Anarchism - Summary of Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Summary of Notes...

Description

Anarchism: Origins and development:  ‘Anarchy’ = Greek for ‘without rule’. Often seen as a critical and negative, referring to the breakdown in civilised society or cause of chaos.  Origins can be traced back to the French Revolution.  Anarchists advocate the abolishment of law and order with the belief that a more natural and positive social order will develop.  Associated with Revolutionary Marxism as both ideologies came together to form the First International (unification of different left-wing socialist, communist and anarchist all advocating an end to class struggle).  Anarchism as a political ideology has never succeeded in winning power on a national scale.  Goal of Anarchism: overthrow the state and dismantle all forms of political authority - many other ideologies believe this a utopia dream.  Means of Anarchism rejection of the corrupting nature of political influence (forming parties, standing for elections and seeking office) and instead advocate political organisation and strategic planning through mass spontaneity and need for freedom. Themes of Anarchism:  Defining feature of anarchism is its opposition to the state and accompanying bodies like government and law.  They advocate a free society in which individual manage their own affairs without pressure and oppression.  Two problems with Anarchism: o

1) Stronger on moral assertion regarding a positive conception of human nature than on analysis and explanation of state oppression and how it should be challenged.

o

2) Anarchism is a divided ideology as it is formed out of Liberalism and Socialism – the point where each ideology reaches an anti-state conclusions.

 Natural Order and Utopianism (Human Nature): o

Anarchists view the state as evil and unnecessary.

o

Godwin challenges the social contract theory, proposed by liberals, which asserts a stateless society is characterised by a ‘war of each against all’ as human beings are egoistic.

o

Instead he argues humans are rational creatures who are naturally capable of living in harmony with moral laws.

o

People have a natural propensity to organize their own lives in a harmonious and peaceful fashion. Rather it is unnatural laws administered by the state which causes greed and aggression.

o

Godwin & Kropotkin have a very optimistic view of human nature. They believe humans have an innate goodness and sociability which can be corrupted in societies based around competitive capitalist institutions and/or dominant states.

o

So, the state is not the solution but rather the cause of evil. They support Rousseau’s assertion that “man was born free, yet everywhere he is in chains”.

o

Criticism: However, has been argued that these anarchists are therefore illogical because if human beings are innately good we cannot explain why competitive capitalist institutions and dominant states arose in the first place.

o

All anarchists would agree that human nature contains elements of both self-interest and altruism; that it provides the potential for the development of rational thought; and that the development of human nature itself is heavily influenced by environmental factors such that “while our present authoritarian and hierarchical society encourages egoism, competition and aggression, there is good reason to think that a free society without authority and coercion would encourage our benevolent and sympathetic tendencies.” (Peter Marshall).

o

So, these anarchists would explain the development of the state and of capitalism in terms of the dominance of our potential for selfishness over our potential for altruism, and claim that our selfishness would be reinforced in capitalist, state-dominated societies. This view is similar to Lord Acton’s where he stated ‘’Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’’. This is different to the Leninist and social democratic views that assume the state can be used to the benefit of societies as a whole.

o

There are differences in the nature of anarchist societies that can be formed without a state, which also reflect some differences in their views of human nature.

o

Collectivist Anarchists stress human capacity and cooperative behaviour while Individualist Anarchists stress on our ability to reason. Thus, they argue human nature is biased in favour of natural order.

o

Anarchists have thus sometimes been drawn to the ideas of non-western religions such as Buddhism and Taoism, which emphasize interdependence and oneness.

o

HOWEVER, Anarchism isn’t purely based on the belief in human ‘goodness’. 

1) They accept that the human core is morally and intellectually enlightened but has potential to become corrupt. Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin accept that we can be selfish and competitive as well as sociable and cooperative.



2) Human nature as ‘plastic’, malleable, like socialists, as its shaped by social, political and economic experiences. Just as law, government and the state breed a domination/subordination complex, other social institutions nurture respect, cooperation and spontaneous harmony.

o

Collectivist Anarchists thus support common ownership while Individualist Anarchists support the market.

o

Nevertheless, the belief in a stable and peaceful yet stateless society has usually been viewed as the weakest and most contentious aspect of anarchist theory.

o

Opponents of anarchism have argued that if selfish or negative impulses are basic to human nature then the prospect of natural order is nothing more than a utopian dream.

o

o

Utopianism is at the heart of Anarchism: the belief in natural goodness of mankind and idea that social order develops naturally and spontaneously; in short, without law and order is completely utopian. These views of human nature and the implications they have on the anarchist view of the state are described as utopian.

