Log in

View Full Version : What makes an anarchist…anarchist?



Blackberry
12th August 2004, 15:57
Recent musings have prompted me to re-evaluate this article, thus this second version.

What makes an anarchist…anarchist?

Anarchism is simply a word with minimal meaning to many people. It could either be the doctrine of chaos, or of the abolition of government, and maybe it describes an ideal society to some people.

Whatever the meaning, it is important to recognise that there is a set of principles that are inherent in anarchism. Anarchism is an ideology that has been developed by many people over centuries that are recognised as anarchists.

While there are some radical differences between a variety of anarchist thinkers and other anarchists, it is important to recognise that there is a set of principles that determine whether an individual is an anarchist or not.

Although a clear list is often not available, while mostly not being spoken of, it can frustrate anarchists with a level of understanding of what anarchism is when someone may call themselves an anarchist but reject one of the core principles.

This is what this paper will explain; exactly what are these core principles. It does not, however, attempt to justify anarchist principles.

Non-Hierarchy

The most important core principle is non-hierarchy, as opposed to hierarchy – the institutionalisation of authority within a society. According to anarchist theory, hierarchy is harmful and unnecessary to society; including its institutions and relationships. Control in any hierarchy is maintained by coercion – that is, by the threat of negative sanctions of one kind or another: political, social, economic, physical, psychological, etc.

Anarchists therefore reject the state, class, and capitalism, which all allow individuals and groups to have authority over another, whether political, social, or economic. Racism, sexism, and homophobia are rejected as hierarchical attitudes as well, as hierarchy provides the justification for domination and exploitation involved in these three attitudes.

Participation in or advocacy of any form of authoritative power is rejected in the state, including all levels of government, judiciaries, and security services. However, anarchists may have no choice but to live in a hierarchical society. What is important is that they do not participate in its institutions in order to gain authority.

Equal Decision-Making Power

Equal decision-making power is one of the most important fundamentals, and consequently another principle that defines an anarchist. They come in two forms, including direct democracy and consensus (with the pre-supposition being that everyone will have equal access to this decision-making in an anarchist society).

Direct democracy is a non-hierarchical form of decision-making, since it is based on equal decision-making power for all citizens in non-hierarchical political, social, and economic structures. A minority cannot be trusted to make the decisions of a majority, as it is hierarchical and authoritarian.

However, some anarchists disagree with direct democracy, preferring consensus. Consensus is based upon everyone in an organisation or institution agreeing to a decision before it can be put into action.

Voluntarism

Voluntarism is an essential anarchist principle as well. It is important is that a citizen is not compulsorily forced to comply with decisions in an anarchist society.

They may choose to withdraw themselves from a decision or actions, but they must not contradict it. Forcing a task upon someone, or contradicting a decision by carrying out contrary actions, is coercion -- a hierarchical and authoritarian mean.

Due Process

An important core anarchist principle is due process. A society without due process is harmful and cannot let an individual or a group decides arbitrarily on the spot decisions for them.

Due process – knowing and following a series of steps that guarantee a citizen's security within an anarchist organisation or wider anarchist society, is paramount. Automatic access to due process in a society guarantees citizens and small groups rights in that community.

Equal Access to Wealth

Equal access to the wealth of any anarchist society for all citizens is another essential anarchist fundamental. It implicates that possession of the wealth of a society should be needs-based rather than profit-based: “to each according to their needs, from each according to their ability”.

It is an important anarchist principle due to the further implication that there exists a society where the citizens have control of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Those with an unfair advantage in terms of wealth could potentially manipulate their wealth by bribery to have a stronger influence over decisions made in a society, relegating the influence of others in the decision-making processes – a hierarchical and authoritarian action.

In conclusion, these five essential principles are the bread and butter of any anarchist. A rejection of any of these five core principles, including any of the concepts introduced as being contrary to the political theory of anarchism, renders any self-labeled anarchist a non-anarchist. To ignore these is to reject centuries of anarchist history.

