Search Connexions

Connexions Library

Articles, Books, Documents, Periodicals, Audio-Visual


Title Index

Author Index

Subject Index

Chronological Index

Spotlight: Most Popular

Format Index

Dewey Index

Library of Congress Index

Español

Français

Deutsch


Connexipedia:

Connexipedia Title Index

Connexipedia Subject Index

Connexipedia: People

Connexipedia: Events

Connexipedia:
  Movements/Organizations


Search the Library

Connexions Directory
Groups & Websites

Subject Index

Associations Index

SOURCES: Media Spokespeople

Search the Directory

Selected Resources by
Subject Area

Donate or Volunteer

Your support makes our work possible. Please Donate Today

Please Donate Today!
Volunteer and Internship opportunities

Anarchist communism

Anarchist communism is a theory of anarchism which advocates the abolition of the state, private property, and capitalism in favor of common ownership of the means of production,[1][2] direct democracy and a horizontal network of voluntary associations and workers' councils with production and consumption based on the guiding principle: "from each according to ability, to each according to need"[3][4].

While anarchist communists Peter Kropotkin and Murray Bookchin believed that the members of such a society would spontaneously perform all necessary labour because they would recognize the benefits of communal enterprise and mutual aid,[5][page needed] others such as Nestor Makhno and Ricardo Flores Magon had the conviction that all those able to work in an anarchist communist society should be encouraged to do so.[6][7][8][9]. Kropotkin didn't think laziness or sabotage would be a major problem in an authentically anarchist-communist society, but he did agree that a freely associated anarchist commune could, and probably should, deliberately disassociate from those not fulfilling their communal agreement to do their share of work.[10]

Some forms of anarchist communism are egoist and strongly influenced by radical individualism,[11] believing that anarchist communism does not require a communitarian nature at all. But most other forms of anarchist communism are communal and see human beings as social vessels that contribute to a greater collective whole (which is what most communists in general, including Marxist-Leninists, purport to believe; most anarchist communists and left communists counter that the Marxist-Leninist view is insincere and in actuality is authoritarian).

To date in human history, the only successfully-established example of an anarchist communist society, established around the ideas as they exist today, that received worldwide attention and knowledge in the historical canon, is Anarchist Catalonia, a brief territory fashioned during the Spanish Civil War by spanish anarchists and then brutally crushed by the fascist regime that won the war.

Contents

[edit] History

[edit] Early developments

Anarchist communist currents appeared during the English Civil War and the French Revolution of the 1700s. Gerrard Winstanley, who was part of the radical Diggers movement in England, wrote in his 1649 pamphlet, The New Law of Righteousness, that there "shall be no buying or selling, no fairs nor markets, but the whole earth shall be a common treasury for every man," and "there shall be none Lord over others, but every one shall be a Lord of himself."[12] During the French Revolution, Sylvain Maréchal, 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."[12]

An early anarchist communist was Joseph Déjacque, the first person to describe himself as "libertarian".[13] 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."[12][14] According to the anarchist historian Max Nettlau, the first use of the term libertarian communism was in November 1880, when a French anarchist congress employed it to more clearly identify its doctrines.[15] The French anarchist journalist Sébastien Faure, later founder and editor of the four-volume Anarchist Encyclopedia, started the weekly paper Le Libertaire (The Libertarian) in 1895.[16]

The collectivist anarchists advocated remuneration for the type and amount of labor adhering to the principle "to each according to deeds"[17]; 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... [e]veryone 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."[18]

[edit] 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, Emilio Covelli, Errico Malatesta, Andrea Costa and other ex-Mazzinian Republicans[19]. Out of respect for Mikhail Bakunin, they did not make their differences with collectivist anarchism explicit until after Bakunin's death.[20] The collectivist anarchists sought to collectivize ownership of the means of production while retaining payment proportional to the amount and kind of labor of each individual, 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 individual labor and to be remunerated for their particular contribution to production. But, Errico Malatesta put it: "...instead of running the risk of making a confusion in trying to distinguish what you and I each do, let us all work and put everything in common. In this way each will give to society all that his strength permits until enough is produced for every one; and each will take all that he needs, limiting his needs only in those things of which there is not yet plenty for every one."[21]

Cafiero explains in Anarchy and Communism (1880) that private property in the product of labor will lead to unequal accumulation of capital and, therefore, the reappearance of social classes and their antagonisms, and thus the resurrection of the state: "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."[12] 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.

