| Revision as of 23:38, 16 December 2015 editClueBot NG (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers6,438,456 editsm Reverting possible vandalism by 2A02:2149:8200:8E00:9198:9FBC:3BDE:4DE5 to version by 184.96.193.68. Report False Positive? Thanks, ClueBot NG. (2476542) (Bot)← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:32, 17 December 2015 edit undo165.230.173.186 (talk) ←Replaced content with 'Riot against the system! Life at will!'Tags: possible vandalism blankingNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Riot against the system! Life at will! | |||
| == Etymology == | |||
| The word ''anarchy'' comes from the ] ἀναρχία (''anarchia''), which combines ] (''a''), "not, without" and ] (''arkhi''), "ruler, leader, authority." Thus, the term refers to a person or society "without rulers" or "without leaders."<ref>"". ''OED Online''. December 2012. Oxford University Press. Accessed January 17, 2013.</ref> | |||
| == Anarchy and political philosophy == | |||
| === Kant on anarchy === | |||
| The German philosopher ] treated anarchy in his ''Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View'' as consisting of "Law and Freedom without Force". Thus, for Kant, anarchy falls short of being a true ] because the law is only an "empty recommendation" if force is not included to make this law efficacious. For there to be such a state, force must be included while law and freedom are maintained, a state which Kant calls ''republic''.<ref>Kant, Immanuel (1798). "". In ''Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht''. AA: VII, s.330.</ref><ref>Louden, Robert B., ed. (2006). ''Kant: Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View''. Cambridge University Press. p. 235.</ref>{{Break}} | |||
| As summary Kant named four kinds of government: | |||
| # Law and freedom without force (anarchy). | |||
| # Law and force without freedom (despotism). | |||
| # Force without freedom and law (barbarism). | |||
| # Force with freedom and law (republic). | |||
| === Anarchism === | |||
| {{Main|Anarchism}} | |||
| Anarchism is generally defined as the ] which holds the state to be ],<ref name="definition"> | |||
| {{Cite journal|last=Malatesta|first=Errico|title=Towards Anarchism|journal=MAN!|publisher=International Group of San Francisco|location=Los Angeles|oclc=3930443|url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1930s/xx/toanarchy.htm|authorlink=Errico Malatesta}} | |||
| {{Cite journal|url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070514.wxlanarchist14/BNStory/lifeWork/home/ | |||
| |title=Working for The Man |journal=] |accessdate=2008-04-14 |last=Agrell |first=Siri |date=2007-05-14}} | |||
| {{cite web|url=http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285|title=Anarchism|year=2006|work=Encyclopædia Britannica|publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service|accessdate=2006-08-29}} | |||
| {{Cite journal|year=2005|title=Anarchism|journal=The Shorter ]|page=14|quote=Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable.}} | |||
| The following sources cite anarchism as a political philosophy: | |||
| {{Cite book| last = Mclaughlin | first = Paul | title = Anarchism and Authority | publisher = Ashgate | location = Aldershot | year = 2007 | isbn = 0-7546-6196-2 |page=59}} | |||
| {{Cite book| last = Johnston | first = R. | title = The Dictionary of Human Geography | publisher = Blackwell Publishers | location = Cambridge | year = 2000 | isbn = 0-631-20561-6 |page=24}}</ref><ref name=slevin>Slevin, Carl. "Anarchism." ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics''. Ed. Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan. Oxford University Press, 2003.</ref> or alternatively as opposing ] in the conduct of human relations.<ref name="iaf-ifa.org">"The ] fights for : the abolition of all forms of authority whether economical, political, social, religious, cultural or sexual."]"]</ref><ref>"Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations." ]. "What it Really Stands for Anarchy" in '']''.</ref><ref>Individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker defined anarchism as opposition to authority as follows "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left, — follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism... Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx." ]. </ref><ref name="Ward 1966">{{cite web|url=http://www.panarchy.org/ward/organization.1966.html|last=Ward|first=Colin|year=1966|title=Anarchism as a Theory of Organization|accessdate=1 March 2010| archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20100325081119/http://www.panarchy.org/ward/organization.1966.html| archivedate= 25 March 2010 <!--DASHBot-->| deadurl= no}}</ref><ref>Anarchist historian ] report of ]'s anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it." (pg. 9)...Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Berne Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State."