By Petri Lahtinen
Activism
One of the main ways in which anarchism can influence and challenge the status quo is through activism and its various forms. Contemporary anarchist activism is theorised as a result of a result of practices. It also theorises the practices themselves and re-theorises historical practices in changed political contexts. Based on a rough division of contemporary anarchism, six different forms of activism can be distinguished. Insurrectionary anarchism refers to a principled refusal to negotiate or compromise with opponents. Insurrectionary anarchism is not so much an ideological position as a multifaceted current with many different variations. It is often described as a ‘politics of aggression’, whose presence is manifested in sabotage and political communications against businesses and state organisations. Class-struggle anarchism has emerged as a critical response to the rise of feminist, ecological and other movements that view anarchism as having ignored the concept of class in its analyses of oppression. Class-struggle anarchists tend to be feminists, anti-racists and greens in their values, but above all they are anti-capitalist egalitarians fighting against bourgeois privilege and state power.
From the feminist and anti-racist movements, many contemporary forms of anarchism have adopted the concept of intersectionality in their analysis of different forms of oppression. Intersectionality is the view that racial, gender, heterosexual and class oppression are interrelated and intersecting. Therefore, an integrated analysis and practice is needed to tackle the main systems of oppression responsible for creating and sustaining many of the inequalities and injustices that exist today. Equally, many trends in feminism share similarities with anarchist ideology: patriarchy is almost unambiguously seen in feminist trends as a social and societal oppression.
Post-left anarchy, on the other hand, tends to be unambiguously apolitical, hedonistic and proudly individualistic: individual freedom and happiness are, according to this form of activism, the yardsticks of a good society. Social anarchism refers to the tendency of anarchism to allow the expression and development of mutual help. It is both the practice of alternative lifestyles and an anarchist ethic of care; it is the construction of anarchist non-governmental cultures. Post-anarchism seeks to articulate a critique of power by reformulating anarchist ideas of freedom and change. anarchism with a small ‘a’ focuses on different movements rather than theory. However, it also describes the change to Anarchism with a capital ‘a’, which refers to the anarchism of the so-called founding fathers of anarchism such as Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin. anarchism with a small ‘a’ is also understood in many different ways: sometimes it seeks to show the evolution of anarchist principles and aspirations over time, and sometimes it emphasises the obsolescence of revolution in the post-materialist and post-industrial era. Sometimes it is used to expose the shortcomings of 19th century anarchist theory, sometimes to highlight the ethical core of anarchism. However, running through anarchism with a small ‘a’ is the idea that historical anarchism is an ideology-to-rival-Marxism, and that anarchist activism should be understood as pluralistic.
The historical connection of anarchism and communism
As far as Marxism is concerned, it can be briefly stated here that historically anarchism and communism have always been closely connected with each other. Both see capitalism as a major social problem that generates and sustains alienation among workers. Moreover, it opens up a rift between the worker, his work and its products. In anarchism, wage labour in particular is often seen as an extension of the historical system of slavery: in a wage labour system, the worker is simply forced to find himself a master – the owner of the means of production and the paymaster. Since the material existence of the wage-earner is highly dependent on the capital of the employer, the former has to tolerate the arbitrariness, indifference and sometimes even cruelty of the latter. Just as the purpose of state-controlled education is to produce cogs in the wheels of a uniform culture, in the capitalist labour market the worker is reduced to being merely a cog in the capitalist machine. In practice, this means that the worker is almost invariably replaced by another cog. The worker’s personality, sociality and identity are meaningless in this equation unless the worker is able to commodify and sell them on the labour market.
One of the more central forms of activism that anarchists use to challenge current practices of production and work is the refusal to work. It should be pointed out that what is meant here is specifically refusal of wage labour. On the one hand, wage labour is perceived as an extension of the slave system, but on the other hand, wage labour is often linked to capitalist production, which alienates people from the products of their own labour, causes various mental health problems and destroys the viability of natural environments. Moreover, historically, there has been more talk of so-called ‘shit jobs’ (known also as McJobs), which are generally understood to be inhospitable and undesirable work with poor working conditions and low pay. Nowadays, the term ‘bullshit job’ has also applied alongside with the shit jobs. Bullshit job has become known in particular through the writings of the anthropologist David Graeber. In contrast to shit jobs, bullshit jobs are work that is perceived as essentially meaningless and pointless, both for the worker and for the work product itself. Instead of wage labour, shit jobs and bullshit jobs, anarchists are oriented towards more meaningful work, which can include work in cooperatives, small communities, organisations, farms, bike shops and other non-profit activities that often fall outside traditional wage labour. The main point is that the work done actually serves the needs and well-being of one’s community, people, non-human animals and the natural environment. A social security reform such as the basic income advocated by Global Visions would be one possible way to facilitate a shift away from wage labour and towards the examples of work in the public interest mentioned above.
Gustav Landauer, the leading German anarchist theorist of the 1800s and 1900s, considered the oppressed to be a large group of workers who had no stake in capitalism: they lived under the threat of permanent unemployment, were threatened with poverty because of old age, accident at work or illness, and had no income and no opportunities for intellectual or cultural life at their disposal. Landauer’s contemporary, David Andrade, on the other hand, thought that workers would set up cooperatives that would buy goods in bulk and run an anarchist economy by selling them to the public within the capitalist state system. The cooperatives would create their own capital, buy their own land, set up their own factories and shops and build their own housing. The expansion of the movement over time would depend on both the economic success of the enterprises and the sustainability of their political arrangements.
