| Anarcho-communism |
Website Links For Anarchist |
Information AboutAnarcho-communism |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT ANARCHIST COMMUNISM | |
| anarchism by genre | |
| communism | |
| political ideologies | |
|
Anarchist communism advocates the abolition of the State and Capitalism in favor of a horizontal network of Voluntary Association s, Workers' Council s and/or Commons through which everyone will be free to satisfy their needs. Anarchist Communism is also known as anarcho-communism, '''communist anarchism''', '''red anarchism''' or, sometimes, '''libertarian communism'''. However, while all anarchist communists are libertarian communists, some libertarian communists, such as Council Communists , are not anarchists. What distinguishes anarchist communism from other variants of libertarian communism is the former's opposition to all forms of political power, hierarchy and domination. DEVELOPMENT OF IDEAS Anarchist communist currents manifested themselves during the , in his "Manifesto of the Equals" (1796), demanded "the communal enjoyment of the fruits of the earth" and looked forward to the disappearance of "the revolting distinction of rich and poor, of great and small, of masters and valets, of governors and governed."Ibid An early anarchist communist was ) Unlike Proudhon , he argued that, "it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature."Graham op. cit. The Collectivist Anarchists advocated remuneration for labor, but held out the possibility of a post-revolutionary transition to a communist system of distribution according to need. As Bakunin's associate, James Guillaume , put it in his essay, ''Ideas on Social Organization'' (1876), "When... production comes to outstrip consumption... will draw what he needs from the abundant social reserve of commodities, without fear of depletion; and the moral sentiment which will be more highly developed among free and equal workers will prevent, or greatly reduce, abuse and waste."Guillaume, James. [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/guillaume/works/ideas.htm Ideas on Social Organization First International Anarchist communism as a coherent, modern economic-political philosophy was first formulated in the Italian section of the First International by Carlo Cafiero , Errico Malatesta , Andrea Costa and other ex- Mazzinian Republicans. Out of respect for Mikhail Bakunin , they did not make their differences with Collectivist Anarchism explicit until after Bakunin's death.Guillaume, James. Michael Bakunin - A Biographical Sketch The collectivist anarchists sought to collectivize ownership of the means of production while retaining payment for labor, but the anarcho-communists sought to extend the concept of collective ownership to the products of labor as well. While both groups argued against capitalism, the anarchist communists departed from Proudhon and Bakunin, who maintained that individuals have a right to the product of their labor and to be remunerated for their work, by proposing that individuals should be free to access goods according to their needs without respect to how much labor they exert. Cafeiro explains in ''Anarchy and Communism'' (1880) that private property in the product of labor will lead to unequal accumulation of capital and, therefore, undesirable class distinctions: "If we preserve the individual appropriation of the products of labour, we would be forced to preserve money, leaving more or less accumulation of wealth according to more or less merit rather than need of individuals."Graham op. cit. At the Florence Conference of the Italian Federation of the International in 1876, held in a forest outside Florence due to Police activity, they declared the principles of anarcho-communism, beginning with: "The Italian Federation considers the collective property of the products of labour as the necessary complement to the collectivist programme, the aid of all for the satisfaction of the needs of each being the only rule of production and consumption which corresponds to the principle of solidarity. The federal congress at Florence has eloquently demonstrated the opinion of the Italian International on this point..." The above report was made in an article by Malatesta and Cafiero in the (Swiss) Jura Federation 's bulletin later that year. Peter Kropotkin '' that this was illustrated in nature. He advocated the abolition of private property through the "expropriation of the whole of social wealth" by the people themselves, Kropotkin , Peter. ''Words of a Rebel'', p99. and for the economy to be co-ordinated through a horizontal network of voluntary associations Kropotkin , Peter. '' The Conquest Of Bread '', p145. where goods are distributed according to the physical needs of the individual, rather than according to labor.Shatz, Marshall. Introduction to Kropotkin: The Conquest of Bread and Other Writings, Cambridge University Press 1995, p. xvi "Anarchist communism called for the socialization not only of production but of the distribution of goods: the community would supply the subsistence