</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Brown |first=L. Susan |chapter=Anarchism as a Political Philosophy of Existential Individualism: Implications for Feminism |title=The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism and Anarchism |publisher=Black Rose Books Ltd. Publishing |year= 2002 |page=106}}</ref> Proponents of anarchism, i.e. anarchists, advocate ] based on what are sometimes defined as non-] organizations,<ref name="iaf-ifa.org"/><ref>"That is why Anarchy, when it works to destroy authority in all its aspects, when it demands the abrogation of laws and the abolition of the mechanism that serves to impose them, when it refuses all hierarchical organization and preaches free agreement — at the same time strives to maintain and enlarge the precious kernel of social customs without which no human or animal society can exist." ]. </ref><ref>"anarchists are opposed to irrational (e.g., illegitimate) authority, in other words, hierarchy — hierarchy being the institutionalisation of authority within a society." ]]</ref> and at other times defined as ]s.<ref>"ANARCHISM, a social philosophy that rejects authoritarian government and maintains that voluntary institutions are best suited to express man’s natural social tendencies." George Woodcock. "Anarchism" at The Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref><ref>"In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions." </ref> | |||
| There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Sylvan |first=Richard |chapter=Anarchism |title=A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy |editors=Goodwin, Robert E. and Pettit |publisher=Philip. Blackwell Publishing |year=1995 |page=231}}</ref> ] can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism.<ref name=slevin/> Strains of anarchism have been divided into the categories of ] and ] or similar dual classifications.<ref name="black dict">]. "Anarchism". ''The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought''. Blackwell Publishing. p. 14.</ref><ref name=socind>{{Cite book|authorlink=Peter Kropotkin |last=Kropotkin |first=Peter |title=Anarchism: A Collection of Revolutionary Writings |publisher=Courier Dover Publications |year=2002 |page=5|isbn=0-486-41955-X}}{{Cite journal|author=R.B. Fowler|title=The Anarchist Tradition of Political Thought|year=1972|journal=Western Political Quarterly|volume=25|issue=4|pages=738–752|doi=10.2307/446800|publisher=University of Utah|jstor=446800}}</ref> Anarchism is often considered to be a radical ] ideology,<ref name=brooks>{{Cite book|quote=Usually considered to be an extreme left-wing ideology, anarchism has always included a significant strain of radical individualism, from the hyperrationalism of Godwin, to the egoism of Stirner, to the libertarians and anarcho-capitalists of today |last=Brooks |first=Frank H. |year=1994 |title=The Individualist Anarchists: An Anthology of Liberty (1881–1908) |publisher=Transaction Publishers |page=xi|isbn=1-56000-132-1}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|author=Joseph Kahn|title= Anarchism, the Creed That Won't Stay Dead; The Spread of World Capitalism Resurrects a Long-Dormant Movement |year=2000|journal=]|issue=5 August}}{{Cite journal|author=Colin Moynihan |title=Book Fair Unites Anarchists. In Spirit, Anyway|year=2007|journal=New York Times|issue=16 April}}</ref> and much of ] and ] reflect ] interpretations of ], ], ] or ]. "To see this, of course, we must expound the moral outlook underlying anarchism. To do this we must first make an important distinction between two general options in anarchist theory The two are what we may call, respectively, the socialist versus the free-market, or capitalist, versions."<ref name="tormey">{{cite book |author=Tormey, Simon |title=Anti-Capitalism, A Beginner's Guide |publisher=] |year=2004 |pages=118–119}}</ref> Some individualist anarchists are also ]s or ]s while some anarcho-communists are also individualists<ref name="bobblack">] anarcho-communist ] after analysing ] anarcho-communist ]'s view on anarcho-communism went as far as saying that "communism is the final fulfillment of ].... The apparent contradiction between individualism and communism rests on a misunderstanding of both.... Subjectivity is also objective: the individual really is subjective. It is nonsense to speak of 'emphatically prioritizing the social over the individual'.... You may as well speak of prioritizing the chicken over the egg. Anarchy is a 'method of individualization'. It aims to combine the greatest individual development with the greatest communal unity."</ref><ref name="dwardmac.pitzer.edu">"Modern Communists are more individualistic than Stirner. To them, not merely religion, morality, family and State are spooks, but property also is no more than a spook, in whose name the individual is enslaved - and how enslaved!...Communism thus creates a basis for the liberty and Eigenheit of the individual. I am a Communist because I am an Individualist. Fully as heartily the Communists concur with Stirner when he puts the word take in place of demand - that leads to the dissolution of property, to expropriation. Individualism and Communism go hand in hand." ]. "Stirner: The Ego and His Own" on '']''. Vol. 2. No. 3 MAY, 1907]</ref> or egoists.<ref>"This stance puts him squarely in the libertarian socialist tradition and, unsurprisingly, ] referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be "Anarchistic socialism." "'']''by Various Authors</ref><ref>"Because revolution is the fire of our will and a need of our solitary minds; it is an obligation of the libertarian aristocracy. To create new ethical values. To create new aesthetic values. To communalize material wealth. To individualize spiritual wealth." ]. ''Toward the Creative Nothing'']</ref> | |||