[edit] Peter Kropotkin

Peter Kropotkin, often seen as the most important theorist of anarchist communism, outlined his economic ideas in The Conquest of Bread and Fields, Factories and Workshops. Kropotkin felt that co-operation is more beneficial than competition, arguing in Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution 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,[22] and for the economy to be co-ordinated through a horizontal network of voluntary associations[23] where goods are distributed according to the physical needs of the individual, rather than according to labor.[24] He further argued that these "needs," as society progressed, would not merely be physical needs but "[a]s 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."[25]

He maintained that, in anarcho-communism:

...houses, fields, and factories will no longer be private property, and that they will belong to the commune or the nation and money, wages, and trade would be abolished.

– Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread[26]

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."[27] 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.

We do not want to rob any one of his coat, but we wish to give to the workers all those things the lack of which makes them fall an easy prey to the exploiter, and we will do our utmost that none shall lack aught, that not a single man shall be forced to sell the strength of his right arm to obtain a bare subsistence for himself and his babes. This is what we mean when we talk of Expropriation...

– Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread[28]

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,[29] 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."[29]

In summation, Kropotkin described an anarchist communist economy as functioning like this:

Imagine a society, comprising a few million inhabitants, engaged in agriculture and a great variety of industries--Paris, for example, with the Department of Seine-et-Oise. Suppose that in this society all children learn to work with their hands as well as with their brains. Admit that all adults, save women, engaged in the education of their children, bind themselves to work 5 hours a day from the age of twenty or twenty-two to forty-five or fifty, and that they follow occupations they have chosen in any one branch of human work considered necessary. Such a society could in return guarantee well-being to all its members; that is to say, a more substantial well-being than that enjoyed to-day by the middle classes. And, moreover, each worker belonging to this society would have at his disposal at least 5 hours a day which he could devote to science, art, and individual needs which do not come under the category of necessities, but will probably do so later on, when man's productivity will have augmented, and those objects will no longer appear luxurious or inaccessible. Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread[30]

While many anarcho-communists are opposed to trade, some post-left and 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 non-monetary commons. Others such as Tiziana Terranova easily see anarcho-communism being compatible with a non-hierarchical, open access, free association, non-monetary form of trade such as P2P.[31]

[edit] Organizationalism vs. insurrectionarism

"In 1876, at the Berne conference of the International Working Men's Association, the Italian anarchist Errico Malatesta argued that the revolution "consists more of deeds than words", and that action was the most effective form of propaganda. In the bulletin of the Jura Federation he declared "the Italian federation believes that the insurrectional fact, destined to affirm socialist principles by deed, is the most efficacious means of propaganda".[32]"

As anarcho-communism emerged in the mid 19th century it had an intense debate with bakuninist collectivism and as such within the anarchist movement over participation in syndicalism and the workers movement as well as on other issues.[33] So "In the theory of the revolution" of anarcho-communism as elaborated by Peter Kropotkin and others "it is the risen people who are the real agent and not the working class organised in the enterprise (the cells of the capitalist mode of production) and seeking to assert itself as labour power, as a more 'rational' industrial body or social brain (manager) than the employers."[33].

Johann Most influential german-american anarcho-communist advocate of insurrectionary anarchism

So "between 1880 and 1890"[33] with the "perspective of an immanent revolution,"[33] who was "opposed to the official workers' movement, which was then in the process of formation (general Social Democratisation). They were opposed not only to political (statist) struggles but also to strikes which put forward wage or other claims, or which were organised by trade unions."[33] But "While they were not opposed to strikes as such, they were opposed to trade unions and the struggle for the eight-hour day. This anti-reformist tendency was accompanied by an anti-organisational tendency, and its partisans declared themselves in favour of agitation amongst the unemployed for the expropriation of foodstuffs and other articles, for the expropriatory strike and, in some cases, for 'individual recuperation' or acts of terrorism."[33]

But after Peter Kropotkin along others decided to enter labor unions after their initial reservations[33], there remained "the anti-syndicalist anarchist-communists, who in France were grouped around Sebastien Faure's Le Libertaire. From 1905 onwards, the Russian counterparts of these anti-syndicalist anarchist-communists become partisans of economic terrorism and illegal 'expropriations'."[33] Illegalism as a practice emerged and within it "The acts of the anarchist bombers and assassins ("propaganda by the deed") and the anarchist burglars ("individual reappropriation") expressed their desperation and their personal, violent rejection of an intolerable society. Moreover, they were clearly meant to be exemplary , invitations to revolt."[34]

