Page 177
PART XI
THE ABSURDITY OF ANARCHISM
Ever since Bakunin roamed around Europe on his irresponsible forays in
the middle 1800's,370
Marxism has been in a perpetual struggle with a pseudo-revolutionary
theory known as anarchism,371
which is widespread in the United States, especially among students.
Those who subscribe to anarchist ideology deny the need for a party, a government,
a common ideology or a post-revolutionary politico-economic system; some even
deny the need for a violent revolution. Anarchists dislike authority
in any form, regardless of the purpose or exercising agency. From their
perspective all which restricts one's freedom to act as he chooses is evil. Anarchists want to establish a communist society without going through the
innumerable pains beforehand. They want the baby without the agony of
birth.372
Their anti-authority attitude is readily apparent with respect
to revolution, since the latter is viewed as a do-your-own-thing affair in
which organization, planning, a party, and leaders are not needed.
373
------------------------------------------------------------------------
370 (Add) "He (Bakunin--Ed.) a man devoid of all theoretical
knowledge.... His programme was a hash superficially scraped together
from the Right and the Left--equality of classes, abolition of the right of
inheritance...atheism as a dogma dictated to the members, etc....and the main
dogma: abstention from the political movement.... Though a nonentity
as a theoretician he is in his element as an intriguer."
371 "...the anarchists are real enemies of Marxism."
372 (Add) What Lenin said of the liberals is applicable to
the anarchists. "The liberal is willing to talk about what will happen
when it will not be necessary to govern men. Why not indulge in such
innocuous dreams? But about the proletariat having to crush the bourgeoisie's
resistance to its expropriation--of that not a word."
373 (a) "The Bakuninists, says Engels, had for years been propagating
the idea that all revolutionary action from above was pernicious, and that
everything must be organized and carried out from below upward. Hence,
the principle, 'only from below' is an anarchist principle."
(b) (Add) "One of the most widespread and unhealthy symptoms of our public
life is the contempt (if not open hostility) that is displayed toward adherence
to a party. It is characteristic of political free lances, political
adventurers...to repudiate party affiliations and to talk pompously about
party 'bigotry,' 'dogmatism,' 'intolerance,' and so on, and so forth.
As a matter of fact, the use of such expressions merely reflects the ridiculous
and paltry conceit or self-justification of intellectuals who are shut off
from the masses and feel compelled to cover up their feebleness."
Page 178
People should simply blow up something, fight the police, or otherwise
oppose the system, whenever they feel the need to strike.
374
Anarchists believe that when enough people so act the system will
collapse through the sheer inability of its leaders to cope with the destruction.
Anarchism is like Christianity in that if it were not for the large number
of people who adhere to this philosophy, few rational men would bother to
discuss it seriously. Do-your-own-thing revolution is no more rational
than men rising from the dead. The fallacies of anarchism are many. Firstly, those people who bomb buildings and engage in other incendiary activities
are nearly always the most class-conscious, the most militant, the most determined. They are the type of individuals who should be spreading Marxism to the masses
and assuming leadership roles. Instead, they are engaging in activities
which will put the police hot-on-their-tail and ensure their apprehension
and neutralization.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
374 (a) "The anarchist mode of thought is displayed in full
measure here. Blind faith in the miracle-working power of all direct
action; the wrenching of this 'direct action' out of its general social and
political context, without the slightest analysis of the latter...."
(b) (Add) "Marxists call 'adventurist' the policy pursued by groups that
do not take their stand on the basis of scientific socialism, such groups,
for instance, as the anarchists...."
