
From Anarkismo by Wayne Price
Original title: The Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism: Review of Zoe Baker, Means & Ends: The Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism in Europe and the United States
A review of an outstanding book covering the anarchist movement from 1868 to 1939, discussing many issues which are still important to revolutionary anarchists. It was originally written for Workers Solidarity: A Green Syndicalist Webzine.
This is an outstanding overview of the anarchist movement. It covers the period from 1868 (the approximate beginning of revolutionary anarchism as a movement) to 1939 (the defeat of the Spanish Revolution and the beginning of World War II). While anarchism has been a world movement, this book only covers European and U.S. anarchism, which has inherent limitations (also, the author admits to only reading English). Further, the text does not discuss all tendencies which have been regarded as anarchist. It does not deal with individualist or market-oriented anarchisms, nor with anarchist-pacifism nor some other trends.
Instead it focuses on what has been referred to as revolutionary class-struggle anarchism, also called libertarian socialism or communism. Today some advocate anarchisms without revolution or the working class. However, Lucien van der Walt considers that “the broad anarchist tradition.” (van der Walt & Schmidt 2009; p. 19) Baker might agree with this, but would probably not go as far as van der Walt when he writes, “‘Class struggle’ anarchism, sometimes called revolutionary or communist anarchism, is not a type of anarchism; in our view it is the only anarchism.” (same; emphasis in original) In any case, this is the anarchism that Baker concentrates on, which in itself contains a host of internal conflicts and controversies.
Unlike some other books on this subject, Baker does not report on the lives and works of the most influential anarchists. Instead she is interested in the ideas and practices of the movement as such. This involves an effort to research what members of the movement—influential writers but also ordinary militants—were doing and saying. She tries to reconstruct the basic trends within anarchism during this period (in Europe and the U.S.), to draw them out and rationally discuss them.
Anarchism does not have an official, orthodox, philosophy, comparable to the “dialectical materialism” of Marxism. But, as Baker summarizes, “The central argument of this book is that…anarchists…were grounded in a theoretical framework—the theory of practice—which maintained that, as people engage in activity, they simultaneously change the world and themselves…the anarchist commitment to the unity of means and ends.” (p. 10)
In philosophy this is often called “praxis,” a Greek word meaning practice-integrated-with-theory, as opposed to superficially empirical practice. As Baker knows, this was a fundamental aspect of Karl Marx’s method, developed out of the dialectical theory of G.W.F. Hegel. Michael Bakunin, a “founder” of revolutionary anarchism, also studied Hegel’s philosophy. A number of philosophers have considered the implications of focusing on humanity as actively productive, consciously interacting with objective reality, simultaneously changing the world and themselves. (Bernstein 1971; Price 2014)
Controversies Among Anarchists
The book begins with the origins of the anarchist movement as an anti-statist wing of working class socialism. It reviews the values and basic strategies of anarchist anti-capitalism. This focuses on “direct action” by workers and the oppressed against the bosses and the state. Direct action included strikes, boycotts, tenant strikes, and civil disobedience. But anarchists also established schools for children and adults, community libraries, popular theaters, and sports clubs.
“Anarchism…emerged in parallel with, and opposition to, various forms of state socialism.” (p. 141) Baker goes through anarchists’ reasons for rejecting parliamentarianism as well as Leninist revolutionary replacement of the existing state with a new (dictatorial) one. The state is a centralized, bureaucratic, hierarchical institution, standing over and above the rest of society, serving the interests of an exploitive minority. It cannot be used to build a classless, stateless, and non-oppressive society, whatever Marxists may think. She points out, correctly, that the program of state socialism in practice can only end in state capitalism.
While revolutionary anarchists agreed on certain fundamental commitments, they also had a number of disagreements. “Broadly speaking the anarchist movement can be divided into two main strategic schools of thought: insurrectionist anarchism and mass anarchism.” (p. 171) (These were not terms used at the time, but were later assigned by van der Walt.) There was a great deal of overlapping of the schools in actual practice by individuals and groups; these are “pure types.” (“Insurrectionism” has also been called “terrorism” by some, “guerrilla warfare” by others.)
The “insurrectionists” built little groups, which fluctuated in composition, and were associated—if at all—in loose networks. They were regarded as “anti-organizationalists,” although they put out newspapers and had networks. They engaged in violent actions by individuals or small groups against the government or capitalist enterprises, sometimes against individual politicians or businesspeople or just random citizens (eventually called “propaganda of the deed”). By such methods they hoped to trigger social revolution.