Proponents and activists of these tactics among others included Johann Most, Luigi Galleani, Victor Serge,Giuseppe Ciancabilla and Severino Di Giovanni. The Italian Giuseppe Ciancabilla (1872–1904) wrote in "Against organization" that "we don't want tactical programs, and consequently we don't want organization. Having established the aim, the goal to which we hold, we leave every anarchist free to choose from the means that his sense, his education, his temperament, his fighting spirit suggest to him as best. We don't form fixed programs and we don't form small or great parties. But we come together spontaneously, and not with permanent criteria, according to momentary affinities for a specific purpose, and we constantly change these groups as soon as the purpose for which we had associated ceases to be, and other aims and needs arise and develop in us and push us to seek new collaborators, people who think as we do in the specific circumstance."[35]

[edit] Revolution and platformism

In Ukraine the anarcho-communist guerrilla leader Nestor Makhno led an independent anarchist army in Ukraine during the Russian Civil War. A commander of the peasant Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine, also known as the Anarchist Black Army, Makhno led a guerrilla campaign during the Russian Civil War. He supported the Bolsheviks, the Ukrainian Directory, the Bolsheviks again, and then turned to organizing the Free Territory of Ukraine, an anarchist society, committed to resisting state authority, whether capitalist or communist.[36][37] This project was cut short by the consolidation of Bolshevik power.

In Mexico Ricardo Flores Magón was one of the major thinkers of the Mexican Revolution and the Mexican revolutionary movement in the Partido Liberal Mexicano. Kropotkin's The Conquest of Bread, which Flores Magón considered a kind of anarchist bible, served as basis for the short-lived revolutionary communes in Baja California during the "Magónista" Revolt of 1911.

A group of exiled russian anarchists attempted to address and explain the anarchist movement's failures during the Russian Revolution. They wrote the Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists which was written in 1926 by Dielo Truda ("Workers' Cause"). The pamphlet is an analysis of the basic anarchist beliefs, a vision of an anarchist society, and recommendations as to how an anarchist organization should be structured. The four main principles by which an anarchist organization should operate, according to the Platform, are ideological unity, tactical unity, collective action, and federalism. The platform argues that "We have vital need of an organization which, having attracted most of the participants in the anarchist movement, would establish a common tactical and political line for anarchism and thereby serve as a guide for the whole movement".

The Platform attracted strong criticism from many sectors on the anarchist movement of the time including some of the most influential anarchists such as Voline, Errico Malatesta, Luigi Fabbri, Camillo Berneri, Max Nettlau, Alexander Berkman[38], Emma Goldman and Gregori Maximoff [39]. Malatesta in a written response to the Platform commented that "Their organisation, being typically authoritarian, far from helping to bring about the victory of anarchist communism, to which they aspire, could only falsify the anarchist spirit and lead to consequences that go against their intentions."[40]

[edit] Economic theory

Anarcho-communism stresses egalitarianism and the abolition of social hierarchy and class distinctions arising from unequal wealth distribution, as well as the abolition of private property and money. Replacing these approaches would be collective production and distribution of wealth by means of voluntary association. In anarchist communism, the state and private 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 overwhelming amount of externalities and contributing factors would need to be taken into account â€“ especially current or past labor contributing to the ability to utilize future labor. As Kropotkin put it: "No distinction can be drawn between the work of each man. Measuring the work by its results leads us to absurdity; dividing and measuring them by hours spent on the work also leads us to absurdity. One thing remains: put the needs above the works, and first of all recognize the right to live, and later on, to the comforts of life, for all those who take their share in production.."[41]

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 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 arbitrary 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. Anarchist communists recognize money as fundamentally quantitative in nature, rather than qualitative. They believe production should be a qualitative matter, and that consumption and distribution should be self-determined by each individual without arbitrary value assigned to labor, goods and services 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 essentially 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 (what is commonly called bartering). Any limits on production and distribution would be determined by the individuals within the groups involved, rather than by capitalist owners, investors, banks or other artificial market pressures.

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.[42] 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 one person or entity, leaving it free to be used by individuals for their own self-determined needs and wants. Land and housing would no longer be subject to rent or property taxes (and therefore, its use would be free of eviction threats). It would instead be subject simply to the desires of occupants on an egalitarian basis. For example, in an apartment building in which many live, no one person would have a say in the arrangements. All who live there would be involved in decisionmaking. It's typically argued that everyone should share certain responsibilities on a revolving-door basis rather than relegate them to any particular individual. This way, no one would get stuck doing labor considered relatively degrading.