Page 179
Such activities change the complexion of the capitalist system about as
much as dropping an open ink bottle into the Pacific alters the Ocean's color. They put the potential cadre, the potential leaders, the potential vanguard
out in front where they can be identified and removed. Instead of marshalling
support throughout the country for a nation-wide mass struggle against capitalism,
the potential vanguard are engaging in relatively innocuous functions
375
which can only lead to their eventual arrest and long term imprisonment. Sooner or later they will be caught, if not after the first bombing then after
the second or third. Despite their revolutionary rhetoric and incendiarism,
anarchists are actually aiding the ruling class. If they successfully
spread their pseudo-revolutionary teachings, the most class conscious and
determined would be the first to act. A comparable situation would
have been for someone to have convinced the leaders of the NLF in Vietnam
to have put their generals and colonels at the head of every attack. Certainly this person would have been supporting American ruling circles by
tremendously aiding the destruction of Marxist cadre. Instead of accelerating
the advent of the revolution, he would have been hindering its arrival.
There is little doubt that the potential cadre would have exhausted its supply
of leaders long before the capitalists ran out of buildings and other vital
installations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
375 (a) (Add) "...we maintain, of course, our old convictions,
confirmed by decades of experience, that individual terrorist acts are inexpedient
methods of political struggle."
(b) (Add) "The history of the Russian revolution shows that a party always
resorts to individual terror when it does not enjoy the support of the masses."
(c) (Add) "It is against our principles to terrorize the bourgeoisie by
means of individual, stealthy acts of violence. Let us leave such 'deeds'
to the notorious terrorist elements."
(d) (Add) "I must declare that Communists never had, do not have, and cannot
have, anything in common with the theory and practice of individual terrorism...."
Page 180
Secondly, anarchists play into the hands of the property owners by not
explaining their behavior to the masses, by remaining separate from the
workers, and by not marshalling mass support. Their bombings, assassinations,
street fighting, and other dramatic deeds can be easily and deceptively
portrayed as revolutionary movement. Acts without any apparent goal
or purpose, acts which destroy without offering an alternative, acts which
display more egotism and individualism than revolutionism,
376
acts which degrade and destroy that which people revere and have
been given no convincing reason to oppose, acts which exhibit more emotionalism
than rational justification, acts which appear to be more irrational than
rational to outside observers are readily sold as "revolution" by the ruling
class. Is it any wonder that American workers are shocked and repulsed.
Understandably, their attitude is, "If that's what revolution means, I don't
want any part of it. Include me out." Responsible men with families
are not going to embark upon any wild schemes without some guarantee of success
and improvement, even if material conditions were to deteriorate rapidly and
dramatically. Besides eliminating the potential cadre, anarchists alienate
the masses377
and enable the ruling class to give a highly distorted picture of
revolutionaries and revolution. To the masses a revolutionary becomes
a hairy, unkempt, irresponsible, emotional, wildman with a club in one hand
and a molotov cocktail in the other who street fights with the police. Such a presentation is more the product of ruling class propaganda than reality. Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin hardly fit the model.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
376 (Add) "...your terrorism, gentlemen, is not the outcome
of your revolutionism. Your revolutionism is confined to terrorism."
377 (Add) "A half-hearted attitude toward the working-class
movement inevitably leads in fact to aloofness from it...the term class cannot
be applied to a group of unstable intellectuals who qualify their vagueness
and lack of principle as 'broadness'."
Page 181
A third failing of anarchists is their assumption that the destruction
of buildings and equipment will lead to the elimination of capitalism.
Demolition of property does not mean the abolishment of a system. As
long as the overwhelming majority of the people continue to support private
ownership, the latter will remain. The strength of capitalism lies not
only in wealth and property but in mass support, and as long as people remain
loyal the system will endure. Blowing up buildings, shutting off electricity,
stopping transportation, hindering communications, etc. will not convince
the people that there is something basically wrong with the system, especially
when individuals are later apprehended. The masses will continue to
believe the system is fundamentally good; it's just being administered incorrectly.
All that is needed is an appropriate change in leadership. Blame will
be placed upon the system's leaders (people) and not its existence.
Unlike Vietnamese guerrillas who were swimming in a sea of sympathetic peasants,
those committing the destruction will be isolated from the workers and have
no place to hide or someone willing to hide them. By relying upon the
destruction of property as opposed to changing the ideology of the American
people, anarchists would be committing an error comparable to that committed
by the American government in Vietnam. Sheer force, through either
the demolition of United States property by domestic dissidents or Vietnamese
villages by United States aircraft, will not cause a change in the philosophy
of the masses. They must be convinced by information, persuasion, logical
argument, and appropriate material conditions. Force and destruction
alone are insufficient.