requirements of each individual member free of charge, and the criterion, 'to each according to his labor' would be superseded by the criterion 'to each according to his needs.'" He further argued that these "needs," as society progressed, would not merely be physical needs but " soon as his material wants are satisfied, other needs, of an artistic character, will thrust themselves forward the more ardently. Aims of life vary with each and every individual; and the more society is civilized, the more will individuality be developed, and the more will desires be varied."Kropotkin, Peter. ''The Conquest of Bread'' [http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/kropotkin/conquest/ch9.html Chapter IX The Need For Luxury He maintained that, in anarcho-communism: Individuals and groups would use and control whatever resources they needed, as the aim of anarchist-communism was to place "the product reaped or manufactured at the disposal of all, leaving to each the liberty to consume them as he pleases in his own home."''The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought'' He supported the expropriation of property to ensure that everyone would have access to what they needed without being forced to sell their labour to get it. He said that a "peasant who is in possession of just the amount of land he can cultivate," and "a family inhabiting a house which affords them just enough space... considered necessary for that number of people" and the artisan "working with their own tools or handloom" would not be interfered with,Kropotkin ''Act for yourselves.'' N.Walter and H. Becker, eds. (London: Freedom Press 1985) 104-5 arguing that "[t]he landlord owes his riches to the poverty of the peasants, and the wealth of the capitalist comes from the same source."Kropotkin "The Conquest of Bread" op cit While many anarcho-communists are opposed to trade, some post-left, post-scarcity anarcho-communists, and ones with syndicalist sympathies are not opposed to trade. Some support a non-monetary form of trade in the form of post-monetary trade unions and commons. Others such as Tiziana Terranova easily see anarcho-communism being compatible with a non-hierarchical, open access, free association, post-monetary form of trade such as P2P. Terranova, Tiziana "Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy". 07-26-2005 THEORY Anarchist communism stresses Egalitarianism and the abolition of Social Hierarchy and class distinctions that arise from unequal wealth distribution, the abolition of Capitalism and Money , and the collective production and distribution of wealth by means of voluntary associations. In anarchist communism, the state and property would no longer exist. Each individual and group would be free to contribute to production and to satisfy their needs based on their own choice. Systems of production and distribution would be managed by their participants. The abolition of Wage Labor is central to anarchist communism. With distribution of wealth being based on self-determined needs, people would be free to engage in whatever activities they found most fulfilling and would no longer have to engage in work for which they have neither the temperament nor the aptitude. Anarchist communists argue that there is no valid way of measuring the value of any one person's economic contributions because all wealth is a collective product of current and preceding generations. For instance, one could not measure the value of a factory worker's daily production without taking into account how transportation, food, water, shelter, relaxation, machine efficiency, emotional mood etc. contributed to their production. To truly give numerical economic value to anything, an infinite amount of externalities and contributing factors would need to be taken into account. Especially current or past labor that contributes to the ability to utilize future labor. Anarchist communists argue that any economic system based on wage labor and private property requires a coercive state apparatus to enforce property rights and to maintain the unequal economic relationships that inevitably arise from differences in wages or amount of property. They further argue that markets and systems of currency divide labor into classes and assign artificial numerical values to an individual's work and attempt to regulate production, consumption and distribution. They argue that money restricts an individual's ability to consume the products of their labor by limiting their intake with prices and wages. They believe that production, consumption and distribution should be self-determined by each individual without arbitrary value assigned to labor tasks by others. In place of a market, most anarcho-communists support a currency-less gift economy where goods and services are produced by workers and distributed in community stores where everyone (including the workers who produced them) is entitled to consume whatever they want or need as "payment" for their production of goods and services. A gift economy does not necessarily involve an immediate return (such as with