| Anarchism as a ] has regularly endured fluctuations in popularity. The central tendency of anarchism as a mass social movement has been represented by ] and ], with ] being primarily a literary phenomenon<ref>]. ''Facing the Enemy: A History of Anarchist Organization from Proudhon to May 1968''. AK Press, 2002, p. 191.</ref> which nevertheless did have an impact on the bigger currents<ref>Catalan historian Xavier Diez reports that the Spanish individualist anarchist press was widely read by members of ] groups and by members of the ] trade union ]. There were also the cases of prominent individualist anarchists such as ] and ] who were members of the ] and J. Elizalde who was a founding member and first secretary of the ]. Xavier Diez. ''El anarquismo individualista en España: 1923-1938.'' ISBN 978-84-96044-87-6</ref> and individualists also participated in large anarchist organizations.<ref>Within the ] anarchist organization, the ], there existed an individualist anarchist tendency alongside anarcho-communist and anarchosyndicalist currents. Individualist anarchists participating inside the ] included ], Georges Vincey and André Arru. </ref><ref>In Italy in 1945, during the Founding Congress of the ], there was a group of individualist anarchists led by Cesare Zaccaria who was an important anarchist of the time.</ref> Most anarchists ], supporting ] or ] (]),<ref name="ppu.org.uk">{{cite web|url=http://www.ppu.org.uk/e_publications/dd-trad8.html#anarch%20and%20violence |title="Resiting the Nation State, the pacifist and anarchist tradition" by Geoffrey Ostergaard |publisher=Ppu.org.uk |date=1945-08-06 |accessdate=2010-09-20}}</ref><ref name="Anarchism 1962">]. ''Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements'' (1962)</ref> while others have supported the use of ] measures, including ] and ], on the path to an anarchist society.<ref>Fowler, R.B. "The Anarchist Tradition of Political Thought." ''The Western Political Quarterly'', Vol. 25, No. 4. (December 1972), pp. 743–744.</ref> | |||
| Since the 1890s, the term '']'' has been used as a synonym for anarchism<ref>{{Cite book|title=A Short History of Anarchism |last=Nettlau |first=Max |authorlink=Max Nettlau |year=1996 |publisher=Freedom Press |isbn=0-900384-89-1 |page=162}}</ref><ref>]. ''''. "At the end of the century in France, Sebastien Faure took up a word originated in 1858 by one Joseph Déjacque to make it the title of a journal, Le Libertaire. Today the terms 'anarchist' and 'libertarian' have become interchangeable."</ref> and was used almost exclusively in this sense until the 1950s in the United States. At this time, ]s in the United States began to describe themselves as libertarians, and it has since become necessary to distinguish their individualist and capitalist philosophy from socialist anarchism. Thus, the former is often referred to as '']'', or simply ''right-libertarianism'', whereas the latter is described by the terms '']'', ''socialist libertarianism'', '']'', and ''left-anarchism''.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Perlin |first=Terry M. |title=Contemporary Anarchism |publisher=Transaction Publishers |year=1979 |page=40|isbn=0-87855-097-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Noam Chomsky, Carlos Peregrín Otero |title=Language and Politics |publisher=] |year=2004 |page=739}}</ref> Right-libertarians are divided into ]s and anarchists, with the latter often described as '']s''.<ref>{{cite book |last=Morris |first=Christopher |title=An Essay on the Modern State |year=1992 |publisher=] |pages=61}} (Using "libertarian anarchism" synonymously with "individualist anarchism" when referring to individualist anarchism that supports a ]).</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Burton |first=Daniel C. |title= Libertarian anarchism |url= http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/polin/polin168.pdf |publisher=] |year= |page=}}</ref> Outside the ], ''libertarianism'' generally retains its association with left-wing anarchism.<ref> | |||
| * Ward, Colin. Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press 2004 p. 62 | |||
| * Goodway, David. Anarchists Seed Beneath the Snow. Liverpool Press. 2006, p. 4 | |||
| * MacDonald, Dwight & Wreszin, Michael. Interviews with ]. University Press of Mississippi, 2003. p. 82 | |||
| * Bufe, Charles. The Heretic's Handbook of Quotations. See Sharp Press, 1992. p. iv | |||
| * Gay, Kathlyn. Encyclopedia of Political Anarchy. ABC-CLIO / University of Michigan, 2006, p. 126 | |||
| * ]. Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements. Broadview Press, 2004. (Uses the terms interchangeably, such as on page 10) | |||
| * ]. Facing the Enemy: A History of Anarchist Organization from Proudhon to May 1968. AK Press 2002. p. 183. | |||
| * Fernandez, Frank. Cuban Anarchism. The History of a Movement. See Sharp Press, 2001, page 9.</ref> | |||
| == Anarchy and anthropology == | |||
| {{See also|Anarcho-primitivism|Acephalous society|Anthropology|Primitive communism}} | |||