Fourthly, some anarchists believe that mass support will materialize as
more and more people engage in incendiary activity. Yet, millions of
people will never become involved in activities of this nature until they
are not only driven by material conditions378
but can also visualize some benefit that will accrue. Although
many may someday agree that the system should be destroyed, they will not
act until a better society has been made manifest by word or deed. People
are not going to initiate widespread destruction until they can see a relationship
between destruction and the creation of a better environment. Destruction
for the mere sake of destruction is senseless. 379
To the anarchist they will say, "What have you got that is
better and practical," to which the anarchist has no reply, since by definition
he is opposed to all forms of authority and regulation which will remain indispensable
to an orderly and progressive society for years to come. Until presented
with an alternative, people will understandably retain what they have, despite
its faults, not wishing to run from the swamp to the quicksand. Those
providing an alternative society will gain far more support.
A fifth major error attributable to many anarchists is elitism--Blanquism.
Blanq was a French revolutionary who believed that a successful revolution
could be carried out by a small cadre380
who need only seize the appropriate buildings, installations, etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
378 "I repeat, tens of millions of people will not make a revolution
to order, but will do so when driven to it by dire need, when their position
is an impossible one...."
379 (a) "Bakunin's slogan was that, 'Everything must be ruined.' Marx replied by saying that, 'it was absolute nonsense to destroy values,
to pull down one's own and other peoples' houses and then run away without
knowing where and how to build another one'."
(b) (Add) "People without constructive doctrine cannot do anything and
have indeed done nothing so far except make a noise, rouse dangerous flares
and bring about the ruin of the cause they had undertaken."
(c) (Add) "It is not enough to say that life is hard and to call for revolt;
every tub-thumper can do that, but that is of little use. The working
people must clearly understand why they are living in such distress and
with whom they must unite in order to fight to liberate themselves from want."
380 (a) "Blanquism--the fantastic idea of overturning an entire
society by the action of a small conspiracy."
(b) "Blanquism means the seizure of power by a minority...."
(c) "Blanquism is a theory which repudiates the class struggle. Blanquism
expects that mankind will be emancipated from wage slavery, not by the proletarian
class struggle, but through a conspiracy hatched by a small minority of intellectuals."
Page 182
Without mass support, however, a successful revolt of this kind would
be quickly crushed. The masses would look upon the cadre as intruders;
the property owners would view them as criminals worthy of extinction.
How could they defend themselves when they are subsequently attacked by a
horde of ruling class forces?381
Only those who are reckless and naive would attempt to overthrow
a private property system without vast forces in reserve, without mass support.
With the people you can't lose; without the masses you can't win.
382
------------------------------------------------------------------------
381 (Add) "No revolution is worth anything unless it can defend
itself...."
382 (a) "The time of surprise attacks, of revolutions carried
through by small conscious minorities at the head of unconscious masses, is
past. Where it is a question of a complete transformation of the social
organization, the masses themselves must also be in it, must themselves already
have grasped what is at stake, what they are going in for, body and soul."
(b) "...without the working people all bombs are powerless, patently powerless."
(c) "That the only 'hope' of the revolution is the 'crowd'; that only a
revolutionary organization which leads this crowd (in deed and not in word)
can fight against the police--all this is ABC. It is shameful to have
to prove this."
(d) "...only the revolutionary struggle of the masses can bring about worth-while
improvements in the lives of the workers and in the administration of the
state. No 'sympathy' for the workers on the part of educated people,
no struggle of lone terrorists, however heroic, could do anything to undermine...the
omnipotence of the capitalists. This could be achieved only by the
struggle of the workers themselves, only by the combined struggle of millions...."