Crucially, the abstract relationship of "landlord" and "tenant" would no longer exist, as such titles are held to occur under conditional legal coercion and are not absolutely necessary to occupy buildings or spaces (intellectual property rights would also cease). In addition to believing rent and other fees are exploitative, anarcho-communists feel these are arbitrary pressures inducing people to carry out unrelated functions. For example, they question why one should have to work for 'X hours' a day to merely live somewhere. So instead of working conditionally for the sake of the wage earned, they believe in working directly for the objective at hand. From this it follows that, rather than land being for sale or rent, vacant land and housing would be freely taken regardless of one's employment or financial status (essentially, the "for sale" sign could be replaced by a "vacant" sign). Therefore, in anarcho-communist theory, land used by individuals for themselves or their families, or productive property used to produce for an individual (such as a small farm), would be considered private possessions rather than social possessions. The individual would be perfectly free to create something and keep it as long as it is not a crucial means of production for the community or general public. So an artist's paintbrushes would not need outside approval to be utilized, and the same basic principle would apply to other personal items such as one's toothbrush, musical instruments or book collection, which others needn't tamper with. However, if the matter at hand involves production for society (such as a factory which makes toothbrushes, musical instruments or books), it would become a social possession, accountable to all who work within it and the consuming public. In that regard, anarcho-communism could be considered a compromise between collective and individual use.[43]

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, again, 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 free common use over ownership by society.

[edit] 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.[citation needed] 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 socialization. Many, like Peter Kropotkin, also believe that human evolutionary tendency is for humans to cooperate with each other for mutual benefit and survival instead of existing as lone competitors.[44]

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.[45]

Some anarcho-communists (and collectivist anarchists as well) reject "individualism" and "collectivism" as illusory concepts[46]. 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 separate from the individual, and argue that collective control over the individual is tyrannical and un-anarchistic.[47] Others, such as Lucien Van Der Walt and Michael Schmidt, argue that: "The anarchists did not ... identify freedom with the right of everybody to do exactly what one pleased but with a social order in which collective effort and responsibilities- that is to say, obligations- would provide the material basis and social nexus in which individual freedom could exist." They argued that "genuine freedom and individuality could only exist in a free society" and that in contrast to "misanthropic bourgeois individualism" anarchism was based in "a deep love of freedom, understood as a social product, a deep respect for human rights, a profound celebration of humankind and its potential and a commitment to a form of society where a 'true individuality' was irrevocably linked to 'the highest communist socieability'"[48]

[edit] Criticisms

[edit] Capitalist

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.

The example of the Spanish revolution, in which high levels of mobilisation and swift improvements to production were implemented by anarchists, is often cited as an example of an anarchist-communist society which saw high levels of motivation and rapid improvements to both industrial and scientific output.[49]

Capitalists believe that such a society's productivity and technological progress would stagnate as individuals would not have the incentive to work that monetary reward provides.[50][verification needed]

Capitalists also argue that the only way to obtain and maintain a communal ownership of property and the means of production is by force, claiming that human beings "naturally" seek to keep the fruits of their labor for personal use and distribution. Anarchist communists counter that such a position is neither fixed in nature [51] nor unchangeable in practice, citing numerous examples of communal behavior occurring naturally even within capitalist systems.[52]

[edit] Marxist-Leninist

Historically, Marxist-Leninists have criticized anarchism as being incapable of creating a successful and lasting revolution saying it does not aptly identify issues of class and modes of production, rather defending "the freedom of the small property owner" against large scale capitalist enterprise.[53] However this is more properly attributable to early forms of anarchism including mutualism and individualist anarchism than later forms in the communist tradition, such as anarcho-syndicalism.

Marxist-Leninists also believe that without a transitionary period of state control (their interpretation of the dictatorship of the proletariat) it would be impossible for any revolution to maintain the momentum or cohesion to defend and maintain the new society against external and internal threats. Friedrich Engels noted: "Without a previous social revolution the abolition of the state is nonsense; the abolition of capital is in itself the social revolution and involves a change in the whole method of production."[54] Alternatively, such quotations have been interpreted by Anarcho-Communists supportive of Marx and Engels to suggest the abolition of capitalism and the state simultaneously, not the creation of a new state.