| Some anarchist anthropologists, such as ] and ], consider societies such as those of the ], ] and the ] to be anarchies in the sense that they explicitly reject the idea of centralized political authority.<ref>{{cite book |last=Graeber |first=David |authorlink=David Graeber |title=Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology |url=http://www.prickly-paradigm.com/paradigm14.pdf |format=PDF |year=2004 |publisher=] |location=] |language= |isbn=0-9728196-4-9}}</ref> | |||
| Other anthropologists, such as ] and ], have repudiated the idea of hunter-gatherer societies being a source of scarcity and brutalization; describing them as "affluent societies".<ref>{{cite book |first=Marshall |last=Sahlins |authorlink=Marshall Sahlins |title=Stone Age Economics |publisher=] |year=2003 |isbn=0-415-32010-0 |accessdate=2007-04-27 }}</ref> | |||
| The ] ] writes: | |||
| {{quote|Adjudication by an armed authority appears to be the most effective violence-reduction technique ever invented. Though we debate whether tweaks in criminal policy, such as executing murderers versus locking them up for life, can reduce violence by a few percentage points, there can be no debate on the massive effects of having a criminal justice system as opposed to living in anarchy. The shockingly high homicide rates of pre-state societies, with 10 to 60 percent of the men dying at the hands of other men, provide one kind of evidence. Another is the emergence of a violent culture of honor in just about any corner of the world that is beyond the reach of law. ..The generalization that anarchy in the sense of a lack of government leads to anarchy in the sense of violent chaos may seem banal, but it is often over-looked in today's still-romantic climate.<ref name="BlankSlate">]'s '']'', pages 330-331.</ref>}} | |||
| Some ] believe that this concept is used to justify the values of modern industrial society and move individuals further from their natural habitat and natural needs.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.greenanarchy.org/index.php?action=viewwritingdetail&returnto=viewjournal&printIssueId=18&writingId=552 |title=Seven Lies About Civilization, Ran Prieur |publisher=Greenanarchy.org |date= |accessdate=2012-01-30}}</ref><ref>]</ref> ] has noted the existence of tribal societies with less violence than "advanced" societies.<ref>{{cite book |first=John |last=Zerzan |authorlink=John Zerzan |title=Running on Emptiness: The Pathology of Civilization |publisher=] |year=2002 |isbn=0-922915-75-X |accessdate=2007-05-x }}</ref> Zerzan and ] have talked about other forms of violence against the individual in advanced societies, generally expressed by the term "social anomie", that result from the system of monopolized security.<ref>{{cite book |first=John |last=Zerzan |authorlink=John Zerzan |title=Future Primitive: And Other Essays |publisher=Autonomedia |year=1994 |isbn=1-57027-000-7 |accessdate=2007-05-x }}</ref> These authors do not dismiss the fact that humanity is changing while adapting to its different social realities,<ref>]</ref> but consider the situation anomalous. The two results are (1) that we either disappear or (2) become something very different from what we have come to value in our nature. It has been suggested that this shift towards civilization, through domestication, has caused an increase in diseases, labor, and psychological disorders.<ref>{{cite book |first=Sigmund |last=Freud |authorlink=Sigmund Freud |title=Civilization and Its Discontents |publisher=] |year=2005 |isbn=0-393-05995-2 |accessdate=2007-05-x }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Paul |last=Shepard |authorlink=Paul Shepard |title=Traces of an Omnivore |publisher=Island Press |year=1996 |isbn=1-55963-431-6 |accessdate=2007-05-x }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.primitivism.com/sedentism.htm |title=The Consequences of Domestication and Sedentism by Emily Schultz, et al |publisher=Primitivism.com |date= |accessdate=2012-01-30}}</ref> In contrast, ] maintains that violence in primitive societies is a natural way for each community to maintain its political independence, while dismissing the state as a natural outcome of the evolution of human societies.<ref>{{cite book |first=Pierre |last=Clastres |authorlink=Pierre Clastres |title=Archeology of a kind of Violence |publisher=Semiotext(e) |year=1994 |isbn=0-936756-95-0 |accessdate=2007-05-x }}</ref> | |||
| == Examples of state-collapse anarchy == | |||
| {{See also|Failed states}} | |||
| ] (1618–1648)]] | |||
| === English Civil War === | |||
| {{Main|English Civil War}} | |||
| Anarchy was one of the issues at the ] of 1647: | |||