(e) "One of the biggest and most dangerous mistakes made by Communists...is
the idea that a revolution can be made by revolutionaries alone. On
the contrary, to be successful, all serious revolutionary work requires that
the idea that revolutionaries are capable of playing the part only of the
vanguard of the truly virile and advanced class must be understood and translated
into action. A vanguard performs its task as vanguard only when it is
able to avoid being isolated from the mass of the people it leads and is
able really to lead the whole mass forward."
(f) "Victory cannot be won with the vanguard alone. To throw the
vanguard alone into the decisive battle, before the whole class, before the
broad masses have taken up a position either of direct support of the vanguard,
or at least of benevolent neutrality toward it, and one in which they cannot
possibly support the enemy, would be not merely folly but a crime. And
in order that actually the whole class...may take up such a position, propaganda
and agitation alone are not enough. For this the masses must have their
own political experience. Such is the fundamental law of all great
revolutions...."
(g) "...the Bolsheviks have at all times and invariably spoken about the
capture of power by the masses of the people, by the proletariat...and not
by any 'politically-conscious minority'."
(h) "Revolution without 'revolutionary mass struggle' is impossible.
There have never been such revolutions."
(i) "We have always maintained that the revolution must rely on the masses
of the people, on everybody taking a hand, and have opposed relying merely
on a few persons issuing orders."
(j) "The revolutionary war is a war of the masses; it can be waged only
by mobilizing the masses and relying on them."
(k) "You cannot disregard the people. Only dreamers and plotters
believed that a minority could impose their will on a majority. That
was what the French revolutionary Blanqui thought, and he was wrong.
When the majority of the people refuse, because they do not yet understand
(or material conditions are not compelling them to act--Ed.) to take power
into their own hands, the minority, however revolutionary and clever, cannot
impose their desire on the majority of the people."
(l) "To be successful, insurrection must rely not upon conspiracy and not
upon a party, but upon the advanced class. That is the first point.
Insurrection must rely upon a revolutionary upsurge of the people.
That is the second point.... And these three conditions for raising
the question of insurrection distinguish Marxism from Blanquism."
(m) "Military conspiracy is Blanquism, if it is organized not by a party
of a definite class, if its organizers have not analyzed the political moment
in general and the international situation in particular, if the party has
not on its side the sympathy of the majority of the people, as proved by objective
facts, if the development of revolutionary events has not brought about a
practical refutation of the conciliatory illusions of the petty bourgeoisie...
if there has not matured a sentiment in the army...against the government
that protracts the unjust war against the will of the whole people, if the
slogans of the uprising...have not become widely known and popular...if the
country's economic situation inspires earnest hopes for a favorable solution
of the crisis by peaceable and parliamentary means."
(n) "We do not want a 'seizure' of power, because the entire experience
of past revolutions teaches us that the only stable power is one that has
the backing of the majority of the population."
(o) "...in politics in general and in the working-class movement in particular
only those trends which exercise mass influence can be taken seriously."
(p) "We have not forgotten the basic Marxist lesson which has been so clearly
confirmed by the Russian revolution: that it is necessary to reckon forces
in tens of millions; anything less is not taken into account in politics;
politics discard anything less as a magnitude of no importance."
(q) "...politics without the masses are adventurist politics...."
(r) "We know that revolution is a theory that is learned by experience
and practice, that a revolution becomes a real revolution only when tens
of millions of people rise up with one accord, as one man."
(s) "...for revolution is impossible without change in the views of the
majority of the working class, and this change is brought about by the political
experience of the masses, and never by propaganda alone."
(t) "The Social-Democrats...do not believe in conspiracies; they think
that the period of conspiracies has long passed away, that to reduce political
struggle to conspiracy means, on the one hand, choosing the most unsuitable
methods of struggle. ...they have always thought, and continue to think,
that this fight must be waged not by conspirators, but by a revolutionary
party based on the working class movement."
(u) (Add) "...he (Marx--Ed.) very definitely stated his disapproval of
those who considered it possible to accelerate the course of events by conspiracy. He called such people alchemists of the revolution."
