ANARCHISM: A DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF LIBERTARIAN IDEAS
Volume 1: From Anarchy to Anarchism (up to 1939)
PREFACE
Anarchy, a society without government, has existed since time immemorial. Anarchism, the doctrine that such a society is desirable, is a much more recent development.
For tens of thousands of years, human beings lived in societies without any formal political institutions or constituted authority. About 6,000 years ago, around the time of the so-called dawn of civilization, the first societies with formal structures of hierarchy, command, control and obedience began to develop. At first, these hierarchical societies were relatively rare and isolated primarily to what is now Asia and the Middle East. Slowly they increased in size and influence, encroaching upon, sometimes conquering and enslaving, the surrounding anarchic tribal societies in which most humans continued to live. Sometimes independently, sometimes in response to pressures from without, other tribal societies also developed hierarchical forms of social and political organization. Still, before the era of European colonization, much of the world remained essentially anarchic, with people in various parts of the world continuing to live without formal institutions of government well into the 19th century. It was only in the 20th century that the globe was definitively divided up between competing nation states which now claim sovereignty over virtually the entire planet.
The rise and triumph of hierarchical society was a far from peaceful one. War and civilization have always marched forward arm in arm, leaving behind a swath of destruction scarcely conceivable to their many victims, most of whom had little or no understanding of the forces arrayed against them and their so-called primitive ways of life. It was a contest as unequal as it was merciless.
Innocent of government, having lived without it for thousands of years, people in anarchic societies had no conception of anarchy as a distinct way of life. Living without rulers was just something they did. Consequently, anarchism, the idea that living without government is a superior way of life, would never have even occurred to them, lacking anything to compare anarchy with until it was too late.
It was only after hierarchical societies arose that people within them began to conceive of anarchy as a positive alternative. Some, such as the early Daoist philosophers in China (Selection 1), looked back to an age without government, when people lived in peace with themselves and the world. Various Christian sects looked forward to the second coming, when the egalitarian brotherly love of Christ and his disciples would triumph over evil (Selection 3). Rationalists, such as Zeno, the founder of Stoicism in ancient Greece, and later Renaissance (Selection 2) and Enlightenment (Selection 4) thinkers, envisaged a new era of enlightenment, when reason would replace coercion as the guiding force in human affairs.
Although none of these early advocates of anarchy described themselves as anarchists, what they all share is opposition to coercive authority and hierarchical relationships based on power, wealth or privilege. In contrast to other radicals, they also reject any authoritarian or privileged role for themselves in the struggle against authority and in the creation of a free society.
We find similar attitudes among some of the revolutionaries in the modern era. During the French Revolution, the enragés (Selection 5) and the radical egalitarians (Selection 6) opposed revolutionary dictatorship and government as a contradiction in terms, and sought to abolish all hierarchical distinctions, including that between the governed and the governors.
But it was not until around the time of the 1848 Revolutions in Europe that anarchism began to emerge as a distinct doctrine (Chapter 4). It was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in France who was the first to describe himself as an anarchist in 1840 (Selection 8). Anarchist ideas soon spread to Germany (Selection 11), Spain (Selection 15) and Italy (Selection 16). Following the failure of the 1848 Revolutions some expatriates, disillusioned by politics, adopted an anarchist position (Selection 14).
As the political reaction in Europe began to ebb in the 1860s, anarchist ideas re-emerged, ultimately leading to the creation of an avowedly anarchist movement from out of the anti-authoritarian sections of the socialist First International (Chapters 5 and 6). The Paris Commune, despite being drowned in blood, gave renewed inspiration to the anarchists and helped persuade many of them to adopt an anarchist communist position (Chapters 7 and 8). The anarchist communists championed the Commune, but insisted that within the revolutionary commune there should be no ruling authority and no private property, but rather free federation and distribution according to need.
Although anarchist communism was perhaps the most influential anarchist doctrine, soon spreading throughout Europe, Latin America and later Asia, the First International had bequeathed to the anarchist movement another doctrine of comparable significance, anarcho-syndicalism (Chapter 12), a combination of anarchism and revolutionary trade unionism based on direct action (Chapter 10) and anti-parliamentarianism.
Of lesser significance were anarchist collectivism (Selections 36 and 55), where distribution of wealth was to be based on labour, and individualist anarchism (Selections 42 and 61), which for the most part was but a footnote to Max Stirner (Selection 11).
At the beginning of the 20th century, a new era of revolutions began, first in Mexico (Chapter 16), then in Russia (Chapter 18), culminating, at least for the anarchists, in Spain (Chapter 23). At the same time, anarchists had to deal with a devastating war in Europe and the rise of totalitarianism (Chapters 17 and 22).
Anarchist ideas spread throughout Latin America (Chapter 19), China (Chapter 20), and Japan and Korea (Chapter 21). I was fortunate to obtain for this volume translations of considerable material from these areas and from Europe that has never before appeared in English. I have also included several translations from now out of print sources that would otherwise be unavailable. Generally, I have organized the selections chronologically, but with a specific theme for each chapter, to try to convey the scope of anarchist ideas, as well as their historical development.
This is the first of a two volume documentary history of anarchist ideas. The final chapter of this volume, with selections from Emma Goldman, Herbert Read and Errico Malatesta, constitutes both an epilogue to volume one, and a prologue to volume two, which will cover the period from 1939 to the present day. I regard all three as important figures in the transition from "classical anarchism," covering the period from Proudhon to the Spanish Revolution, to modern anarchism as it developed after the Second World War.
A review of the material in this volume alone demonstrates how remarkable was the breadth and depth of anarchist thinking for its time. Anarchists and their precursors, such as Fourier, were among the first to criticize the combined effects of the organization of work, the division of labour and technological innovation under capitalism. Anarchists recognized the importance of education as both a means of social control and as a potential means of liberation. They had important things to say about art and free expression, law and morality. They championed sexual freedom but also criticized the commodification of sex under capitalism. They were critical of all hierarchical relationships, whether between father and children, husband and wife, teacher and student, professionals and workers, or leaders and led, throughout society and even within their own organizations. They emphasized the importance of maintaining consistency between means and ends, and in acting in accordance with their ideals now, in the process of transforming society, not in the distant future. They opposed war and militarism in the face of widespread repression, and did not hesitate to criticize the orthodox Left for its authoritarianism and opportunism. They developed an original conception of an all-encompassing social revolution, rejecting state terrorism and seeking to reduce violence to a minimum.
And they paid dearly for it. Several of the contributors to this volume were executed, murdered or killed fighting for their ideals (Pisacane, Landauer, the Haymarket Martyrs, Ferrer, Guerrero, Kôtoku Shûsui, Ôsugi Sakae, Itô Noe, Arshinov, Isaac Puente), as were countless of their comrades. Others died in prison or prematurely as a result of imprisonment (Bakunin, Most, Wilde, Flores Magón, Makhno, Shin Chaeho). Others were the objects of attempted assassinations (Michel, de Cleyre, Malatesta). Still others died in tragic circumstances (Déjacque, Gross, Berkman). Virtually every one of them was imprisoned at various times for advocating anarchy. Anyone honestly assessing the impact of anarchist ideas, or the lack thereof, cannot fail to take this pervasive repression into account. The "competition of ideas" has never been a fair one.