On Anarcho-Syndicalism

While Anarchism is widely thought to be a means of achieving a communist society as an alternative to Marxist methods, this is not always nor inherently true. The idea that it can be however certainly is.

Anarchism may also be the ends in of itself. It may also facilitate a capitalist economy (e.g Anarcho-Capitalism), as well as non-communist forms of socialism such as collectivism and syndicalism.

What is Anarcho-Syndicalism though? What makes it any different than other strains of anarchism and socialism? The way I see it, is that it allows for the simultaneous facilitation of both socialist, AND capitalist economic systems in a very interesting way.

An Anarcho-Syndicalist commune is a directly democratic faction with public ownership of the means of production, which generally requires a two thirds consensus for all decision making.

It’s almost as if you were to take a workers union, and a corporation; derive the middle point therefrom, and implement it as an autonomous and collectivized community.

Right about now your probably thinking “Well this sounds very socialist yes, but how would this facilitate capitalism, where’s the economic competition involved here?” Well within the syndicate, none.

The economic competition would result from the competition with other syndicates and or co existing forms of society. Different groups of people would want different rules and would have to split up into different syndicates. The examples are endless.

One might want only the production of necessary goods like food, shelter, clothing, and medicine to be publicly owned with luxury production being privately owned, some might want it all to be owned by the group.. SPLIT!

One might want too allow certain types of drug use, one might not… SPLIT!

One might want religious principals, the other might be inherently atheistic… SPLIT!

One might want principals from X religion, one might want principals from Y religion, some might want religious freedom as long as you have a religion or believe in god, some might want complete autonomy of belief… DOUBLE SPLIT!

I could go on all day, but the idea is that economic competition would likely occur between these different split syndicates, as they would be specializing differently, likely resulting in the production of different types of food, clothing, luxury goods, technologies etc, giving plenty of incentive for inter syndicate trade relations and therefore economic competition.

This would like wise give everyone the ability to choose a community that fits with the way that they wanna live, so long as that way is viable enough to sustain a thriving syndicate. It also preserves the rights of popular sovereignty by requiring the two thirds rule to pass legislature, as well as allowing for the reorganization and correction from the bottom upward if the leadership becomes corrupt and or begins to conflict with the interests of the participants/workers.

 

 

 

Advertisements

A Sorta New Direction

The Greatest Never Artist Collective

Realistically not much has or ever will change in terms of our goals. Our path remains the same. What has changed; is the detail of our perspective and the depths of our understanding on where that path is leading us.

The Greatest Never as an association, has ascribed itself to the long term goal of transforming into and establishing it’s presence and functionality as a non-specific Artist Collective.

You may be familiar with the term collectivism, though i’m assuming most of you probably aren’t. If by chance you are, than it’s likely you may have heard it tossed around with other big name economic and political ideas like communism, socialism, and anarchism.

 In relation to these, collectivism is one of  socialism’s many ideological offspring. Simultaneously collectivism itself also has many different sub-types and interpretations.

Broadly speaking one could generalize it as economically resembling a form of libertarian-communism while being both anarchistic in nature and functioning like a direct-democracy in terms of it’s administration.

What is a Collective?

To answer more specifically we must define collectivism. 

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary provides the following definitions for collectivism both of which are applicable:

1. A political and economic theory advocating collective control over production and distribution. Also a system marked by such control (collective). 

2. Emphasis on the Collective rather than individual action or identity.

So a collective is essentially a system; in our case a small autonomous, mixed-motive organization; in which the means of production, and distribution are collectively shared.  So an artist crollective would simply be a collective that shared their means to create works of art, as well as market, promote, showcase and distribute such works.

On a very basic level we already have this established. Any member of the team is able to promote just about any creative work they want on TGN or any of it’s related platforms. Reguardless of whether it’s for profit or not, TGN is our collective hub and utility for reaching an audience and showcasing things that we’ve done,  made, want to say. etc.

For the sake of building upon and entertaining my fantastical visions, what if we somehow managed to step up our size in one way or another. That way could be anything from finding a patron, releasing a high selling album, or book, or even just organizing ourselves better and being more consistent, efficient, and proactive with our content creation and output.