| :]: I shall now be a little more free and open with you than I was before. I wish we were all true-hearted, and that we did all carry ourselves with integrity. If I did mistrust you I would not use such asseverations. I think it doth go on mistrust, and things are thought too readily matters of reflection, that were never intended. For my part, as I think, you forgot something that was in my speech, and you do not only yourselves believe that some men believe that the government is never correct, but you hate all men that believe that. And, sir, to say because a man pleads that every man hath a voice by right of nature, that therefore it destroys by the same argument all property -- this is to forget the Law of God. That there’s a property, the Law of God says it; else why hath God made that law, Thou shalt not steal? I am a poor man, therefore I must be oppressed: if I have no interest in the kingdom, I must suffer by all their laws be they right or wrong. Nay thus: a gentleman lives in a country and hath three or four lordships, as some men have (God knows how they got them); and when a Parliament is called he must be a Parliament-man; and it may be he sees some poor men, they live near this man, he can crush them -- I have known an invasion to make sure he hath turned the poor men out of doors; and I would fain know whether the potency of rich men do not this, and so keep them under the greatest tyranny that was ever thought of in the world. And therefore I think that to that it is fully answered: God hath set down that thing as to propriety with this law of his, Thou shalt not steal. And for my part I am against any such thought, and, as for yourselves, I wish you would not make the world believe that we are for anarchy. | |||
| :]: I know nothing but this, that they that are the most yielding have the greatest wisdom; but really, sir, this is not right as it should be. No man says that you have a mind to anarchy, but that the consequence of this rule tends to anarchy, must end in anarchy; for where is there any bound or limit set if you take away this limit , that men that have no interest but the interest of breathing shall have no voice in elections? Therefore I am confident on 't, we should not be so hot one with another.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1322&Itemid=264 |title=The Putney Debates, The Forum at the Online Library of Liberty}} Source: Sir William Clarke, Puritanism and Liberty, being the Army Debates (1647-9) from the Clarke Manuscripts with Supplementary Documents, selected and edited with an Introduction A.S.P. Woodhouse, foreword by A.D. Lindsay (University of Chicago Press, 1951).]</ref> | |||
| As people began to theorize about the English Civil War, "anarchy" came to be more sharply defined, albeit from differing political perspectives: | |||
| *1651 – ] (''])'' describes the ] as a ], where man lives a brutish existence. "For the savage people in many places of America, except the government of small families, the concord whereof dependeth on natural lust, have no government at all, and live at this day in that brutish manner."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-c.html#CHAPTERXIII |title=Chapter XIII |publisher=Oregonstate.edu |date= |accessdate=2012-01-30}}</ref> Hobbes finds three basic causes of the conflict in this ]: competition, diffidence and glory, "The first maketh men invade for gain; the second, for safety; and the third, for reputation". His first ] is that "every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war". In the state of nature, "every man has a right to every thing, even to then go for one another's body" but the second law is that, in order to secure the advantages of peace, "that a man be willing, when others are so too… to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much ] against other men as he would allow other men against himself". This is the beginning of contracts/covenants; performing of which is the third law of nature. "Injustice," therefore, is failure to perform in a covenant; all else is just. | |||
| *1656 – ] ('']'') uses the term to describe a situation where the ] use force to impose a government on an economic base composed of either solitary land ownership (absolute ]), or land in the ownership of a few (mixed monarchy). He distinguishes it from ], the situation when both land ownership and governance shared by the population at large, seeing it as a temporary situation arising from an imbalance between the form of government and the form of property relations. | |||
| === French Revolution === | |||
| {{Main|French Revolution|Reign of Terror}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ], Scottish essayist of the Victorian era known foremost for his widely influential work of history, '']'', wrote that the French Revolution was a war against both ] ''and'' anarchy: | |||
| {{quote|Meanwhile, we will hate Anarchy as Death, which it is; and the things worse than Anarchy shall be hated more! Surely Peace alone is fruitful. Anarchy is destruction: a burning up, say, of Shams and Insupportabilities; but which leaves Vacancy behind. Know this also, that out of a world of Unwise nothing but an Unwisdom can be made. Arrange it, Constitution-build it, sift it through Ballot-Boxes as thou wilt, it is and remains an Unwisdom,-- the new prey of new quacks and unclean things, the latter end of it slightly better than the beginning. Who can bring a wise thing out of men unwise? Not one. And so Vacancy and general Abolition having come for this France, what can Anarchy do more? Let there be Order, were it under the Soldier's Sword; let there be Peace, that the bounty of the Heavens be not spilt; that what of Wisdom they do send us bring fruit in its season!-- It remains to be seen how the quellers of Sansculottism were themselves quelled, and sacred right of Insurrection was blown away by gunpowder: wherewith this singular eventful History called French Revolution ends.<ref name="Carlyle">{{cite book |author=Thomas Carlyle |authorlink=Thomas Carlyle |title=]}}</ref>}} | |||