The “mass anarchists” (I would have preferred “mass struggle anarchists”) wanted big associations, such as labor unions, community groups, anti-war organizations. These would be radically democratic, militant, and independent of capitalist institutions. This type of anarchist was often “dual-organizationalist,” being for specific organizations of anarchists which would work inside and out of larger mass organizations. Their goal was to build popular struggles by workers and every other oppressed group, initially around immediate reform issues, but eventually leading to a social revolution.
Baker clearly comes down against insurrectionist anarchism due to its 150 years of failure. It is true that mass struggle anarchism also has not succeeded in making the revolution. But it has led to large unions in a number of countries, big anarchist federations, and significant military struggles. This is not enough—nothing short of a successful revolution is enough—but it has been more than insurrectionism has done.
Baker is fully aware that anarchist-socialist revolution must include all the oppressed and exploited, with concerns which overlap with class issues but also are distinct. This includes women, African-Americans, and so on. (But she does not discuss ecological issues.) “We must…struggle against all forms of oppression simultaneously. The self-emancipation of the working classes can only be achieved through intersectional class struggle.” (p. 359)
This included support for national liberation struggles against imperialist domination (which is very different from taking sides in wars in which both sides are imperialists). “For anarchists, this commitment to universal human solidarity entailed an opposition to imperialism and colonialism and the support of anti-colonial national liberation movements….According to Maximoff, ‘the anarchists demand the liberation of all colonies and support every struggle for national independence….’ The main goal of national liberation movements—emancipation—could only be achieved through the methods of anarchism, rather than the establishment of a new state.” (pp. 109—110) That is quite contrary to the belief of many ignorant anarchists today that anarchism is opposed to national self-determination. (Many anarchists reject support for the Ukrainian people against Russian imperialist aggression on this false ground.)
Syndicalist Anarchism
However, for Baker, this “intersectionality” does not deny the importance of the working class. This class has a central role in the total process of production and therefore has potentially great strategic power. This leads to her discussion of syndicalism. “All forms of syndicalist anarchism argued that workers should form federally structured trade unions that engaged in direct action and were independent of political parties….to pursue the double aim of winning immediate improvements in the present and overthrowing capitalism…in the long term.” (p. 279)
She divides “syndicalist anarchism” into three types: “revolutionary syndicalism,” “syndicalism-plus,” and “anarcho-syndicalism.” In her categorizing, revolutionary syndicalism would be open to all workers in their shop or industry, regardless of whether they were anarchists. Anarchist militants would seek to make the union as worker-run and militant as possible, with no association with any political party or tendency.
Syndicalism-plus (a term she took from Iain McKay) also had an “open” membership and would be non-affiliated to any political grouping. While anarchists would not try to take over the unions, they would not dissolve in them either. They would still form their own specific anarchist organization, to work inside and outside the syndicalist union. Anarcho-syndicalism, in her conception, would explicitly commit its unions to anarchist revolution. Probably this would be written into their constitutions. Baker reviews the arguments pro and con for the different versions of syndicalist anarchism. She notes that the distinction between revolutionary syndicalism and anarcho-syndicalism has become blurred (which she largely blames on Rudolf Rocker).
As mentioned, Baker says that syndicalist anarchists (in contrast to insurrectionist anarchists) “pursue the double aim of winning immediate improvements in the present….” However, she makes one exception: “One reform that mass anarchists consistently opposed was universal suffrage within existing capitalist states…included women’s suffrage….” (p. 237) I don’t doubt her accuracy but I think this is as aspect of anarchist sectarian over-purity.
I am thinking of the struggle for the right to vote for African Americans in the early ‘60s. Undoubtedly, there was the conscious aim of the liberal wing of the U.S. capitalist class to co-opt the mass movement and channel it into the Democratic Party . And the Black leadership was agreeable to this. On the other hand, the actual struggle involved massive civil disobedience (law-breaking) and independent organizing. The goal of being allowed to vote was also a valid goal. It meant that Black people would no longer be second class citizens. It is better to live under a bourgeois democracy than under a racist and semi-fascist tyranny (which is what the segregationist South was). This does not deny the need for anarchists to point out the limitations of bourgeois representative democracy, which would not really free the Black population from the bottom of society. (Another example of sectarian inflexibility is the syndicalist anarchists rejection of “joining reformist unions.” [p. 273] Carried out consistently, it would limit their ability to reach the mass of workers.)
Baker’s last chapter before concluding is about organizational dualism. This is the idea that anarchists should organize themselves, or at least those with whom they are in substantial agreement. And this organized minority should become part of broader organizations and movements, including but not limited to, unions. She reviews the history from Bakunin’s “Brotherhoods,” to the syndicalists’ concept of the “militant minority,” to the “Platform” of Makhno and Arshinov, to Malatesta’s ideas, and so on. Such political organization would be different from the Leninist concept of the centralized vanguard party. It would not aim at taking power for itself or establishing its own state. Its only aim was to encourage the workers and oppressed to organize themselves and reorganize society by themselves. To help people change the world as they change themselves.
