, ,

1191510344_fWhat is Anarchism?

While for many this question will elicit a number of responses, but I think the most dangerous one is to define anarchism as Anti-State.

Anarchism is primarily a socialist, communist ideology. As the authors of “Black Flame” strongly argued, It cannot be understood and made sense of without coming from an anti-capitalist, pro-communist perspective. Anti-statism is a feature of anarchism, not the feature that defines it. It is primarily an ideology of class warfare.

Yet every day it seems another weird “strain” of anarchism pops out, another “anarcho-this” or “something-other-anarchist” that has absolutely nothing to do with the liberation of the toiling people, but are mainly forms of bourgeois rebellion, individualistic and superficial.

Luigi Fabbri, in his excellent “bourgeois influences on anarchism”, talks about defining anarchism just as something that is against the status quo, without a coherent social program of what we want to achieve:

The minds of men, especially of the young, thirsting for the mysterious and extraordinary, allow themselves to be easily dragged by the passion for the new toward that which, when coolly examined in the calm which follows initial enthusiasm, is absolutely and definitively repudiated. This fever for new things, this audacious spirit, this zeal for the extraordinary has brought to the anarchist ranks the most exaggeratedly impressionable types, and, at the same time, the most empty-headed and frivolous types-persons who are not repelled by the absurd, but who, on the contrary, engage in it. They are attracted to projects and ideas precisely because they are absurd; and so anarchism comes to be known precisely.for the illogical character and ridiculousness which ignorance and bourgeois calumny have attributed to anarchist doctrines.

White-r Anarchism?

White-r Anarchism?

However, a more present and insidious danger has slowly trying to creep its way into anarchism – the far-right. While so-called “anarcho-capitalists” (WTF!) is general seem to steer mostly clear of the same circles as anarchists, another group seems to purposely try to blend in as “just another strain” of  anarchists.

When you hear calls for no amnesty for illegal immigrants or praise for the police officers killed by Lovelle Mixon, anarchism is generally the last thing that comes to the mind of an semi-informed person. Yet the two links above are of sites related to supposed “national-anarchists.” While the debate around nationalism within anarchism has a longstading and respectable history – with the majority of anarchists stading clearly in the side of internationalism (actually, I cannot think of a single anarchist that sided against internationalism) – this pseudo “anarchism” is nothing more than thinly veiled white-nationalism.

Aided by post-leftist claims of being “neither left nor right”, third-positionists are trying to worm their way into anarchist circles, infiltrate it and corrupt it. They compare right-wing anti-statism (the fear of big government stifling capitalist entrepreneurship) to anarchist anti-statism (the position that the State is a tool of the capitalist class and an enforcer of hierarchy in behalf of this class). Their aburdist ideology is in every way the enemy of anarchism, yet they feel safe to claim anarchism as their own.

How can someone to claim to be anti-state repression justify praising police officers, or systematic state crackdown on a group of people? It is not possible, and it shows that even their veneer of “anti-authoritarianism” is nothing more than a ruse. They are fascists, pure and simple. they have nothing but a coward’s pride.