| ], duke of Aiguillon came before the ] in 1789 and shared his views on the anarchy: | |||
| {{quote|I may be permitted here to express my personal opinion. I shall no doubt not be accused of not loving liberty, but I know that not all movements of peoples lead to liberty. But I know that great anarchy quickly leads to great exhaustion and that despotism, which is a kind of rest, has almost always been the necessary result of great anarchy. It is therefore much more important than we think to end the disorder under which we suffer. If we can achieve this only through the use of force by authorities, then it would be thoughtless to keep refraining from using such force.<ref name="Duke">{{cite web|url=http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/inter/rev_002_ber/page02.html |title=Duke d'Aiguillon |publisher=Justice.gc.ca |date=2007-11-14 |accessdate=2012-01-30}}</ref>}} | |||
| Armand II was later exiled because he was viewed as being opposed to the revolution's violent tactics. | |||
| Professor Chris Bossche commented on the role of anarchy in the revolution: | |||
| {{quote|In The French Revolution, the narrative of increasing anarchy undermined the narrative in which the revolutionaries were striving to create a new ] by writing a constitution.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/carlyle/vandenbossche/4g.html |title=Revolution in Search of Authority |publisher=Victorianweb.org |date=2001-10-26 |accessdate=2012-01-30}}</ref>}} | |||
| === Jamaica 1720 === | |||
| Sir ], Governor of ], wrote to ], the ], in 1720: | |||
| :"As to the ] that came as mechanics hither, very young and have now acquired good estates in ] ] and ] & co., of course they know no better than what maxims they learn in the ]. To be now short & plain Your Lordship will see that they have no maxims of Church and State but what are absolutely anarchical." | |||
| In the letter, Lawes goes on to complain that these "estated men now are like ]'s ]" and details the humble origins of the "]" largely lacking an education and flouting the rules of church and state. In particular, he cites their refusal to abide by the Deficiency Act, which required ] owners to procure from ] one ] person for every 40 enslaved ], thereby hoping to expand their own estates and inhibit further English/] immigration. Lawes describes the government as being "anarchical, but nearest to any form of ]". "Must the King's good subjects at home who are as capable to begin plantations, as their Fathers, and themselves were, be excluded from their Liberty of settling Plantations in this noble Island, for ever and the King and Nation at home be deprived of so much riches, to make a few upstart ] Princes?"<ref>''Jamaica: Description of the Principal Persons there'' (about 1720, Sir Nicholas Lawes, Governor) in '']'' Vol. III (1911), edited by ]</ref> | |||
| === Anarchy from the Russian Civil War === | |||
| During the ] - which initially started as a confrontation between the ] and ] - on the territory of today's ], a new force emerged, namely the ] ] led by ]. The Ukrainian Anarchist during the Russian Civil War (also called the "Black Army") organized the ] of Ukraine, an ], committed to resisting ] authority, whether ] or ].<ref>Yekelchyk 2007, p 80.</ref><ref name="OIHMW163">{{cite book |author=Charles Townshend, John Bourne, Jeremy Black |title=The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern War |publisher=Oxford University Press |location= |year=1997 |pages= |isbn=0-19-820427-2 |oclc= |doi=}}</ref> This project was cut short by the consolidation of Bolshevik power. Makhno was described by anarchist theorist ] as "an extraordinary figure" leading a revolutionary peasants' movement.<ref name="MDR">{{cite book |author=Emma Goldman |title=My Disillusionment in Russia |publisher=Courier Dover Publications |location= |year=2003 |page=61 |isbn=0-486-43270-X |oclc= |doi=}}</ref> During 1918, most of Ukraine was controlled by the forces of the ], which were unpopular among the people. In March 1918, the young anarchist Makhno's forces and allied anarchist and guerrilla groups won victories against German, Austrian, and Ukrainian nationalist (the army of ]) forces, and units of the ], capturing a lot of German and Austro-Hungarian arms. These victories over much larger enemy forces established Makhno's reputation as a military tactician; he became known as ''Batko'' (‘Father’) to his admirers.<ref name="RN173">{{cite book |author=Edward R. Kantowicz |title=The Rage of Nations |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing |location= |year=1999 |page=173 |isbn=0-8028-4455-3 |oclc= |doi=}}</ref> | |||
| ] (1918), the leader of the Anarchist Free Territory in ] during the ].]] | |||
| At this point, the emphasis on military campaigns that Makhno had adopted in the previous year shifted to political concerns. The first ''Congress of the Confederation of Anarchists Groups''<!--date and place?-->, under the name of '']'' ("the Alarm Drum"), issued five main principles: rejection of all political parties, rejection of all forms of dictatorships (including the ], viewed by Makhnovists and many anarchists of the day as a term synonymous with the dictatorship of the Bolshevik communist party), negation of any concept of a central state, rejection of a so-called "transitional period" necessitating a temporary dictatorship of the proletariat, and self-management of all workers through free local ]s (soviets). While the Bolsheviks argued that their concept of dictatorship of the proletariat meant precisely "rule by workers' councils", the Makhnovist platform opposed the "temporary" Bolshevik measure of "party dictatorship". The ''Nabat'' was by no means a puppet of Mahkno and his supporters, from time to time criticizing the Black Army and its conduct in the war. | |||