I suppose if that were to happen the next step would be to acquire a warehouse. Therei Set up an office, a couple DIY recording studio, practice and jam area, acquire a variety of instruments, art supplies, areas for painting, sculpting, modeling, crafting etc, bookshelves full of resources and areas to write, think, and work. Create and maintain our own promotional platforms like newsletters, magazines, etc.

Even more fantastical what would the step after that be? Operating our own venues? museums? libraries?laboratories? studios? radio station? etc? I should stop myself, this is getting too good. Though such talk sounds ambitious and crazy, I know it is, but I’ve always found it better to dream big, and I believe I speak for most of the crew here at TGN when I say that.

Just to clarify this is not collective profit system. Obviously if money was made using the collective equipment, we would expect a very minuscule return to help pay for supplied equipment, and a minuscule cut to contribute to charity.

The idea is not to make money off it’s members, but if the capital is for the benefit of each, than everyone who’s receiving a monetary benefit ought to be doing their part to keep it afloat. Not that we wouldn’t love to see our members contributing as much excess to the growth of the collective as possible, but we understand that won’t be in everyone’s best interest, but perhaps a few of us will be inclined to do so.

If non-for profit, or if for profit but none was made, than obviously we would not expect any form of  monetary contribution. However their are many ways each of us could contribute that wouldn’t cost anything but our time and effort; the more we can manage to accomplish through DIY tactics the better.

10 Ways Anyone can help and contribute that won’t cost a cent.

  1. Turn off Adblock!!!!!

  2. Spread our name through word of mouth, spam our link in random corners of the internet. 

  3. Take some time to read our articles, and check out our various content. 

  4. Share and talk about us through social media, text, email or even just press the like button!

  5. Comment with your thoughts, criticisms and feedback to help us improve on any of our works or aspects of our organization.

  6. Follow us on Social Media: Facebook , Twitter, LinkedIn

  7. Submit something you’d like us to promote or showcase for you. 

  8. Give us a shout-out on you own blog, website, social media, youtube channel etc. 

  9. Become a member! (contact us through email or our facebook page)

  10. Come back and visit soon! Spend some time in our corner of the internet! browse our other sites and content! Leave us a message in the forums!

10 Ways to help and contribute that won’t cost you a cent (Members Specific)

  1. Writing, Creating, thinking up, conjuring, coding, crafting, fashioning, Recording new content to be published, shared, linked to, advertised etc. 

  2. Assisting with the cleaning and maintenance of our as of yet imaginary warehouse/collective safe house and the half imaginary equipment that would be found therein. 

  3. Creation and Distribution of homemade promotional materials. 

  4. Interacting with  readers, followers and fans through comments sections and our social media pages. 

  5. Motivating, assisting, educating, learning from and collaborating with other members. 

  6. Acquire a new skill, form of knowledge, or connection that could be in some way shape or form useful to the collective. 

  7. Turn a skill or form of knowledge you have into a How to, Guide, and or Tutorial. 

  8. Generate, discuss, share and explore ideas for ways to expand and grow the reach, production power, and overall economic value of our organization. 

  9. Sift through old content for mistakes in grammar, spelling and formatting, as well as ways to simplify and or add value. 

  10. Improve yourself in any way shape or form in return making you more useful and valuable to the team. 

On Socialism and Proxy Societies.

In a dog-eat dog world, where does one find peace?

 In Utopia? That’s a funny ass joke.

Socialism has never worked right? Cry the yuppies; who are already lined up to give me a hundred reasons why socialism only works on paper. Most of which are likely derived from a conservative twitter page.

What is socialism?

Socialism however contrary to popular belief, is a broad umbrella term rather than a concrete system. Many commonly conflate socialism with it’s ideological offshoots such as , Collectivism, Communism, Mutualism as well as various forms of anarchist, socialist, and communist ideology.

It’s true that all of the above have their roots in socialism, along with many other strains of ideology. The key concept common among all forms of socialism is the social/communal ownership of the means of production.

This means that instead of controlling private corporations controlling production and manufacturing, it would be controlled socially or communally.

Alternative control systems for means of production

1. by the state (communism, fascism),

2.by the workers (anarchism, Anarcho-communism ),

3.by voluntary associations (collectivism, Mutualism, Anarcho-syndicalism)

Socialist revolution?