remuneration), compensation comes in the form of whatever the person decides is of equal value to their products of labor. Communist anarchism shares many traits with Collectivist Anarchism but has defining differences. Collectivist anarchism believes in collective ownership but communist anarchism negates the entire concept of ownership in favor of the concept of usage. Alexander Berkman. What is Anarchism?, p. 217 Thus, things are seen as either private possessions used by an individual, or social possessions used to produce for society. Anarcho-communists believe that means of production should not be owned by any person or entity, leaving it free to be used by individuals for their own self-determined needs and wants. The land used by an individual for themself or their family or productive property used to produce for an individual would be considered private possessions rather than social possessions in anarcho-communist theory. In that regard, anarcho-communism could be considered to be a compromise between collective and individual ownership, in that one would own what they had created unless it is used to produce for society in which case it would become a social possession. The individual would be perfectly free to create it again and keep it as long as it is not being used as a means of production for the community or general public.Kropotkin Act for yourselves. N.Walter and H. Becker, eds. (London: Freedom Press 1985) 104-5 Anarcho-communists reject mutualist economics because they believe that market competition, even non-capitalist markets, inherently create inequalities in wealth and land which would lead to inequalities of power - thus the recreation of the State and capitalism as some workers would have more access to capital and defence force than others. They reject collectivist economics arguing that remuneration would require a type of currency, which anarcho-communists reject as an artificial measurement of the value of labor. They further argue that those who are not part of collective groups or unions in workers' councils and collectives could be alienated from access to capital, and thus promote common ownership over ownership by collective groups. PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENTS Anarchist communists reject the claim that wage labor is necessary because people are by "nature" lazy and selfish. They point out that even the so-called "idle rich" sometimes find useful things to do despite having all their needs satisfied by the labour of others. Anarcho-communists generally do not agree with the belief in a pre-set 'human nature', arguing that human culture and behavior is very largely determined by '' {Link without Title} Anarchist communists support communism as a means for ensuring the greatest freedom and well-being for everyone, rather than only the wealthy and powerful. In this sense, anarchist communism is a profoundly Egalitarian philosophy. Anarchist communists do not think that anyone has the right to be anyone else's master, or 'boss' as this is a concept of capitalism and the state. Some contemporary anarchist communists and advocates of Post-left Anarchy such as Bob Black reject the concept of work altogether in favor of turning necessary subsistence tasks into voluntary free play. Many anarcho-communists (and collectivist anarchists as well) reject "individualism" and "collectivism" as illusory concepts http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/secA2.html#seca213. They argue that an individual sacrificing themself for the "greater good" or being ruled by the "community" or "society" is not possible because society is composed of individuals rather than being a cohesive unit sepreate from the individual, and argue that collective control over the individual is tyrannical and un-anarchistic The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought, p. 14-15. CRITICISMS ''(1849), Proudhon answers with " Property Is Theft! " In natural resources, he sees two conceivable types of property, ''de jure'' property and ''de facto'' property, and argues that the former is illegitimate. Proudhon's fundamental premise is that equality of condition is the essence of justice. "By this method of investigation, we soon see that every argument which has been invented in behalf of property, whatever it may be, always and of necessity leads to equality; that is, to the negation of property." {Link without Title} He argued that an inegalitarian condition in society would impoverish some people at the hands of people with more land, However, while being opposed to communism, he was also opposed to Capitalism . In a series of commentaries, from '' What Is Property? '' (1840) through the posthumously-published ''Théorie de la propriété'' (''Theory of Property'', 1863-64), he first declared that "property is theft", "property is impossible", "property is despotism" and "property is freedom". When he said property is theft, he was referring to the landowner or capitalist who he believed ''stole'' the profits from laborers. For Proudhon, the capitalist's employee was "subordinated, exploited: his permanent condition is one of obedience."'' General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century'' (1851), Sixth Study, § 3 ¶ 5 . Proudhon called himself a "socialist" and called his philosophy "anarchist socialism". He opposed state ownership of capital goods in favour of ownership by workers themselves in associations. Many says that the individualists and communists "could not reconcile their differences, the Communist Anarchists dedicated to a community of property and the Individualist Anarchists deeply committed to private property and individual effort."William Kline, ''The Individualist Anarchists: A Critique of Liberalism'' Anarcho-communists counter these criticisms by arguing that the abolition of property creates maximum freedom for all individuals. As Errico Malatesta argues,
Anarcho-communists argue that individual worker cooperatives have the potential to isolate and control those who do not belong to such institutions, or those with less money. Anarcho-communists in general argue that the value of labor is subjective and thus cannot be measured by any monetary means, arguing that such values are arbitrary and lead to a stratification in society by a division of labor. Kropotkin and other communists anarchists have argued that the existence of defence associations, even worker-owned ones that are freely available for everyone, have authoritarian implications, " their self-defence, both the citizen and group have a right to any violence [within individualist anarchy . . . Violence is also justified for enforcing the duty of keeping an agreement. Tucker . . . opens . . . the way for reconstructing under the heading of the 'defence' all the functions of the State."Kropotkin's Revolutionary Pamphlets, p. 297 Moreover, anarcho-communists argue that even in a socialistic market such as in individualist and mutualist anarchy, as some workers reaped more revenue than others, due to different productivity in market competition, those with more money would have more access to capital (means of production) and thus become able to unilaterally influence market deals, decision-making and employment, offering the highest bids to defence firms and thus reconstituting capitalism and the State. Alfie Kohn points out "strife of competition reduces empathic sympathy, distorts communication, impairs the mutuality of support and sharing, and decreases the satisfaction of personal need." Nathan Ackerman, quoted by Alfie Kohn, Op. Cit., pp. 142-3 Communist anarchist Albert Metzer harshly argued, ''"the school of Benjamin Tucker -- by virtue of their individualism -- accepted the need for police to break strikes so as to guarantee the employer's 'freedom.' All this school of so-called Individualists accept . . . the necessity of the police force, hence for government, and the prime definition of anarchism is no government."'' Anarchism: Arguments For and Against, p. 8 More recently, advocates of Post-left Anarchy , such as Bob Black in ''Anarchy After Leftism'', argue that leftists have an attachment to generic moral standards that are incompatible with anarchism and seek to establish political forms, such as Platformism and Direct Democracy , that amount to forms of the state.Bob Black is a Libertarian Socialist , and likely an anarcho-communist (given his reference to attempts on his part to defend anarcho-communism in his essay "The Libertarian As Conservative") and his references to "leftism" are mostly against what he perceives as Marxist influences in libertarian socialism. However, anarchist communists reject this claim, stating that direct democracy includes no hierarchy or monopolization of force and territory. Bob Black is an anarchist and possibly an anarchist communist himself due to his rejection of wage labor and rejection of market systems. One capitalist criticism of anarcho-communism is that such a society would not be able to keep productivity up because individuals would not be paid for their labor, since wages would be abolished and people would instead be given things "according to their needs."Busky, Donald F. ''Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union''. Praeger/Greenwood 2002, p. 101 Anarchist communists propose that economic distribution should be based on the maxim "from each according to their ability and to each according to their needs" believing these "abilities" and "needs" should be self-determined. Anarchist communists reject markets based on the principle that all theories of monetary value are subjective and argue that private property is inherently exploitative,Berkman, Alexander. ''What Is Communist Anarchism?'' p.11 and could not exist without force or without the eventual creation of a State to protect it.Kropotkin, Peter. Kropotkin's Revolutionary Pamphlets, p. 297 They also put forward the idea that, by making productive property freely accessible to all, it would increase individual liberty.Kropotkin, Peter. ''The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought'', p.14-15 They argue that labor should not be an obligation