Blackberry
12th August 2004, 16:00
The Question of Mutual Aid

There is a question mark on www.radio4all.org/redblack/postersetc/mutualaid.pdf+what+is+mutual+aid+anarchism&hl=en]mutual (http://www.google.com.au/search?q=cache:ZJ40KQbfH2MJ:[url) aid[/url] (that social relations should be based on solidarity and voluntary cooperation). We do know that social anarchists all believe that mutual aid is an important anarchist principle.

However, there is a question mark over whether the egoist trend within the individualist anarchist (http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secGcon.html) school of thought does adhere to this principle. Some state that it does…others argue otherwise. There are too many different interpretations. I am not in a position to judge for myself on anarchist egoism and its attitude to mutual aid, especially since I am not yet familiar with Max Stirner’s writings, in particular The Ego and its Own (http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/stirner/theego0.html).

Although egoism is a rare trend among anarchists in terms of use and popularity, it is still a legitimate trend within anarchism, and thus it has to be taken seriously in this context.

Some texts that deal with the mutual aid question in at least a minor way can be found in the following web pages:
Egoism and Mutual Aid (http://www.spunk.org/library/pubs/sa/2/sp001214.txt)
What are the ideas of Max Stirner? (http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secG6.html)
The trouble with anarchism (http://www.tangentium.org/may04/supp1b.html)
What is the essence of anarchism? (http://www.angelfire.com/ut/landofthelost/anarchy.html)
Break-out from the Crystal Palace, The Anarcho-Psychological Critique: Stirner, Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky (http://www.blackstarreview.com/rev-0016.html)
(Hold “CTRL” + “F” on your keyboard, then type “mutual aid” or “egoism” and click “Find” to jump quickly to the relevant text on these web pages.)

Guest1
12th August 2004, 19:22
I love this, I think it's time we started tackling those fucking pseudo-Anarchists, and this would be perfect to do it.

apathy maybe
13th August 2004, 04:47
I really do enjoy reading these simple basic texts. These ideas are ones that seem logical to me.

While you have mentioned anti-heirarchy in the Equal Access to Wealth section, I believe that this doesn't need to be a seperate principle. Rather it can be placed with in the Non-Hierarchy section.

apathy maybe
13th August 2004, 04:56
Now that we have our basic anarchist, let us point out differences between some of them.

1) Money. While you will find many Anarchists dislike the idea of money, there is nothing that prevents an Anarchist society from having some form of resource representation.
2) Organisation. How should the society be organised? Some want a community base, some based around unions. Others, something else.
3) Rules and Laws. Who decides these? (the people). Do they need to be written down? Or are they implied? (thou shall not kill).
4) Property. Is there private property? Or public property being used by an individual? How much private/public property is an individual allowed to control (taking into account equal distribution of wealth)?

There are probably others, but these are some of the differences between the types of Anarchist you will find today.

Blackberry
13th August 2004, 06:46
Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 13 2004, 02:47 PM
While you have mentioned anti-heirarchy in the Equal Access to Wealth section, I believe that this doesn't need to be a seperate principle. Rather it can be placed with in the Non-Hierarchy section.
All of the principles, excepting non-hierarchy, can be put under a non-hierarchy section though. So could voluntarism and due process be merged into equal decision-making power. It is a matter of deciding which points need pontificating, giving specific statements to those aspects which cannot be adequately explained in a general sense.

Saying that, I may very well restructure the article in an entirely different way in the future, contradicting earlier structure and thoughts. The article appears to me to be incomplete.

apathy maybe
16th August 2004, 07:50
I take your point.
I think that it is well structured. And doesn't really need too much work done on it. Besides which, I don't want to have to reference version 5 of Blackberry's What makes an anarchist…anarchist?

TAT posted something in the other thread, I think it should be taken into account also.

The Feral Underclass
16th August 2004, 08:10
We cant put this as a sticky independent of other things. People will ***** about how this site isnt anarchist, which is a fair point?