Anarchists reject the Leninist model of the "dictatorship of the proletariat," arguing that any revolutionary minority taking over state power would be just as authoritarian as the ruling class in capitalism in order to defend the new state, and would eventually constitute itself as a new ruling class. Bakunin notes:

If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Czar himself.[55]

Many Marxist-Leninists point to what they consider to be failed 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.[56]

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". Again, the Spanish Revolution is cited as an example of successful anarchist military mobilisation, albeit one crushed by superior forces.

[edit] Anarchist

Mutualists

Founding figure Pierre-Joseph Proudhon foreshadowed mutualist arguments against anarchist communism when he said in opposition to the communist maxim "from each according to ability, to each according to need":

To each according to his works, first; and if, on occasion, I am impelled to aid you, I will do it with a good grace; but I will not be constrained".[57]

Mutualists argue that the collectivization of the means of production implicit in anarchist communism is a removal of liberty, insisting on the individual's right to the full value of their labour and supporting instead a system of limited markets and private property, including mutual labor-owned cooperative firms and associations and run through banks which loan at cost.

Individualist criticisms

Many individualist anarchists believe that elements of anarchist-communism are undesirable or even incompatible with anarchism. Benjamin Tucker referred to it as "pseudo-anarchism"[58] when admonishing Peter Kropotkin for opposing wages. Clarence Lee Swartz says in What is Mutualism: "One of the most important criteria of freedom is the right to private property in the products of one's labor. State Socialists, Communists, Syndicalists and Communist-Anarchists deny private property."

Anarcho-communists counter these criticisms by arguing that the abolition of property creates maximum freedom for all individuals. As Errico Malatesta argues,

“ "The individualists assume ... that the (anarchist) communists wish to impose communism, which of course would put them right outside the ranks of anarchism.

"The communists assume ... that the (anarchist) individualists reject every idea of association, want the struggle between men, the domination of the strongest â€“ and this would put them not only outside the anarchist movement but outside humanity.

"In reality those who are communists are such because they see in common freely accepted the realisation of brotherhood, and the best guarantee for individual freedom. And individualists, those who are really anarchists, are anti-communist because they fear that communism would subject individuals ... to the tyranny of the collectivity ... Therefore they want each individual, or each group, to be in a position to enjoy freely the product of their labour in conditions of equality with other individuals and groups, with whom they would maintain relations of justice and equity.

"In which case it is clear that there is no basic difference between us. But, according to the communists, justice and equity are, under natural conditions impossible of attainment in an individualistic society, and thus freedom too would not be attained.

"If climatic conditions throughout the world were the same, if the land were everywhere equally fertile, if raw materials were evenly distributed and within reach of all who needed them, if social development were the same everywhere in the world ... then one could conceive of everyone ... finding the land, tools and raw materials needed to work and produce independently, without exploiting or being exploited. But natural and historical conditions being what they are, how is it possible to establish equality and justice between he who by chance finds himself with a piece of arid land which demand much labour for small returns with him who has a piece of fertile and well sited land?"[59]

”

[edit] Example societies through history

There have been several attempts, both successful and unsuccessful, at creating other anarchist-communist societies throughout much of the world. Anarchist-communists and some green anarchists (especially anarcho-primivists) argue that hunter-gatherer tribes, like families, were early forms of anarchist-communism, due to their egalitarian nature. Early Christian communities have been described by Christian anarchists and some historians as having anarcho-communist characteristics.

In modern history, the first anarchist communist societies are arguably egalitarian religious communities such as the Diggers Movement during the English Revolution. Large communities and federations of communities such as Anarchist Catalonia and the Free Territory of revolutionary Ukraine are examples of successful 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 anarcho-communism, as could the early kibbutz movement[60].

The flag of the French Fulor Anarcho-Communist movement

The Korean Anarchist Movement in Korea led by Kim Jwa Jin briefly brought anarcho-communism to Korea.[citation needed] The success was short-lived and much less widespread than the anarchism in Spain or Hungary.[citation needed] Some consider the current existing anarchist nature of communities in Argentina and the Zapatista councils in Mexico to be anarcho-communist. Others consider them to be collectivist or syndicalist.