(v) (Add) "One of the greatest and most serious dangers that confronts
the numerically small Communist Party...is isolation from the masses, the
danger that the vanguard may run too far ahead and fail to...maintain contact
with the whole army of labour...."
(w) (Add) After the Russian revolution of 1917, Lenin criticised the bourgeois
assertion that the revolt was merely the result of a small group's efforts. "Nothing, therefore, is more ludicrous than the assertion that the subsequent
development of the revolution, and the revolt of the masses that followed,
were caused by a party, by an individual, or, as they vociferate, by the will
of a 'dictator.' The fire of revolution broke out solely because of
the incredible sufferings of Russia, and because of the conditions created
by the war, which sternly and inexorably faced the working people with the
alternative of taking a bold, desperate and fearless step, or of perishing,
or dying from starvation."
(x) (Add) "...it is not worth even bothering about such a ridiculous and
crude story that the Bolsheviks (Russian Marxists and leaders of the 1917
Revolution--Ed.) are backed by the minority of the people in Russia.
It is a story that is not even worth refuting because everyone who knows
anything about what is going on here realises how ridiculous it is.
Yet when you look at the British, French, and American papers...you see the
bourgeoisie are still spreading these tales."
(y) (Add) "Some people in America have come to think of the Bolsheviks
as a small clique of very bad men who are tyrannizing over a vast number
of highly intellectual people who would form an admirable Government among
themselves the moment the Bolshevik regime was overthrown. This is
a mistake, for there is nobody to take our place save butcher Generals and
helpless bureaucrats who have already displayed their total incapacity for
rule."
(z) (Add) "...the only really revolutionary principle, that of the class
struggle."
(aa) (Add) "We mean to tell the people the truth, to warn the people of
the approaching storm, so that all preparations can be made in advance.
We are not conspirators who have determined to begin the revolution on such
and such a day or who are plotting the assassination of princes (government
officials--Ed.)."
Page 183
Even if millions of disorganized anarchists did manage somehow to overthrow
the ruling class, what kind of society would they establish? There
could be no leaders or governmental regulations since they would entail discipline
and a loss of "individualism." Yet, how would the economy function in
a post-revolutionary anarchic society? Who would make the needed decisions?
How would the economy operate in a planned, cooperative manner? How
could 250,000,000 people live together peacefully and harmoniously? Having no guidelines appears wonderful, but what would prevent people from
driving on either side of a highway, for example. Unless general policies
were established, the lives of all would be jeopardized.
383
Moreover, if all forms of government and force (police, armies,
prisons, etc.) were abolished shortly after the revolution, how would former
members of the ruling class be prevented from reinstituting their control,
for surely no one seriously believes that they would not try to reestablish
their happy kingdom by any means necessary.384
------------------------------------------------------------------------
383 "...the Bakuninist ideal of future society. In this society
there will above all be no authority, for authority=state=absolute evil. (How these people propose to run a factory, operate a railway or steer a ship
without a will that decides in the last resort, without a single management,
they of course do not tell us.) The authority of the majority over the
minority also ceases. Every individual and every community is autonomous;
but as to how a society of even only two people is possible unless each gives
up some of his autonomy, Bakunin again maintains silence."
384 (a) "Marx fought...the Anarchists! He fought, not
against the theory of the disappearance of the state when classes disappear,
or of its abolition when classes have been abolished, but against the proposition
that the workers should deny themselves the use of arms, the use of organized
force, that is, the use of the state, for the purpose of 'breaking down the
resistance of the bourgeoisie'."
(b) "They (the anarchists--Ed.) say, that the Proletarian revolution has
to begin by abolishing the political organization of the State. But
after the victory of the Proletariat, the only organization the victorious
working class finds ready-made for use is that of the State...to destroy
that at such a moment, would be to destroy the only organism by means of
which the victorious working class can exert its newly conquered power, keep
down its capitalist enemies and carry out that economic revolution of society
without which the whole victory must end in defeat.... Marx opposed
these anarchist absurdities from the very first day that they were started
in their present form by Bakunin."