References
Baker, Zoe (2023). Means & Ends: The Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism in Europe and the United States. Chico CA: AK Press.
Bernstein, Richard J. (1971). Praxis and Action; Contemporary Philosophies of Human Activity. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Price, Wayne (2014) “Anarchism and the Philosophy of Pragmatism.” https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/wayne-price-anarchism-and-the-philosophy-of-pragmatism
van der Walt, Lucien, & Schmidt, Michael (2009). Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism.
Oakland CA: AK Press.
*written for Workers Solidarity: A Green Syndicalist Webzine
Comments
This appears to cover a
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 14:19
This appears to cover a period ending 84 years ago. While the larger capitalist society around us keeps changing, these conceptions of a response to it cannot change. Everything is only good and valid in its time, and the time for this has passed irrevocably.
Crazy that a book about
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 14:48
In reply to This appears to cover a by anon (not verified)
Crazy that a book about history, written by a historian, as their dissertation for a history PhD, covers events and ideas that were developed in the past.
Works like this always seem
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 19:38
In reply to Crazy that a book about by anon (not verified)
Works like this always seem to inadvertently draw attention to the possibility that "The Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism" is irrevocably a thing of an increasingly distant past. This does mean that the prospects for an anti-capitalist social revolution have disappeared -- in the United States they are growing by the minute -- but that anarchism no longer has any vital contribution to make here.
yeah but a lot of historical
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 21:10
In reply to Works like this always seem by anon (not verified)
Themes repeat themselves, and if evolutionary science understands how life works at all, then people are basically incapable of becoming fundamentally different.
In other words, im not expecting a large anti capitalist revolution either. Everytime leftists think it will happen it doesnt. Plus, some people speak of replacing and competing systems, but communism has consistently failed in not being capitalist. More likely, there will be internet voting in 200 years, which is a creepy thing to imagine.
Listen brah capitalism IS
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 22:13
In reply to yeah but a lot of historical by CalvinSmith (not verified)
Listen brah capitalism IS communism at a subliminal level for all who have deficient analytical cognitive abilities to seperate reality from myth!
Shut the FUCK up, brah. The
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 22:19
In reply to Listen brah capitalism IS by anon (not verified)
Shut the FUCK up, brah. The shit is leaking out of your anus there SO MUCH of it!
Your mimicry has NOT gone unnoticed and we laugh at your complete lack of your own personality. Scrounge a nickel from the folds in your belly and buy yourself one, brah, or no more dumpster poutine for you!
Who are all these brah's?
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 22:42
In reply to Shut the FUCK up, brah. The by anon (not verified)
I am a cis-gendered female who misnamed at birth. Being given a male name when you have a vagina is traumatic. Have solidarity with me: I am not a brah.
Ttake your,,,,,,vitamins,
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 22:51
In reply to Who are all these brah's? by CalvinSmith (not verified)
Ttake your,,,,,,vitamins, Calvin.
Huuh, all these ableist attacks on my mental health just seem to
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 23:06
In reply to Ttake your,,,,,,vitamins, by anon (not verified)
result from the exact same imagined identities you think I have. I would say more, but a large percentage of the times i try to good faith criticize people on here or make a joke, my comment gets erased.
POOR ME.
NoOoooooo vitamin d is good
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 23:18
In reply to Huuh, all these ableist attacks on my mental health just seem to by CalvinSmith (not verified)
NoOoooooo vitamin d is good for your anus! NoOooo ableisms, brah, I'm just thinking about your gut microbiome nutrition!
my "gut microbiome nutrition"
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 23:46
In reply to NoOoooooo vitamin d is good by anon (not verified)
Okay dude, ill get that poop to anus transplant from a healthier person like the NPR book club raves about! You certainly know how to replace a doctor!
im honestly a little confused
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 00:31
In reply to Listen brah capitalism IS by anon (not verified)
whether you are agreeing with me or are attacking my intelligence/competence again, because thats basically what i was saying: capitalism and communism are both bureaucratic power games to an extent, but capitalism has remained a more seemingly useful/sustainable method for brokering that power because it allows for more depersonalization and dissassociation. It's not a political ideology: the ideological aspects of capitalism come from the state and celebrity marketing. The state typically couches their mobster activities in terms of the future and the children, whereas celebrities make life seem glamorous and play a role in promoting the internalization of the state's morality.
The above rant i just created might be bullshit, but that is how i sometimes percieve any sort of an anarcho-political position.