| In 1918, after recruiting large numbers of Ukrainian peasants, as well as numbers of Jews, anarchists, ''naletchki'', and recruits arriving from other countries, Makhno formed the ], otherwise known as the Anarchist Black Army. At its formation, the Black Army consisted of about 15,000 armed troops, including infantry and cavalry (both regular and irregular) brigades; artillery detachments were incorporated into each regiment. From November 1918 to June 1919, using the Black Army to secure its hold on power, the Makhnovists attempted to create an anarchist society in Ukraine, administered at the local level by autonomous peasants' and workers' councils. | |||
| {{quote|text=The agricultural part of these villages was composed of peasants, someone understood at the same time peasants and workers. They were founded first of all on equality and solidarity of his members. All, men and women, worked together with a perfect conscience that they should work on fields or that they should be used in housework... Working program was established in meetings where all participated. They knew then exactly what they had to make.|sign=Makhno|source=''Russian Revolution in Ukraine''}} | |||
| New relationships and values were generated by this new social paradigm, which led Makhnovists to formalize the policy of free communities as the highest form of ]. Education was organized on ]'s principles, and the economy was based upon free exchange between rural and urban communities, from crop and cattle to manufactured products, according to the science proposed by ].{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}} | |||
| Makhno called the Bolsheviks dictators and opposed the "Cheka ... and similar compulsory authoritative and disciplinary institutions" and called for "reedom of speech, press, assembly, unions and the like".<ref name="RIAdeclaration">. Peter Arshinov, Black & Red, 1974</ref> The Bolsheviks accused the Makhnovists of imposing a formal government over the ], and also said that Makhnovists used forced conscription, committed summary executions, and had two military and counter-intelligence forces: the ] and the ] (patterned after the ] and the ]).<ref name="footman1961">Footman, David. Frederick A.Praeger 1961, p287</ref> However, later historians have dismissed these claims as fraudulent propaganda.<ref>Guerin, Daniel. ''Anarchism: Theory and Practice''</ref> | |||
| The Bolsheviks claimed that it would be impossible for a small, agricultural society to organize into an anarchist society so quickly. However, ] had a large amount of coal mines, and was one of the most industrialised parts of the ]. | |||
| === Spain 1936 === | |||
| {{Further|Anarchism in Spain}} | |||
| In 1919, the Confederación Nacional del Trabajo (CNT), the Spanish confederation of anarcho-syndicalist labor unions, had grown to 1 million members, and encountered many fights with the police and the fascists in Spain. On July 18, 1936, General Franco led the army to launch their fight against the government, but instead of an easy victory they faced significant obstacles.<ref name="blackened1">{{cite web|url=http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/spain-rev.html |title=Spain's Revolutionary Anarchist Movement |publisher=Flag.blackened.net |date= |accessdate=2012-01-30}}</ref> They were met with a big resistance from the people, and the rebels were supported by military and the police. With the government in shambles, the workers and peasants took over the government of Spain and joined together to create a revolutionary militia to fight the fascists. The workers and peasants were fighting to start a revolution, not to help save their government. Spain’s society was transposed by a social revolution. Every business was re-organized to have a company with no bosses; surprisingly profits increased by over half. While Stalin wanted to send arms but only on one condition: The party must be given government positions and the militias be “re-organized.” On May 2, 1937, the CNT issued a warning: | |||
| : ''The guarantee of the revolution is the proletariat in arms. To attempt to disarm the people is to place oneself on the wrong side of the barricades. No councillor or police commissioner, no matter who he is, can order the disarming of the workers, who are fighting fascism with more self-sacrifice than all the politicians in the rear, whose incapacity and impotence everybody knows. Do not, on any account, allow yourselves to be disarmed!''<ref name="blackened1"/> | |||
| On the next day after the warning was issued the CNT’s central exchange was attacked and the militias prepared to quit, in front of Barcelona. With this became a power struggle, and confusion which lead the workers to cease fire and lay down their weapons. The “re-organized” Republican Army tried one last attempt to gain control, with over 70,000 casualties, and many people fleeing to France, General Franco’s army entered Barcelona on January 26, 1939 to end the revolution.<ref name="blackened1"/> | |||