I am not advocating for a full fledged revolutionary uprooting of capitalism, but in the same breath I think it would be quite far from the worst thing to happen to our species.

While of course, the young revolutionary forces revived time and time again by the Fiery works of Marx and Proudhon always make for a great story; usually leave a positive mark on society (provided they didn’t attempt any violent revolutionary tactics) and have a lot to offer in terms of education on a surprisingly wide variety of fronts.

I don’t  by any means believe a large scale socialist revolution is either sufficient or necessary for our salvation. But do believe a lot of our problems could be fixed by the adoption of various elements of socialism into our society.

I don’t see a violent revolution on the horizon, what I do see however is a revolution of knowledge and ideas. A revolution of economic systems and Socio-political policy. A revolution in technology and science. A socio-techonomic war of words and numbers if you will.

Why keep capitalism?

Some people are always going to prefer the competition; and we should not be fast to stop them for the fruits of their battle are rapid and significant advancements in technology, research and policy.

Why does capitalism needs proxies?

As for the ones whom wouldn’t benefit from nor wish to participate in an economic and social system based on constant competition with their peers. I do believe some sort of alternative remedy is in need, and indeed it already exists to a certain extent.

Examples would be advent the productive commune or collective. This would allow liberation from the clutches of capitalist realism without actually having to subversively change anything.

A society within a society?

This is possible because a group of people living communally could focus on some sort of export in order to pay taxes and maintain their property, without requiring any internal economic competition.

Earlier I noted there are many forms of socialist ideology, and each of those containing many different sub forms, and methods of implementation.

Regardless of exactly what system is used in this context I believe they can all be described with the branch terms: proxy society and micro society.

Due to functioning as mini societies within a society, some may rather function similar to a corporation ran in alternative social and economic fashion. Some may be both a corporation and a communal living area.

Even Google has their own village for employees!

That being said the systems I describe throughout the essay are based on my respective interpretation and how I would implement these type of ideas based on my currently limited but ever growing understanding of socialist economic and political systems.

NOTE: not to be taken as a set in stone description of a communal society/collecgive society, they all have their flavors and variations

What precisely is a proxy society?

Think about it, because this has already been done by many. What if the hundred socialist thinkers in x square miles, decided to throw down on a large plot of land, live communally under their own terms, and as a collective, contribute some form of tangible and or intellectual export for the rest of the outer society without necessarily being required to be apart of it.

Many Amish communities do just that and export/sell their crops and farmed goods.

Artist collectives

Artist collectives focus on the export of intellectual property. They may live collectively but for many it’s purely about the work. Why though?

Benefits to working in a collective

1. Access to resources and equipment,

2. Sets the stage for collective productivity & enhanced collaboration,

3. Working toward a common goal or with people who share a common worldview/ideology

4. The freedom of creative expression that goes with producing music and other artwork outside the main industry labels and standards.

5. To avoid a traditional capitalist work setting.

6. To feel and be a part of something bigger.

In depth explanation

A settlement, organization and or productive association where the means of production would be communally or collectively maintained controlled, and distributed through a system of possession (as opposed to a system of property. )

Where everyone can retain autonomy and individualism the sense that their talents and aspirations would shape their overall purposes within the group and that any work undertaken would be purely voluntary in nature.

Self management

Team leaders may be appointed for the sake of things like bookkeeping, budgeting, business related communications, and as a sort of administrator.

Besides administrative tasks this system will put everyone in a position of increased responsibility for themselves and their productivity. Unlike a typical work setting, a collective requires everyone to be their own manager, since their is no inherent group management.

Group Administration

The collective interest would overrule all higher group-level decision making in a profoundly democratic fashion. Everyone who contributes whether that is monitarily, or through the group labor/task system gets a vote. Membership in itself does not earn a vote, one has to be useful and make some form of contribution to the collective as a whole. One cannot buy more votes or a greater position by donating or working more towards group efforts. The only thing this will get you is more respect, appreciation, and potentially an administrative positions.

This creates a decentralized system of consensus and decision making. Where anyone who contributes, has an equal say and representation in the affairs of the whole.

Voluntary participation

Anyone would be able to leave at any given time. People who are violent, troublesome, subversively destructive or in some way or another; intentionally trying to hinder productivity or make the work of the group more difficult would be forced away from the settlement, as peacefully as the situation allows.

