Petri Lahtinen
Democracy
Anarchism often has a dichotomous or contradictory relationship with democracy. Again, it is important to clarify that anarchist critique of democracy is mainly directed at neoliberal democracy and parliamentarism. Anarchism’s scepticism of democracy is primarily directed at the inequalities of power that democracy regulates. Even in genuinely liberal systems, where democracy is defended as both a value and a process, many anarchists argue that democracy serves mainly repressive purposes. This analysis is largely based on the fact that most contemporary democratic systems are linked to the ideal of perpetual economic growth and capitalist systems that are perceived as oppressive and destructive. Noam Chomsky’s critique of capitalist democracy is not only that it provides a veil for concentrations of power, but also how capitalist democracy institutionalises, through ritual electoral contests, the division between the leaders and the led: its success in the United States has created a system of international state terrorism and exploitation. Equally, anarchists, particularly those involved in the global justice movements of the 21st century, saw representative government and electoral competition as creating and sustaining elitism and various power hierarchies.
To replace neoliberal democracy and parliamentarism, anarchist theorists offer a variety of alternative methods, many of which are now based on the concept of social ecology. This refers to the idea that the natural and social worlds have been linked by evolution into a single nature consisting of two differentiations. The first, called ‘biotic nature’, is the world as inhabited by non-humans. The second, social nature, describes the effects of human habitation and the changes that humans have made to the world. The prevailing cultures of domination, born of human hierarchies, have led to an artificial separation of the biotic and the social: nature was wrongly conceived as the object of domination, and the economy was organised accordingly. The purpose of social ecology is to bring the first and second natures back together through far-reaching structural and cultural changes.
The concept of social ecology is strongly linked to another concept known as societal ecology. This refers to a social order based on radically democratic structures and built outside traditional state power and centralised control. Instead of a centralised administrative system, societal ecology represents the self-organised regulation of processes of social self-coordination. Such a system breaks away from the capitalist model of service and commodity production and the ideal of continuous economic growth and organises production in a cooperative, ecological and decentralised way. The needs of human beings and other living beings, as well as those of the natural environment, are determined through democratic negotiation, while recognising the potential and limits of an ecological system. In practice, this means that technologies and production, distribution and consumption methods are chosen according to their impact on the natural environment. Even if anarchism is not negative towards technology, some anarchists are sceptical and critical of so-called high technology. The main reason for this is the doubt whether technology can ever be energetically decoupled from the conditions of its production.
The sustainable and ecological society envisaged by anarchists needs a new economic and political basis. On the other hand, anarchism has also drawn inspiration for social organisation from history: Murray Bookchin, for example, took his inspiration from classical Greek democracy. His aim was to incorporate the best features of the Greek polis into the anarchist model of community. Bookchin stripped the Athenian model of its institutionalised forms of power, keeping the non-partisan, anti-parliamentary and anti-representational ideal of direct democratic, open and participatory citizen assemblies and, above all, the idea of a public space and a permanent physical arena for politics. A similar model is also referred to by the concepts of communalism and democratic confederalism, where each member of the community has a direct influence and contribution to the present and future well-being of the community. Consensus decision-making is a key tool for deciding on community issues. It emphasises power-sharing, disagreement resolution, active participation, trust and transparency. There is no set and predetermined process for consensus decision-making, but it typically involves reworking proposals until the outcome is acceptable to all those directly affected by the proposal. In anarchist theory, consensus democracy derived from consensus decision-making is not only a tool to address privilege and oppression, but also a revolutionary challenge to liberal constitutionalism. Consensus democratic processes emphasise the need to transform our existing social relations in order to reconceptualise our local communities.
The main challenges for anarchist societies and their realisation are to challenge and dismantle the existing overwhelming and centralised systems. Indeed, the models of organisation that have presented here work best in a variety of small communities that are able to seek a degree of autonomy and self-sufficiency in their own activities and existence. However, anarchist activism and its organisational models have also been used in larger projects. A good example is provided by various ethnic regions seeking autonomy, such as Catalonia and Kurdistan, which in some places use anarchist methods to break away from central governments and promote their own autonomy. Often these efforts are driven by the experience that the organisation of ecologically and socially sustainable societies can be more effectively achieved at the local level than at the general level. This does not mean, however, that such communities and societies tend to turn inwards only; in line with the cooperative principles already mentioned, anarchist communities often also commit themselves to the principle of mutual cooperation. This means that such societies are also seen to serve their own membership most effectively and to strengthen the cooperative movement by cooperating with each other locally, regionally, nationally and internationally.
Final thoughts
In this text, I have tried to present certain methods and theories of anarchism as they are relevant in the pursuit of a better world. Activism, education and democracy were all highlighted, all of which are key means of influencing the current prevailing systems and structures. However, in weighing up anarchism and its supposed usefulness, one must be careful not to step into an ideological pitfall. Many of liberalism’s sharpest critics point out that we should not seek a substitute ideology for existing liberalism, but rather focus on developing practices that promote new forms of culture, community and civic life. Hence, there is no point in hoping for some kind of all-solving substitute ideology from anarchism either. Instead, the focus should be on the theories and methods that operate within anarchism. If these can be objectively evaluated, and certain negative preconceptions and images of anarchism abandoned, a wide range of means can be found to pursue a better world in a more effective and constructive way.
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.