and should be a voluntary task that should be enjoyable or provide necessary services.Kropotkin, Peter. ''Fields, Factories and Workshops Tomorrow'', p. 197 argued that it would not be possible to be forced into an anarcho-communist commune as the abolition of property (the anarchist conception of property) cannot be authoritarian, "every man woman is free to take what he she requires.... so it is hardly conceivable that personal necessaries and conveniences will not be appropriated..... when property is protected by no legal enactments, backed by armed force, and is unable to buy personal service, its resuscitation on such a scale as to be dangerous to society is little to be dreaded. The amount appropriated by each individual . . . must be left to his [or her own conscience, and the pressure exercised upon him her by the moral sense and distinct interests of his her neighbours." She further argued, "''Property'' is the ''domination'' of an individual, or a coalition of individuals, over things; it is not the claim of any person or persons to the use of things -- this is, Usufruct , a very different matter. Property means the monopoly of wealth, the right to prevent others using it, whether the owner needs it or not. Usufruct implies the claim to the use of such wealth as supplies the users needs. If any individual shuts off a portion of it (which he is not using, and does not need for his own use) from his fellows, he is defrauding the whole community." ''Anarchist Essays'', pp. 22-23 and p. 40 Marxists criticize anarchism as being incapable of creating a successful and lasting revolution because it is philosophically flat-footed and does not aptly identify issues of class and Modes Of Production "anarchism developed in opposition to the growth of capitalist society...the liberty defended by the anarchists was not the freedom of the working class to make collectively a new society. Rather, anarchism defended the freedom of the small property owner -- the shopkeeper, artisan and tradesman -- against the encroachments of large-scale capitalist enterprise." Socialism From Below McNally, David. Both Marxist and anarchist Class Analyses are based on the idea that society is divided up into many different " Classes ", each with differing interests according to their material circumstances. The two differ, however, in where they draw the lines between these groups. For Marxists, the two most relevant classes are the " Bourgeoisie " (owners of the Means Of Production ) and the " Proletariat " (wage laborers). Anarchists argue that it is not the capital class who actually has control over the state, but another upper class which is part of the ruling class (and thus, defending its interests), but with its own concerns, particularly retaining political power, national territory and military power. A revolutionary minority taking over State power and imposing its will on the people would be just as authoritarian as the ruling minority in capitalism, and would eventually constitute itself as a ruling class since the class that governs the state is seen as separate from the labor class. This was predicted by Bakunin long before the Russian Revolution and the fall of the Soviet Union , when he wrote: If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Czar himself. (Quoted in Daniel Guerin, ''Anarchism: From Theory to Practice'' (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970), pp.25-26) Also, anarchists have traditionally advocated that a successful revolution needs the support of the Peasantry , and a joint effort between both rural agricultural workers and industrial workers K. Steven Vincent, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the Rise of French Republican Socialism, pp. 282-3. That is, it explicitly rejects imposing state property of the land. Some modern anarchists (particularly Parecon ists) argue that there are three “classes,” which have relevance to social change - not two. The first is the labor class which includes everyone whose labor is involved in producing and distributing goods; the second is the coordinator class which includes everyone whose labor is primarily concerned with “coordinating” and managing the labor of others primarily on behalf of the bourgeoisie (this would include bureaucrats, politicians, intellectuals and party hierarchs); and the third is the elite owning class or "capital class" which derives its income from its control of wealth, land, property and resources Elements of Political Economy" quoted by David Ellerman, Property and Contract in Economics, pp. 53-4. Anarchists contend that Marxism fails, and will always fail, because it creates a dictatorship of the coordinating class and that a "dictatorship of the proletariat" is a logical impossibility The Bolsheviks and Workers' Control, p. xiv Murray Bookchin, Post-Scarcity Anarchism, p. 152. They argue its theoretical "socialist mode of production" involves centralizing and empowering the State apparatus which empowers people from the coordinator class to seize control of the State and means of production to manage the labor class. Bakunin foreshadowed this argument when he wrote:
