The ABC of Anarchism

[BurnedFlagz]

Hey comrades I just got The ABC of Anarchism by Alexander Berkman for my birthday. What are your opinions of it comrades? I've heard people say it's the Manifesto for anarchism (even though the manifesto can be applied to anarchism) Agree?

[Blake's Baby]

I've said before that I think the Manifesto of Anarchism is the Manifesto. But I certainly found the ABC of Anarchism a more engaging read than the ABC of Communism (which I haven't finished after about 4 years).

It's about 10 years since I read the ABC of Anarchism but I thought there was a lot in it that was true/useful/insightful, and I also remember disagreeing with a few things. But on the whole my recollections of it were positive.

Is that any help? It doesn't seem as if it would be somehow, sorry.

[human strike]

I wouldn't say it's a manifesto for anarchism, but it's a good introduction.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

The ABC of Communist Anarchism is great book for teaching anarchism. I am working on translating it to portuguese, because aparently nobody else ever did it.

Since when does the communist manifesto apply to anarchists?
The communist manifesto clearly defends the use of a vanguard party.

[Os Cangaceiros]

It's not bad for what it is.

[Blake's Baby]

The ABC of Communist Anarchism is great book for teaching anarchism. I am working on translating it to portuguese, because aparently nobody else ever did it.

Since when does the communist manifesto apply to anarchists?
The communist manifesto clearly defends the use of a vanguard party.

I'm not sure I know which bit you're referring to. Can you quote where it does?

[TheRedAnarchist23]

Oh, I must have missed that bit on the 40 or so occasions I've read it. Can you quote where it does?

I have only read it once, but I am prety sure it says something like that.


I chacked it and:
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Notice: "The state".

I also loved this part:


They (communists) do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

[l'Enfermé]

I've said before that I think the Manifesto of Anarchism is the Manifesto. But I certainly found the ABC of Anarchism a more engaging read than the ABC of Communism (which I haven't finished after about 4 years).

It's about 10 years since I read the ABC of Anarchism but I thought there was a lot in it that was true/useful/insightful, and I also remember disagreeing with a few things. But on the whole my recollections of it were positive.

Is that any help? It doesn't seem as if it would be somehow, sorry.
Nonsense! Your fellow Left-Communists' ABC of Communism is brilliant :(

[Blake's Baby]

I have only read it once, but I am prety sure it says something like that...

You claimed the Manifesto 'clearly defends' the use of the 'vanguard party'. When I asked if you could quote where, you supplied something about the property of rebels being confiscated by the state.

Can you quote, as I asked please, where the Manifesto 'clearly defends the use of the vanguard party', as you claimed it did?


Nonsense! Your fellow Left-Communists' ABC of Communism is brilliant :(

I'm pretty sure Bukharin wasn't a Left Comm by then. That's more of youthful indiscretion on his part I feel. Anyway, I'm with Lenin on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

Just checked, it was 1920, I was thinking of the English publication date. So, he was still a Left Comm. Even so, I find it hard going. It's probably better in the original.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

property of rebels being confiscated by the state.

Exactly.


Can you quote, as I asked please, where the Manifesto 'clearly defends the use of the vanguard party', as you claimed it did?

If a party will not do the confiscating who will? A king?

[Brosa Luxemburg]

If a party will not do the confiscating who will? A king?

The proletariat

[Blake's Baby]

Exactly.



If a party will not do the confiscating who will? A king?

Does Portugal currently have a 'vanguard party', or a king? But it has a state, right?

Please quote where Marx 'clearly defends the use of a vanguard party', as you claimed he did (rather than, for example, the existence of a post-revolutionary state).

[l'Enfermé]

You claimed the Manifesto 'clearly defends' the use of the 'vanguard party'. When I asked if you could quote where, you supplied something about the property of rebels being confiscated by the state.

Can you quote, as I asked please, where the Manifesto 'clearly defends the use of the vanguard party', as you claimed it did?



I'm pretty sure Bukharin wasn't a Left Comm by then. That's more of youthful indiscretion on his part I feel. Anyway, I'm with Lenin on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

Just checked, it was 1920, I was thinking of the English publication date. So, he was still a Left Comm. Even so, I find it hard going. It's probably better in the original.
The Manifesto could not possibly clearly (or un-clearly) defend the "use of the vanguard party", if only because the terms "vanguard party" and "vanguardism" were probably invented after the second World War(I suppose by English-speaking Trots or English-speaking "anti-Leninists"). The "vanguardist" rationale, though, which should probably be called Erfurtrianism, is based on Marx's and Engels' writings, especially the later ones, though it has a firm basis in the Communist Manifesto itself as well. For example, from chapter II:


The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality. 2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the line of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement.
The second paragraph is the most perfect elucidation of "vanguardism".

As for Bukharin's and Preobrazhensky's the ABC of Communism, it was actually written in October 1919. Stupid fucking Western publishers get everything wrong though. Even on the English MIA, it says it was written in 1920. Anyway, not really youthful indiscretion in my opinion. Both were in their 30s, older than Marx and Engels when they wrote the Manifesto. Bukharin was active in the party-movement for 13 years before the ABC, Preobrazhensky for 16.

Seriously the ABC of Communism should be mandatory reading for all Left-Coms it's the best thing produced by your tendency. You just have a crappy translation.

[Blake's Baby]

No, I meant Left Communism was a youthful indiscretion on Bukharin's part. thanks for the info on the real date.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

The proletariat

Well if you are going to put it that way, it is always the proletariat that does everything.

[Blake's Baby]

The proletariat, on its own, with no one telling it to but itself.

[tuwix]

Hey comrades I just got The ABC of Anarchism by Alexander Berkman for my birthday. What are your opinions of it comrades? I've heard people say it's the Manifesto for anarchism (even though the manifesto can be applied to anarchism) Agree?

The anarchist manifesto for me was the Proudhon's "What is property?" that on the first page says that property is theft and proofs that throughout the whole book. Besides Proudhon is an author of a term anarchy.