(c) "...to see the abysmal stupidity of the contemptible anarchist windbags,
who deny the necessity of a state power (and what is more, a power ruthless
in its severity toward the bourgeoisie and ruthlessly firm toward disorganizers
of government) for the transition from capitalism to communism and for the
ridding of the working people of all forms of oppression and exploitation...."
(d) "...anarchism denies the need for a state and state power in the period
of transition from the rule of the bourgeoisie to the rule of the proletariat
(from capitalism to communism--Ed.), whereas I (Lenin--Ed.) with a precision
that precludes any possibility of misunderstanding, advocate the need for
a state in this period...."
(e) (Add) "We need revolutionary government, we need (for a certain transitional
period) a state. This is what distinguishes us from the anarchists....
The difference between us precisely on the question of government, of the
state, is that we are for, and the anarchists against, utilising revolutionary
forms of the state in a revolutionary way for the struggle for socialism."
(f) (Add) "The difference between the Marxists and Anarchists consists
in this: (1) the former, while aiming at the complete destruction of the
state recognize that this aim can only be realized after the abolition of
classes...as the result of the establishment of Socialism (read: Communism--Ed.),
leading to the withering away of the state; the latter want the complete
destruction of the state within twenty-four hours... (2) the former recognizes
that when once the proletariat has won political power it must utterly break
up the old state machinery, and substitute for it a new one...; the latter
while advocating the destruction of the state machinery, have absolutely
no clear idea as to what the proletariat will put in its place...; the Anarchists
reject the...revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat; (3) the former
insist upon making use of the modern state as a means of preparing the workers
for revolution; the latter reject this."
(g) (Add) "We are not anarchists who deny the need for an organized state,
i.e., for force in general, particularly a state maintained by the organised
and armed workers themselves...."
(h) (Add) "We say we are not anarchists, and are committed to establishing
a state."
(i) (Add) "However much the enraged press of the capitalists and their
friends may slander us, calling us anarchists, we shall never tire of repeating:
we are not anarchists, we are ardent advocates of the best possible organization
of the masses and the firmest 'state' power...."
(j) (Add) "When we hear objections to the Bolsheviks, attacks levelled
against us in the capitalist newspapers accusing us of being anarchists,
we repudiate such accusations most emphatically and regard them as an attempt
to spread malicious lies and slander. Anarchists are those who deny
the need for a state power, whereas we say that a state power is absolutely
necessary...for any state, even one that goes over directly to socialism.
Without doubt the firmest possible authority is necessary. All that
we want is for that power to be wholly and exclusively in the hands of the
majority of workers...deputies."
Page 184
The anarchist mentality is a product of bourgeois indoctrination--essentially
individualistic and opposed to collective action in which the individual
voluntarily subordinates his desires to group interest for the benefit of
all, including himself.385
Anarchists do not realize the individual is weak and ineffective
without the group. Disunited, individualistic revolutionaries have never
overthrown a united ruling class. The individual will not rise unless
and until the masses rise, which can only occur through cohesive group action,
discipline, and party leadership. If the followers of George Washington
had been anarchists, America would have remained a colony.
Anarchists desire a society permeated with those elements which all men
should seek: peace, freedom, happiness, contentment, brotherhood, love, etc. For this they are to be applauded.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
385 (a) "Anarchism is bourgeois individualism in reverse. Individualism as the basis of the entire anarchist world outlook."
(b) "A wide gulf separates socialism from anarchism...and the newspaper
lackeys of reactionary governments pretend that this gulf does not exist.
The philosophy of the anarchists is bourgeois philosophy turned inside out. Their individualistic theories and their individualistic ideal are the very
opposite of socialism. Their views express, not the future of bourgeois
society, which is striding with irresistible force toward the socialisation
(the bringing together of large numbers--Ed.) of labour, but the present and
even the past of that society, the domination of blind chance over the scattered
and isolated small producer. Their tactics, which amount to a repudiation
of the political struggle, disunite the proletarians and convert them in
fact into passive participators in one bourgeois policy or another, since
it is impossible and unrealisable for the workers really to disassociate
themselves from politics.'