Aspects of the Free Software community, like the Free Software movement, the GNU Project and its copyleft principle are a type of a gift economy for information and software; a gift economy is the preferred economic system of anarcho-communists.[61] Programmers make the source code of their programs available for anyone to copy, modify and improve. Individual programmers gain prestige and respect, and the community benefits from better software. Markus Giesler, in his ethnography Consumer Gift Systems, explored music downloading as a system of social solidarity based on gift transactions.[62][63] Some organizations such as online commons (such as the Wikimedia Commons), wikis and Indymedia are held up as examples of functioning anarcho-communistic organizations.[61]

[edit] See also

[edit] Further reading

[edit] External links

[edit] Anarcho-communist theorists archives

[edit] References

  1. ^ From Politics Past to Politics Future: An Integrated Analysis of Current and Emergent Paradigms Alan James Mayne Published 1999 Greenwood Publishing Group 316 pages ISBN 0275961516
  2. ^ Anarchism for Know-It-Alls By Know-It-Alls For Know-It-Alls, For Know-It-Alls Published by Filiquarian Publishing, LLC., 2008 ISBN 1599862182, 9781599862187 72 pages
  3. ^ Fabbri, Luigi. "Anarchism and Communism." Northeastern Anarchist #4. 1922. 13 October 2002. http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/worldwidemovements/fabbrianarandcom.html
  4. ^ Makhno, Mett, Arshinov, Valevski, Linski (Dielo Trouda). "The Organizational Platform of the Libertarian Communists". 1926. Constructive Section: available here http://www.nestormakhno.info/english/platform/constructive.htm
  5. ^
  6. ^ Dielo Trouda Editoral Group. "Supplement to the Organizational Platform (Questions and Answers)". 2 November 1926. "Supplement to the Organizational Platform (Questions and Answers)"
  7. ^ Puente, Isaac. "Libertarian Communism". 1932. The Cienfuegos Press Anarchist Review #6. Orkney. English Translation 1982. Also available at: http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/libcom.html
  8. ^ Berneri, Camilo. "The Problem of Work". pp. 59-82, Why Work?. Vernon Richards (ed.). p. 74
  9. ^ Flores, Magon; Rivera, Librado; Figueroa, Anselmo; Magon, Enrique Flores. "Manifesto". 23 September 1911. Dreams of Freedom: A Ricardo Flores Magon Reader. Chaz Bufe and Mitchell Cowen Verter (ed.) 2005. pgs. 139,141 & 144
  10. ^ Kropotkin, Peter The Conquest of Bread, Ch. 12, Objections, first published 1892, also at [1]
  11. ^ Christopher Gray, Leaving the Twentieth Century, p. 88.
  12. ^ a b c d Robert Graham, Anarchism - A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas - Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300CE to 1939), Black Rose Books, 2005
  13. ^ Joseph Déjacque, De l'être-humain mâle et femelle - Lettre à P.J. Proudhon par Joseph Déjacque (in French)
  14. ^ "l'Echange", article in Le Libertaire no 6, September 21, 1858, New York. [2]
  15. ^ Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press. p. 145. ISBN 0900384891. 
  16. ^ Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press. p. 162. ISBN 0900384891. 
  17. ^ Kropotkin, Peter. The Wages System. 1920. Also available: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/kropotkin-peter/1920/wage.htm quote: "Such, in a few words, is the organization which the Collectivists desire ... their principles are: collective property in the instruments of labor and remuneration of each worker according to the time spent in productive toil, taking into account the productiveness of his work."
  18. ^ James Guillaume, Ideas on Social Organization
  19. ^ Nunzio Pernicone, "Italian Anarchism 1864 - 1892", pp. 111-113, AK Press 2009.
  20. ^ James Guillaume, "Michael Bakunin - A Biographical Sketch"
  21. ^ Malatesta, Errico. A Talk About Anarchist Communism Between Two Workers. Also available at: http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_Archives/malatesta/MalatestaATAC.html
  22. ^ Peter Kropotkin, Words of a Rebel, p99.
  23. ^ Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread, p145.
  24. ^ Marshall Shatz, 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.'"
  25. ^ Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread Chapter IX The Need For Luxury
  26. ^ Kropotkin, Peter Chapter 13 The Collectivist Wages System from The Conquest of Bread, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York and London, 1906.
  27. ^ The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought
  28. ^ Kropotkin, Peter The Conquest Of Bread Chapter IV