Anarchists do not differentiate between peasants, . They argue that Marxian socialism in particular arose from the minds of the working class due to the Class Contradictions Of The Capitalist Mode Of Production . Some Marxists even argue that anarchism springs from the ideas of proletarians (or even petty bourgeoisie) who have been marginalized by capitalism as an unorganized and unrefined reactionary struggle against the forces of capitalism McNally, David. Socialism From Below. Marxists believe that attempts by oppressed people to liberate themselves will continue to fail to achieve their full aims until class society is done away with, because under capitalism and other class societies, social power rests at the point of production. Many Marxists point to the sometimes rag-tag nature of anarchist revolutions as evidence that any working class movement needs a sufficient backbone organizational focus to maintain good tactics and inspire a proletarian Class Consciousness , often in the form of a revolutionary Vanguard Party '''Marxism and direct action''' by Phil Mitchinson http://www.marxist.com/Theory/direct_action.html. Some Marxists believe anarchist revolutions tend to be reactionary (in the sense of reacting against the alienating effects of capitalism) and fail to stop capitalism due to their hostility to established political power. They argue that anti-capitalist revolutions need to seize sufficient political power in the form of a state in order to prevent the return of capitalism and to create an economy which allows both capitalism and the state to become unnecessary "Stalinism and Bolshevism", Socialist Workers Review, no. 146, p. 16 Phil Mitchinson argues: "task of this state would be to develop the economy to eradicate want. Less need, means less need to govern society, less need for a state.". Anarcho-communists counter-argue that decentralized, stateless collective federations are sufficient to give both power to workers and preserve personal freedom and point to the fact that no socialist state has ever showed signs of "withering away". However, it should be noted that these disagreements are less of a problem for Libertarian Marxists who believe that a State apparatus should operate on proletariat-controlled Participatory Democracy or even as a Consociational State . Marxists and anarcho-communists would both agree that ''"It is this class division of society which gives rise to the state - because the minority need a special force to maintain their rule over the majority - which has evolved over thousands of years into the complicated structures we see today."'' Marxism and direct action by Phil Mitchinson http://www.marxist.com/Theory/direct_action.html. RESPONSE However, despite criticisms, anarchist communist communes, such as Anarchist Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War , saw increased productivity. The production of potatoes increased 50% and the production of sugar beets and feed for livestock doubled. Through the use of more modernized machinery and chemical fertilizers, the yield per hectare was 50% greater on collective property than on individually-owned land. Dolgoff, Sam. The Anarchist Collectives, ch. 10 The anarchist collectivization in Spain also showed that such ideas are possible to implement in industrial settings. 75% of Spanish industry was located in the Catalon region. According to local sources at the time, The collectivist projects were quite successful, sources noted HISTORY OF ANARCHIST COMMUNIST SOCIETIES There have been several attempts both successful and unsuccessful at creating anarchist-communist societies throughout much of the world. Some anarchist-communists, especially Anarcho-primitivism forms of the theory argue that tribal societies are early forms of anarchist-communism. Egalitarian religious communities such as the Diggers Movement during the English Revolution could arguably be the first anarchist communist societies in modern history. Large communities and federations of communities such as Anarchist Catalonia and the Free Territory of revolutionary Ukraine are examples of anarchist-communism in 20th century Europe. The free territories of Hungary during the Hungarian Revolution Of 1956 could be seen as another example of large-scale successful anarcho-communism. The Korean Anarchist Movement in North and South Korea led by Kim Jwa Jin showed a temporary success in bringing anarcho-communism to Korea. However, the success was short-lived and not nearly as widely spread as the anarchism in Spain or Hungary. Some consider the current existing anarchist nature of communities in Argentina and the Zapatista Councils in Mexico to be anarcho-communist in nature. Others consider them to be collectivist or syndicalist. Some parts of the ), wikis and Indymedia are held up as examples of functioning anarcho-communistic organizations. SEE ALSO
PEOPLE
REFERENCES BOOKS
EXTERNAL LINKS Introductory articles on anarchist communism
Anarchist communist websites and portals
In other languages
|
|
|