(c) (Add) "The cornerstone of anarchism is the individual, whose emancipation,
according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation
of the masses, the collective body. According to the tenets of Anarchism,
the emancipation of the masses is impossible until the individual is emancipated.
Accordingly, its slogan is, 'Everything for the individual.' The cornerstone
of Marxism, however, is the masses, whose emancipation, according to its tenets,
is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual.
That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism, the emancipation of the
individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly,
its slogan is: 'Everything for the masses'."
Page 185
Yet, they play into the hands of those whose system is the very antithesis
of that which the anarchists seek to create.386
Anytime informed, systematic, methodical activity becomes secondary
to emotionalism, hatreds, and the venting of frustrations, weakness and defeat
become all but certain.387
There is an old proverb which anarchists would do well to remember: "Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."
388
Madness often accompanies the loss of reason and logical, dispassionate
analysis. The ruling class is rarely dispossessed of either.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
386 (a) "A disdainful attitude toward theory, evasiveness,
and shilly-shallying with regard to socialist ideology inevitably play into
the hands of bourgeois ideology."
(b) "...the anarchists always help the bourgeoisie in practice."
387 (a) "Where there is spontaneity, there is utopianism; where
there is utopianism, there is failure."
(b) (Add) "...the victory of socialism is inconceivable without a victory
of proletarian conscious discipline over spontaneous petty-bourgeois anarchy...."
(c) (Add) "...the absence of theory, deprives a revolutionary trend of
the right to existence and inevitably condemns it, sooner or later, to political
bankruptcy."
(d) (Add) "...real revolutionaries (and not revolutionaries of the heart)...."
(e) (Add) "Anarchism is a product of despair--The psychology of the unsettled
intellectual or vagabond and not of the proletarian."
(f) (Add) "We do not believe in conspiracies, we renounce individual revolutionary
ventures to destroy the government; the words of Liebknecht, veteran of
German Social-Democracy, serve as the watchword of our activities: 'Studieren,
propagandieren, organizieren'--Learn, propagandize, organize...."
388 (a) "Not without reason it is said: Whom the gods wish
to destroy they first make mad."
(b) "It is another example of God (if he exists, that is) first making
mad those he wants to destroy."
Page 186
In summary, then, anarchism is not a practical approach to modern problems.
389
Of that there can be little doubt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
389 (a) "In a short article Lenin once listed what he considered
to be some of the major errors of anarchism. "Anarchism...has produced
nothing but general platitudes against exploitation. These phrases have
been current for more than 2,000 years. What is missing is (a) an understanding
of the causes of exploitation; (b) an understanding of the development of
society, which leads to socialism; (c) an understanding of the class struggle
as the creative force for the realization of socialism.... Failure
to understand the development of society--the role of large-scale production--the
development of capitalism into socialism.... Failure to understand
the class struggle of the proletariat. Absurd negation of politics
in bourgeois society. Failure to understand the role of the organization
and the education of the workers. Panaceas consisting of one-sided,
disconnected means. What has anarchism...contributed....? ----No doctrine,
revolutionary teaching, or theory ----Fragmentation of the working-class
movement. ----Complete fiasco in the experiments of the revolutionary movement
(Proudhonism, 1871; Bakuninism, 1873). ----Subordination of the working class
to bourgeois politics in the guise of negation of politics."
(b) (Add) Engels' description of the Social-Democratic Federation is relevant
in this regard. "To make a revolution...they thought nothing else was required
but...packing meetings, lying in the press, and then, with five and twenty
men secured to back them up, appealing to the masses to 'rise' somehow, as
best they might, against nobody in particular and everything in general, and
trust to luck for the result."
(c) (Add) "This shows that the anarchists in every country and at all times
are either police agents or imbeciles."
TO GO TO PART 12 (CLICK HERE
)