Anarchist reservations towards utopian thinking
In anarchist political thought, there is a strong tendency towards different utopias and the way they are conceived. However, many anarchists have reservations about the concept of utopia: today, many anarchists defend anarchy as a good idea precisely because they see it not as a utopia but as an actual possibility. Indeed, pro-utopian anarchists typically define themselves as ‘anti-utopian utopians’, i.e. critics of utopian plans. One central version of an anarchist utopia is a model that is inherently designed to last. This model is usually projected into the future and has a strong organisational element. The aim is thus to imagine viable anarchies that empower individuals while avoiding so-called ‘dead structures’. One of the best-known theories of anarchist utopia is P. M. Widmer’s bolo’bolo. A general observation that can be made about anarchist utopias here is that Widmer states that the limits of utopia are inevitable because our reality limits our options. Dreams, ideal visions, utopias, longings and alternatives are, according to Widmer, only new illusions. If we rely on them, we will only be seduced into participating in a system of progress. The alternative is to create an entirely different reality. People should not think about the near future, about any prospective alternative, and it is not about reality but about understanding individual desires – regardless of their practicality.
Another influential anarchist utopian theory that can be cited is the concept of transitional utopias. The best known single theoretical example of this is the so-called TAZ, which stands for “Temporary Autonomous Zone”. The concept was introduced by the American anarchist and writer Hakim Bey (pseudonym of Peter Lamborn Wilson) in his 1991 essay The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism. The idea behind TAZ is a form of social and political theory that explores the creation of temporary, liberated spaces as a means of resisting and subverting hierarchical and oppressive structures. Key points of TAZ theory include 1) the temporary nature: TAZs are seen as temporary and transient spaces that exist outside or on the margins of formal social structures. They are not intended to be permanent or fixed, but rather to emerge spontaneously and disappear before the authorities have time to react; 2) autonomy: TAZs are spaces of autonomy where individuals can voluntarily come together and engage in activities and relationships free from the constraints imposed by mainstream institutions and control systems. The emphasis is on self-management and self-expression; 3) resistance: the creation of TAZs is seen as a form of resistance against the dominant power structures. By establishing these temporary zones, individuals can experiment with alternative ways of living and organising themselves and challenge established norms and authorities; 4) Creative and poetic elements. The idea is that these zones should be spaces where individuals can express themselves freely and creatively, thus fostering a sense of liberation; 4) Poetic terrorism: Bey also introduces the concept of “poetic terrorism”, which involves subversive and creative acts aimed at challenging the established order and bringing about change. These acts are not intended to cause physical harm, but rather to disrupt dominant power structures through symbolic and cultural means.
Anarchists continue to argue about violence and its role in anarchist activism. Indeed, several leading anarchist theorists have argued that the turn to non-violence has reinforced the tendency to judge activists’ actions in terms of violence. Again, it should be noted that violence here does not only mean the infliction of pain and suffering on sentient beings, but also, more broadly, sabotage and vandalism of objects and property. The destruction of property is also violence, because it involves the deliberate use of physical force to damage an object owned by someone who does not want this to happen. At the same time, however, violence aimed towards objects and property can be argued to be violence of a different nature compared to violence directed at the body or mind of a sentient being. Indeed, sabotage and vandalism remain viable forms of activism in many anarchist tendencies because they aim to strike directly at harmful structures. For example, in the light of the current environmental crises, the potential for sabotage and vandalism is significant: in particular, ecologically committed anarchists argue that the current climate movements should declare and implement a ban on all new carbon-emitting devices: these devices should be decommissioned and destroyed, while the property of the richest 1-10% would be expropriated. This would wipe out nearly half of all emissions at once and would finance many times over the global transition towards sustainability that respects planetary boundaries.
In his final blog post Anarchism (part three), Petri Lahtinen discusses the role of democracy and anarchism. He concludes this blog series with final thoughts on what the anarchist viewpoint may offer in the pursuit of a better world.
SOURCES:
Deneen, Patrick J.: Why Liberalism Failed, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2018.
Europe refuses to work: interviews and critique of the prevailing work.Interviews by Lasse Poser, Ilona Raivio, Henri Salonen; essays by Klaus Maunuksela, Pontus Kurokuru; photos by Henri Salonen. Helsinki: Khaos Publishing 2023.
Haymarket Statements of the Accused: Address of Albert Parsons. https://www.marxists.org/subject/mayday/articles/speeches.html#PARSONS
Kinna, Ruth: The Government of No One: The Theory and Practice of Anarchism, London: Pelican, an imprint of Penguin Books, 2020.
Make Rojava Green Again. Rojava Internationalist Commune. Tulirinta, Sirpa Elina & Rantanen, Ville. Lode Publishing 2022.
Malm, Andreas: The Progress of This Storm: Nature and Society in a Warming World, New York: Verso 2018.
Malm, Andreas: How to Blow Up a Pipeline. Verso, London 2021.
