Anarchist Communism

"Anarchist communism" is a term used by some anarchists to describe their vision of a future society. The term, like the related terms "libertarian communism" or "libertarian socialism," has been used to distinguish this vision of the future society from the so-called "Communism" that existed in the former Soviet Union, its satellite states, and in China. Because these states appropriated the terms "Socialism" and "Communism" as labels for authoritarian Stalinist state-capitalist regimes, those who adhere to the original vision of Communism have felt a need to clearly distinguish what they stand for from Stalinist "Communism."

All of them refer to the project of creating a future society in which capitalism, private ownership of the means of production, and the capitalist state are abolished and replaced by common ownership of the means of production, direct democracy, and a horizontal network of voluntary associations and workers' councils with production and consumption.

The theory and guiding principles of Communism were developed by Karl Marx, who sought a future society where "In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." (The Communist Manifesto, 1848) and in which economic activity would occur "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need". Because many anarchists associate "Marxism" with Stalinist and Leninist distortions of what "Marxism" is, they have frequently avoided acknowledging that the communist ideas they espouse were developed by Marx.

Among anarchists there have been different ideas of what communism is.While some anarchist communists like 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, others such as Nestor Makhno and Ricardo Flores Magon said that all those able to work 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 communist society, but he did agree that a freely associated commune could, and probably should, deliberately disassociate from those not fulfilling their communal agreement to do their share of work.[10]

Some theories 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.


  1. History
    • 1.1 Early developments
    • 1.2 First International
    • 1.3 Peter Kropotkin
    • 1.4 Organizationalism vs Insurrectionarism
    • 1.5 Revolution and Platformism
  2. Economic Theory
  3. Philosophical Arguments
  4. Criticisms
    • 4.1 Capitalist
    • 4.2 Marxist-Leninist
    • 4.3 Anarchist
  5. Example Societies Through History
  6. See Also
  7. Further Reading
  8. External Links
      8.1 Anarcho-Communist Theorists Archives
  9. References


Early developments

While modern Communism emerged as a reaction to capitalism, commmunist or proto-communist currents can be found in earlier history as well. For example, during the English Civil War period, 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 Marechal, 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 Dejacque, who described himself as "libertarian".[13] Unlike Proudhon, he argued that, "it is not the product of his or her labour 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 describe its doctrines.[15] "Collectivist" anarchists advocated remuneration for the type and amount of labour 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.

Anarchist communism as a distinct viewpoint from collectivist anarchism was first formulated by Carlo Cafiero, Emilio Covelli, Errico Malatesta, Andrea Costa and other ex-Mazzinian Italian Republicans. The collectivist anarchists sought to collectivize ownership of the means of production while retaining payment proportional to the amount and kind of labour of each individual, but the anarcho-communists sought to extend the concept of collective ownership to the products of labour 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 labour 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 argued in Anarchy and Communism (1880) that private property in the product of labour would 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...."

Peter Kropotkin

Main article: 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 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 a 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]

Organizationalism vs. Insurrectionarism

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].

Those with these views were opposed not only to political struggles but also to strikes which put forward wage or other claims, or which were organised by trade unions.[33] "While 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]

After Peter Kropotkin along others decided to enter labour 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 anarchists 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]

Revolution and platformism

In Ukraine the anarcho-communist guerrilla leader Nestor Makhno led an independent anarchist army in Ukraine during the Russian Civil War. As 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.

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]

Economic theory

Communist theory, including 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 a communist society, 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 labour is central to communist theory. 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. 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 - especially current or past labour 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]

Communists argue that any economic system based on wage labour 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 labour 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 labour by limiting their intake with prices and wages.

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.



Founding figure Pierre-Joseph Proudhon foreshadowed mutualist arguments against 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 labour. State Socialists, Communists, Syndicalists and Communist-Anarchists deny private property."

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

"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]