I am personally no hater of "The Capitalists" and "The Rich" like the red anarchists...but there are exceptions of course. Personally, my least favorite capitalist would have to be elan musk, but that has to do with his media representation than any sort of fictitious moral character that i could tell you about.
You are the hero the anus
anon (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 01:07
In reply to im honestly a little confused by CalvinSmith (not verified)
You are the hero the anus collective deserves on their highly moderated webblog. Maybe you comment everyday, all day, forever.
Simple...It's a bio
anon (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 01:16
In reply to Listen brah capitalism IS by anon (not verified)
Simple...It's a bio-industrial human behavioral syndrome unique to industrialized merchant societies.
The pathology phrasing of human behavior is always
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 05:17
In reply to Simple...It's a bio by anon (not verified)
juicy, wilhem reich would surely be proud of you.
I admire Reich's lateral
anon (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 05:35
In reply to The pathology phrasing of human behavior is always by CalvinSmith (not verified)
I admire Reich's lateral theorology yeeEees, elon musk, I hold him and his feeble attempts at looking cool doing a watered-down twist dance in a suit with contempt!
More likely, there will be
anon (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 10:24
In reply to yeah but a lot of historical by CalvinSmith (not verified)
More likely, there will be little to no human existence on the planet in 200 years, which is an unavoidable thing to imagine.
I definetly prefer that over the internet voting possibility.
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 11:17
In reply to More likely, there will be by anon (not verified)
One of the saddest developments of civilization so far has been the frantic safeguarding of human life. It's reflected in every funeral, and was also reflected with the death of the great anarchist firebrand...Aragorn! He got the short and open ended analogue life he wanted, why not everyone else?
No, we as humans will never be content to wither away and die so easily, but there is no sense in denying that we have no control. I personally am in love with Nietzsche's hashing out of determinism. It reminds of this one futurama episode where the characters lived out their universe cycle ad-infinitum, but i think 10 feet above every time. I like that version of things a lot more than the assertion that we are bad and need to change. Of course, i'm not sure how the anarchy web feels about human universalism 56 years after the beginning of the hippy cycle.
i might not get around to reading this
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 15:15
whole article, but im definetly interested in this book...zoe baker has always struck me as a fairly chill red anarchist or socialist.
I think price's opinion here that liberal boog democracy is better than the more blatantly racist south to be interesting. Im not sure how compatible that is with anarchism, or the black panther-esque thinking.
Listen you accademicaloid
anon (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 21:30
In reply to i might not get around to reading this by CalvinSmith (not verified)
Listen you accademicaloid media-esque reporter on the milieu, like your troll buddy liumpy blah blah
"Im not sure how compatible that is with anarchism, or the black panther-esque thinking."
NooOooo, it's not compatible in the least!
Do you have citations for that?
AcadaVin (not verified) Sat, 07/01/2023 - 22:43
In reply to Listen you accademicaloid by anon (not verified)
In my opinion, Joe Biden will not relieve your student loans, so the least you could do is provide citations.
i personally love this very based adjective flame of
CalvinSmith (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 11:20
In reply to Listen you accademicaloid by anon (not verified)
"accademicoloid"! Only on anarchist news can you make up works like that, very primal, anti-intellectual, and camusian.
Revolutionary Anarchist History is Still Relevant
Wayne Price (not verified) Sun, 07/02/2023 - 14:42
Several writers ask why it is worth reviewing a book about anarchist history. Isn't that all...in the past? Hasn't anarchism and libertarian socialism been proven to be irrelevant failures?
Unfortunately, we still live under capitalism and the state, not to mention racism, nationalism, and war. The old problems which anarchism was created to deal with have not gone away. If anything they are worse and threaten to destroy humanity and the world's ecology. Some of us think that lessons can be learned from the history of anarchism. We still think that revolutionary anarchism holds important ideas which are necessary for saving humanity. Others disagree. But they have the burden of saying why anarchism is no longer useful--besides that time has passed. Sure it hasn't saved the world. But neither has capitalism and its state.
Some writers here seem to think that it is un-anarchist to say that it is easier to live under bourgeois representative democracy than under fascist or Stalinist totalitarianism or under Jim Crow racial segregation. Note that I did NOT say that bourgeois representative democracy is a good thing. I did NOT deny that anarchists seek to overthrow any and all forms of the state, no matter how apparently "liberal democratic" it is. I did say that it is easier for radicals and working people to live and organize under bourgeois democracy. It is easier for Black people to organize and struggle when whites are not legally dominant in schools and transportation, etc. This is so obvious that I can hardly think that we are arguing it.
Add new comment