  29. ^ a b Kropotkin Act for yourselves. N. Walter and H. Becker, eds. (London: Freedom Press 1985) [p. 104-5]
  30. ^ Kropotkin, Peter The Conquest Of Bread Chapter VIII, Ways and Means
  31. ^ Tiziana Terranova, "Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy". 07-26-2005
  32. ^ "Propaganda by the deed" by Workers Solidarity No 55 published in October 1998
  33. ^ a b c d e f g h "This inability to break definitively with collectivism in all its forms also exhibited itself over the question of the workers' movement, which divided anarchist-communism into a number of tendencies.""Anarchist-Communism" by Alain Pengam
  34. ^ "The "illegalists" by Doug Imrie. From "Anarchy: a Journal Of Desire Armed" , Fall-Winter, 1994-95
  35. ^ "Against organization" by Giuseppe Ciancabilla. Retrieved 2010-06-10.
  36. ^ Yekelchyk 2007, p 80.
  37. ^ Charles Townshend, John Bourne, Jeremy Black (1997). The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern War. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198204272. 
  38. ^ "â¿Wooden shoes or platform shoes? on the organizational platform of the libertarian communists" by Bob Black
  39. ^ J.3.4 Why do many anarchists oppose the "Platform"? on An Anarchist FAQ
  40. ^ "A Project of Anarchist Organisation" by Errico Malatesta (1927)
  41. ^ Kropotkin, Peter. "The Collectivist Wage System". The Conquest of Bread, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York and London, 1906, Chapter 13, Section 4
  42. ^ Alexander Berkman. What is Anarchism?, p. 217
  43. ^ Kropotkin Act for yourselves. N. Walter and H. Becker, eds. (London: Freedom Press 1985) [p. 104-5]
  44. ^ Peter Kropotkin Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution[3]
  45. ^ http://deoxy.org/endwork.htm
  46. ^ "A.2 What does anarchism stand for?". Archived from the original on 2009-10-25. http://www.webcitation.org/5kmoMlk6V. [dead link]
  47. ^ The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought, p. 14-15
  48. ^ Schmidt, Michael & van der Walt, Lucien. Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism, CounterPower Vol. I. AK Press. 2009. Page 48
  49. ^ Dolgoff, Sam. The Anarchist Collectives, ch. 10
  50. ^ Donald F. Busky, Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union. Praeger/Greenwood 2002, p. 101
  51. ^ Kropotkin, Peter. Mutual Aid
  52. ^ Ward, Colin. Anarchism in Action
  53. ^ Socialism From Below McNally, David
  54. ^ "Letter from Engels to Theodore Cuno". Friedrich Engels. 1872. http://eprints.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/marx/works/1872/letters/72_01_24.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-07. 
  55. ^ (Quoted in Daniel Guerin, Anarchism: From Theory to Practice (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970), pp.25-26)
  56. ^ Marxism and direct action by Phil Mitchinson http://www.marxist.com/Theory/direct_action.html
  57. ^ Pierre Joseph Proudhon, System of Economical Contradictions: or, the Philosophy of Misery
  58. ^ Benjamin Tucker, Labor and its Pay
  59. ^ Errico Malatesta, Life and Ideas, pp. 31-2
  60. ^ James Horrox, A Living Revolution: Anarchism in the Kibbutz Movement. pp.61-84
  61. ^ a b Barbrook, Richard. "The Hi-Tech Gift Economy". First Monday. http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue3_12/barbrook/. 
  62. ^ Markus Giesler, Consumer Gift Systems
  63. ^ Countless Exchanges in the Gift Economy
  64. ^ http://www.blackrosebooks.net/anarism1.htm



Related topics in the Connexions Subject Index

Alternatives  –  Anarchism  –  Anarchism Critiques  –  Anti-Marxism  –  Class Analysis  –  Class Conflict/Class Struggle  –  Emancipation  –  First International  –  Freedom  –  Left, The  –  Left History  –  Libertarian Politics  –  Libertarian Socialism  –  Libertarianism  –  Mark, Karl  –  Marxism  –  Marxism Overviews  –  Radical Political Theory  –  Revolution  –  Revolutionary Politics  –  Social Change  –  Socialism  –  State, The  –  Strategies for Social Change


This article is based on one or more articles in Wikipedia, with modifications and additional content contributed by Connexions editors. This article, and any information from Wikipedia, is covered by a Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL).

We welcome your help in improving and expanding the content of Connexipedia articles, and in correcting errors. Connexipedia is not a wiki: please contact Connexions by email if you wish to contribute. We are also looking for contributors interested in writing articles on topics, persons, events and organizations related to social justice and the history of social change movements.

For more information contact Connexions