 Anti-statism: o

The state: most simply described as a political association that establishes sovereign jurisdiction within defined territorial borders and exercises authority through a set of permanent institutions. To anarchists, a repository of sovereign, compulsory and coercive authority; a concentrated form of evil.

o

Faure defined Anarchism as “the negation of the principle of Authority”.

o

Authority is an offence against absolute freedom and unrestrained political equality which in effect enslaves and limits human life.

o

Authority corrupts those who are subject to it and those who are in charge as it supresses one nature, creating dependency, despite humans being free and autonomous creatures

o

To be in authority reflects unequal distribution of knowledge and power in society and an appetite for prestige, control and domination.

o

Authority gives rise to the ‘Psychology of power’ based on ‘dominance and submission’ or in Goodman’s words a society in which “many are ruthless and most live in fear”.

o

Features of the state for Anarchists: 

1) State is sovereign as it exercises authority over all individuals. Authority for most Anarchists reflects the compulsory political authority of the state. Constitutional governments have evolved over several generations but there is no logical reason why members of the present generation should have their political freedoms restricted by the decisions of past generations



Proudhon – “To be governed is to be watched over, inspected, spied on… all by creatures that have neither the right, nor the wisdom, nor the virtue” – reflecting the idea that the state is absolute and unlimited since laws can restrict behaviour, limit political activity, regulate economic life and interfere with private issues (e.g. religion).



So, they reject Liberal notion that political authority arises from a ‘social contract’, and believe that the idea that limited states protect our freedom is a myth which helps to legitimise governments and hide the fact that they govern in their own interests and not in the interests of the citizens.



2) The state is a coercive body as laws must be obeyed or punishment would be enforced. Goldman – government symbolised “the club, the gun, the handcuff, or the prison” suggesting the state can deprive individuals of their property, liberty and life.



Liberals such as Locke argued that states were necessary to maintain social order without which individual liberty would be impossible but also that individuals should be free [in a negative sense] from excessive state intervention.



Anarchists reject such theories on the grounds that even limited liberal “night watchman” restrict individual freedom and undermine opportunities for personal self-development through the use of individual judgement.



3) The state is exploitative as it robs individuals from their property. Anarchists argue that even apparently democratically elected governments govern in the interests of the rich and powerful. So, not only is our own freedom restricted when governments pass laws which we are forced either to obey or to risk punishment for noncompliance, but these laws also defend the interests of the rich via the perpetuation of exploitation, economic inequality and poverty.



For example, government taxation and spending: taxation takes away our freedom to spend our own money while the government spends money in accordance with the interests of the rich and /or in accordance with its own interests. So, the state serves to oppress the weak.



4) The state is destructive as individuals are expected to fight, kill and die in the name of the state. States are involved in economic competition with other states which may lead to wars in which citizens are misled by spurious appeals to nationalism into killing and maiming in the interests of the state. Bourne – “War is the health of the state”.

o

The Anarchist view on the state reflects their belief in human nature - Humans can either be good or evil depending on the political and social circumstances in which they live.

o

While people are by nature cooperative, sympathetic and sociable, they become oppressive tyrants when raised in an oppressive state. Lord Acton’s quote is taken to an extreme “power in any shape or form will corrupt absolutely”. ‘’Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’’

o

Criticism of the anarchist theory of the state: 

The assumptions that state oppression stems from the corruption of individuals by their political and social circumstances is not logical, in that it is unable to explain how political authority arose in the first place.

 Economic Freedom: o

As well as challenging the state, Anarchists also seek to challenge the existing structures of social and economic life. Bakunin – “Political power and wealth are inseparable”.

o

19th century - most Anarchists were involved in working class movements together with Socialists. However, their definition of the ruling class was not as narrow as Marxism (owners of the means of production) but included anyone with wealth, power and privilege.

o

o

Bakunin – in every society there are three social classes: 

1. A vast majority who are exploited.



2. A minority who are exploited BUT also exploit others.



3. The supreme governing estate – small minority of exploiters and oppressors.

So, they sought to carry out social revolution in the name of the ‘exploited mass’ in which capitalism and the state would cease to exist.

o

HOWEVER, not all Anarchists agree – in fact tension between the ideologies arises due to different interpretations on economics.

o

Although many anarchists acknowledge a kinship with socialism, based upon a common distaste for property and inequality, others have defended property rights and even revered competitive capitalism.

o

Collectivists Anarchists – like Socialists dislike property and inequality. They want an economy based on cooperation and collective ownership.

o

Individualist Anarchists – defend property rights and competition, wishing to develop an economy based on the market and private property.

o

NEVERTHELESS, all Anarchists oppose ‘managed economies’. Collectivist Anarchists reject it as it justifies capitalist oppression and argue that state intervention props up a system of class

exploitation, as well as the fact that it gives capitalism a ‘human face’.

