote illustrating this from CGT militant and anarcho-syndicalist Fernand Pelloutier:
We are men without God, without Masters & Fatherland, irreconcilable enemies of any despotism, moral or collective, i.e. laws & dictatorships (including that of the proletariat), & impassioned lovers of the culture of oneself.
pretty much says it all
Beyond that, though, I've noticed that the anarchists of today who profess themselves to be CSA's kind of shrug aside "individualism", or seem perplexed when egoism is brought up, or bring up the tired "lifestylism" canard(yes, there are people who identify with politics as a kind of bohemian identity, but they're not really any kind of threat to your political project, so who cares?)
The individualists were often interested in what the communists were writing...the American individualist Stephen Pearl Andrews was one of the first to publish "The Communist Manifesto" in the USA and Emile Armand translating Alexandra Kollontai are two examples. Renzo Novatore seems to be considered to be an admirable figure by both anarchist communists and anarcho individualists. Rudolf Rocker praised Max Stirner in "Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice"; Emma Goldman praised Nietzsche. Joseph Labadie was affiliated with the American individualists, but he was also an important labor organizer. Miguel Gimenez and Enrico Arrigoni were both working class anarcho-individualists who were also involved in radical actions/agitation and fought in the Spanish civil war. Lysander Spooner (not really an anarchist, but part of the American individualist school) wrote article defending the Haymarket Martyrs. etc.
There were also feuds, though. The American individualist Benjamin Tucker was probably the worst...on two occassions he was kind of a dick to communists. Once when he declined to categorize Kropotkin as a an anarchist, even though Kropotkin had categorized Tucker as part of the worldwide anarchist movement, and once when Emma Goldman sent Tucker a solidarity petition supporting Alexander Berkman after the failed assassination of Henry Frick, which Tucker declined to sign. Both were totally dick moves. Tucker and Johann Most were also famous opponents.