See also

Further reading

External links

Anarcho-communist theorists archives


  1. Fabbri, Luigi. "Anarchism and Communism." Northeastern Anarchist #4. 1922. 13 October 2002.
  2. Makhno, Mett, Arshinov, Valevski, Linski (Dielo Trouda). "The Organizational Platform of the Libertarian Communists". 1926. Constructive Section: available here
  3. Dielo Trouda Editoral Group. "Supplement to the Organizational Platform (Questions and Answers)". 2 November 1926. "Supplement to the Organizational Platform (Questions and Answers)"
  4. Puente, Isaac. "Libertarian Communism". 1932. The Cienfuegos Press Anarchist Review #6. Orkney. English Translation 1982. Also available at:
  5. Berneri, Camilo. "The Problem of Work". pp. 59-82, Why Work?. Vernon Richards (ed.). p. 74
  6. 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
  7. Kropotkin, Peter The Conquest of Bread, Ch. 12, Objections, first published 1892, also at [1]
  8. Christopher Gray, Leaving the Twentieth Century, p. 88.
  9. Robert Graham, Anarchism - A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas - Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300CE to 1939), Black Rose Books, 2005
  10. Joseph Déjacque, De l'être-humain mâle et femelle - Lettre à P.J. Proudhon par Joseph Déjacque (in French)
  11. "l'Echange", article in Le Libertaire no 6, September 21, 1858, New York. [2]
  12. Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press. p. 145. ISBN 0900384891. 
  13. Nettlau, Max (1996). A Short History of Anarchism. Freedom Press. p. 162. ISBN 0900384891. 
  14. Kropotkin, Peter. The Wages System. 1920. Also available: 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."
  15. James Guillaume, Ideas on Social Organization
  16. Nunzio Pernicone, "Italian Anarchism 1864 - 1892", pp. 111-113, AK Press 2009.
  17. James Guillaume, "Michael Bakunin - A Biographical Sketch"
  18. Malatesta, Errico. A Talk About Anarchist Communism Between Two Workers. Also available at:
  19. Peter Kropotkin, Words of a Rebel, p99.
  20. Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread, p145.
  21. 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.'"
  22. Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread Chapter IX The Need For Luxury
  23. Kropotkin, Peter Chapter 13 The Collectivist Wages System from The Conquest of Bread, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York and London, 1906.
  24. The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought
  25. Kropotkin, Peter The Conquest Of Bread Chapter IV
  26. Kropotkin Act for yourselves. N. Walter and H. Becker, eds. (London: Freedom Press 1985) [p. 104-5]
  27. Kropotkin, Peter The Conquest Of Bread Chapter VIII, Ways and Means
  28. Tiziana Terranova, "Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy". 07-26-2005
  29. "Propaganda by the deed" by Workers Solidarity No 55 published in October 1998
  30. "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
  31. "The "illegalists" by Doug Imrie. From "Anarchy: a Journal Of Desire Armed" , Fall-Winter, 1994-95
  32. "Against organization" by Giuseppe Ciancabilla. Retrieved 2010-06-10.
  33. Yekelchyk 2007, p 80.
  34. Charles Townshend, John Bourne, Jeremy Black (1997). The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern War. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198204272. 
  35. "â¿Wooden shoes or platform shoes? on the organizational platform of the libertarian communists" by Bob Black
  36. J.3.4 Why do many anarchists oppose the "Platform"? on An Anarchist FAQ
  37. "A Project of Anarchist Organisation" by Errico Malatesta (1927)
  38. Kropotkin, Peter. "The Collectivist Wage System". The Conquest of Bread, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York and London, 1906, Chapter 13, Section 4
  39. Alexander Berkman. What is Anarchism?, p. 217
  40. Kropotkin Act for yourselves. N. Walter and H. Becker, eds. (London: Freedom Press 1985) [p. 104-5]
  41. Peter Kropotkin Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution[3]
  43. "A.2 What does anarchism stand for?". Archived from the original on 2009-10-25. [dead link]
  44. The Place of Anarchism in the Evolution of Socialist Thought, p. 14-15
  45. Schmidt, Michael & van der Walt, Lucien. Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism, CounterPower Vol. I. AK Press. 2009. Page 48
  46. Dolgoff, Sam. The Anarchist Collectives, ch. 10
  47. Donald F. Busky, Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union. Praeger/Greenwood 2002, p. 101
  48. Kropotkin, Peter. Mutual Aid
  49. Ward, Colin. Anarchism in Action
  50. Socialism From Below McNally, David
  51. "Letter from Engels to Theodore Cuno". Friedrich Engels. 1872. Retrieved 2009-11-07. 
  52. (Quoted in Daniel Guerin, Anarchism: From Theory to Practice (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970), pp.25-26)
  53. Marxism and direct action by Phil Mitchinson
  54. Pierre Joseph Proudhon, System of Economical Contradictions: or, the Philosophy of Misery
  55. Benjamin Tucker, Labor and its Pay
  56. Errico Malatesta, Life and Ideas, pp. 31-2
  57. James Horrox, A Living Revolution: Anarchism in the Kibbutz Movement. pp.61-84
  58. Barbrook, Richard. "The Hi-Tech Gift Economy". First Monday. 
  59. Markus Giesler, Consumer Gift Systems
  60. Countless Exchanges in the Gift Economy

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