| === Albania 1997 === | |||
| {{Main|1997 rebellion in Albania}} | |||
| In 1997, Albania fell into a state of anarchy, mainly due to the heavy losses of money caused by the collapse of pyramid firms. As a result of the societal collapse, heavily-armed criminals roamed freely with near total impunity. There were often 3-4 gangs per city, especially in the south, where the police did not have sufficient resources to deal with gang-related crime. | |||
| === Somalia 1991–2006 === | |||
| {{Main|History of Somalia (1991–2006)}} | |||
| ] | |||
| Following the outbreak of the ] in ] and the ensuing collapse of the central government, residents reverted to local forms of conflict resolution; either secular, traditional or Islamic law, with a provision for appeal of all sentences. The legal structure in the country was thus divided along three lines: ], ] and ] (]).<ref name="2009factbook">{{cite web|author=Central Intelligence Agency|title=Somalia|work=The World Factbook|publisher=Central Intelligence Agency|location=Langley, Virginia|year=2011|url=https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/so.html|accessdate=2011-10-05}}</ref> | |||
| While Somalia's formal judicial system was largely destroyed after the fall of the ] regime, it was later gradually rebuilt and administered under different regional governments, such as the autonomous ] and ] macro-regions. In the case of the ] and its successor the ], new interim judicial structures were formed through various international conferences. | |||
| Despite some significant political differences between them, all of these administrations shared similar legal structures, much of which were predicated on the judicial systems of previous Somali administrations. These similarities in civil law included: a) a ] which affirms the primacy of Muslim ] or religious law, although in practice shari'a is applied mainly to matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and civil issues. The charter assured the independence of the ], which in turn was protected by a judicial committee; b) a three-tier judicial system including a ], a ]s, and courts of first instance (either divided between district and regional courts, or a single court per region); and c) the laws of the civilian government which were in effect prior to the military coup d'état that saw the Barre regime into power remain in forced until the laws are amended.<ref name="SJS">{{cite web|title=Stateless Justice in Somalia|url=http://www.hdcentre.org/files/Somalia%20report.pdf|date=2005-06-01|author=Dr Andre Le Sage|publisher=Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue|accessdate=2009-06-26}}</ref> | |||
| == Lists of ungoverned communities == | |||
| === Ungoverned communities === | |||
| ], a Danish neighborhood autonomous from local government controls.]] | |||
| *], Southeast Asian highlands beyond control of governments | |||
| *] (930–1262 CE) | |||
| *]{{Citation needed|date=April 2015}} (1440-1826) | |||
| *] (17th century) | |||
| *The ] (England, 1649–1651) | |||
| *] (late 17th century) | |||
| *] (June 26, 1816{{spaced ndash}}June 28, 1919) {{citation needed|date=June 2015}} | |||
| *], a community movement in Israel initially influenced by anarchist philosophy (Palestine, 1909–1948) | |||
| *] was a largely ungoverned squatter settlement from the mid 1940s until the early 1970s | |||
| *], the first rural ] ] (Colorado 1965–1977) | |||
| *] (CPR), ] movement (Guatemala, 1988–) | |||
| *], squatted RV desert community (California 1965-) | |||
| *The 27 ] (January 1, 1994{{spaced ndash}}present) | |||
| *], a South African social movement (2005–) | |||
| === Anarchist communities === | |||
| {{Main|List of anarchist communities}} | |||
| Anarchists have been involved in a wide variety of communities. While there are only a few instances of ] "anarchies" that have come about from explicitly anarchist revolutions, there are also examples of ] founded by anarchists. | |||
| ;Intentional communities | |||
| *] (1847) | |||
| *] (1898) | |||
| *] (1921) | |||
| *] (September 26, 1971) | |||
| *] (1993) | |||
| ;Mass societies | |||
| *] (Ukraine, November 1918{{spaced ndash}}1921) | |||
| *] (July 21, 1936{{spaced ndash}}May 1939) | |||
| *] (1929–1932) | |||
| == See also == | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| {{Portal bar|Anarchism|Politics|Social and political philosophy|Society|Sociology}} | |||
| == References == | |||
| {{reflist|30em}} | |||
| == External links == | |||
| * {{Wiktionary-inline}} | |||
| * | |||
| * '''', by Matt Stone. Online version of book, hosted by Anarchism.net. | |||
| * , August 2007 issue of ] focusing on Somali anarchy. | |||
| * "", a list of essays hosted by royhalliday.home.mingspring.com. | |||
| * "" Principles, propositions & discussions for Land and Freedom | |||
| * , classic essays and modern discussions. Online since 1994. | |||
| * (2014-06-25), '']'' | |||
| * From the | |||
| {{Anarchism}} | |||
| {{Authority control}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 16:32, 17 December 2015
Riot against the system! Life at will!