Individualist

Anarchists reject it because intervention distorts competitive market and creates economies dominated by both public and private monopolies. o

Moreover, they all dislike Soviet style ‘state socialism’.

o

Anarchists of all kinds have a preference for an economy in which free individuals manage their own affairs without the need for state ownership or regulation.

o

Collectivist Anarchists argue this is because state socialism is a contradiction in terms since state is the cause of oppression itself and replaces the capitalist class as the main source of exploitation.

o

Individualistic Anarchists on grounds that state socialism violates private property and individual rights, that they argue occurs in planned economy.

o

However, this has allowed them to endorse a number of quite different economic systems, ranging from ‘anarcho-communism’ to ‘anarcho-capitalism’.

 Anticlericalism: o

While Anarchists dislike the state, they also disapprove other forms of compulsory authority, such as the church – this can explain why the ideology proposed in countries with strong religious traditions. E.g. Spain, Italy, and Latin America.

o

Their criticism of religion reflects their objection of authority; religion as the source of authority. E.g. God as the ‘Supreme Being’ who maintains unquestionable and ultimate authority. Thus, both Proudhon and Bakunin rejected Christianity since individuals could only be free without religion.

o

Religious and political authority is interlinked as both advocate the submission to the authority of spiritual and early rulers. E.g. divine right of king. Bakunin – religion is one of the pillar of the state thus must be abolished together for the true liberation of society.

o

Religion limits individual freedom and moral autonomy by proving them with moral principles of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ behaviour policed by religious figures in authority.

o

HOWEVER, not all Anarchists are anti-religion. Anarchists have a spiritual conception of human nature some argue.

o

Early Anarchists were influenced by millenarianism (a belief in the return of Christ and the establishment of the Kingdom of God after ‘a thousand years’.). Most support political millenarianism (prospect of sudden and complete emancipation from oppression).

o

Modern Anarchists are attracted to Taoism and Zen-Buddhism which advocates toleration, respect and natural harmony.

Types of Anarchism:  Collectivist Anarchism: Bakunin, Proudhon and Kropotkin o

Philosophical roots of Collectivists Anarchism lie in Socialism.

o

Collectivism: the belief that human beings are social animals, better suited to working together for the common food than striving for individual self-interest.

o

Anarchism is collectivist due to its belief that human beings are social - better off living together than alone. Emphasis is placed on social solidarity or what Kropotkin called ‘mutual aid’.

o

So, they believe natural order is based on sympathy and harmony and that when people are linked by common humanity, there is no need for regulation and control through government.

o

Bakunin – “social solidarity is the first human law; freedom is the second law”. Not only is government unnecessary, but it is replacing freedom with oppression, it also makes social solidarity impossible.

o

Both Kropotkin and Bakunin argue that the abolition of the state will help individuals develop their individuality to the full, but that individual self-development for all demands a high level of economic equality of outcome; only then will all individuals have access to the resources necessary to develop their individuality and hence their individual liberty.

o

Lead Kropotkin and Bakunin to argue in favour of the collective ownership of the means of production and for the distribution of goods and services in accordance with individual need, Kropotkin’s anarcho-communism or in accordance with work done and Bakunin’s collectivism.

o

Whilst individualist anarchists Warren and Tucker argued in support of limited private ownership and limited community rules as a means of guaranteeing individual liberty, both Kropotkin and Bakunin suggest that individuals can learn to exercise their freedom in accordance with the needs of the community so that there should eventually be no great tension between individual freedom and the commune’s economic rules relating to communal ownership and the distribution of resources.

o

Overlap between Anarchism and Socialism, particularly Marxism: 

Both see capitalism as oppressive and exploitative.



Both advocate revolutionary change as the preferred means of bringing about political change.



Exhibit a preference for the collective ownership of wealth and communal living.



Both emphasise need for a stateless society and that a fully communist society would be anarchic (expressed my Marc in the theory of the ‘withering away’ of the state.



Both, therefore, believe humans have the ultimate capacity to organise themselves in harmony without political authority.

o

HOWEVER, they differ because… 

Disagree with Marxism in regard to the transition from capitalism to communism. Marx stressed the need for the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ to act as a transitionary socialist phase in which state would ‘wither away’ once communism was achieved.



Anarchists see no distinction between the bourgeois state and the proletarian state. For them the state by its very nature is oppressive and corrupting.



A genuine revolution for anarchists, requires not only the overthrow of capitalism, but also the immediate and final overthrow of state power. The state cannot be allowed to whiter away, it must be abolished.



Anarchists disagree with Parliamentary Socialists. Parliamentary socialists have long since lost faith in the revolutionary potential of the working masses, believing instead the numerical strength of the working class has make a ‘socialism though the ballot box’ possible, if not inevitable.



In addition, they see the state in a positive light, as the principal means through which capitalism is reformed or ‘humanized’. Anarchists, on the other hand, dismiss parli...