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
functions375 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)