Relationship with host country

Another key prerequisite required to make this work would be a productive and mutualistically beneficial relationship with the host country.

This will be absolutely necessary if a communal/collective setting wants its existence to be tolerated. As a benefit of functioning independently within a larger capitalist society, it would have no real need for a military force.

Economics of a communal society

In a traditional communal society: The Individual member would not directly deal with money.

Since The work of each member toward the export of some type of goods would be essential to providing necessities to members as well as paying taxes and property fees that go with existing within the host country.

All external economic affairs would be decided by the commune. Everyone who does their part is provided for. No economic competition or market systems exist within the internal life of the commune.

Now on to my preferred approach:

Economics of a collectivist organization

If this was a collectivist work setting such as an artist collective this would function a bit differently in terms of productivity, economic distribution and group finance.

For example if I was running an artist collective,Anyone who used collective resources to produce, market and or publish/sell art, music, literature etc would obviously keep their profit.

Yet they would be highly encouraged (though never coerced or required) to return at least a minuscule portion of their profit back to the collective and a minuscule portion to charity.

If the collective was successful enough; food and quarters may be offered to members but even in that case living there would not be a requirement for membership.

Group projects and collective task-work.

Aside from individual projects the ‘team leaders’ would organize group projects in which we would come together to work on something for the sake of raising money to keep the collective afloat.

The idea is to be able to function without relying on income from the self-guided work   individual members; making sure everyone has the right to their own profits and the right to create non profit work if they so desire.

Group work may consist of group art/music projects, but there may be other forms of unrelated group work too depending on the situation.

Alternative group efforts

The group could for example own a greenhouse and ask everyone to go tend it, for a small portion of their time each day, with the growth exported for collective money(with a small amount of whatever was grown being allocated to whomever took the time to tend it.)

Alternative group work could also be self guided; any way someone can think of to help the collective will earn them respect and notoriety within the group.

Its a bit of a gray area because theirs lots of ways this can be done, but it seems it would be important to diversify the groups sources of income, so-as not too rely too heavily on any one form of export.

While one technically cannot be forced to participate in group work as with contributing a share, team members may become disgruntled if someone is constantly using up resources and equipment to make money without ever contributing monetarily nor through effort on group work.

If the people democratically vote someone out for being a leach than so be it.

Benefits of group projects.

1. Encourage productive collaboration on other projects,

2. Increased interconnectedness, better inter-group relationships.

3 Develops a sense of culture and community within the group.

4. Helps lesser known members establish credibility and build a following in their respective industry by creating something alongside better known members.

5. Generating collective income; any excess would primarily be used for better equipment, supplies, and advertising/marketing solutions. (Or in a full fledged communal society used to provide everyone with food, shelter, toiletries, etc.)

6. Increased potential for creativity due to collective brain power being utilized for a common goal.

Closing comments

 I hope this helps shed some light on alternative economic and political systems; as well as some light on the direction this group is headed in.

If you found this piece to be interesting, useful, inspiring, stupid, boring, or however you have it please let us know in the comments, we want your feedback so give it here!

 

 

On P. J. Proudhon’s ‘What is property?’

Original text available  free at Marxists.org

On our journey through anarchist philosophy, we arrive at the fourth stop.

In Hindsight, I wish I had arrived here first. The archetypal treatise known as ‘what is property? has helped me to understand the rest of the reading at a far deeper level than I had been able to ascertain prior.

Having gone through most of  the works of Mikhail Bakunin, several by William Godwin, and a brief but enjoyable stop at ‘The Communist Manifesto’ by Karl Marx; We now find ourselves at the literary doorstep of Pierre Joseph Proudhon as he lends assistance toward our understanding of the state, our place (within), and how we think about the government and our lives as a whole.

I would almost go so far as call it the Anarchist version of the communist manifesto. If Marx dealt with the who and the how of the state and revolution; Proudhon dealt with the what and the why. 

While their comparison requires one to speak in terms of apples and oranges; Proudhon seems to have peered both deeper into the roots of society, as well as having done so with better spirit and intention than Marx and at the same time falls short on Marx’s ability to verbally paint detailed pictures of societal constructs and functions as well as predict the course of their (r)evolutions. 

Highlights

1. “What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder, my meaning would be understood at once.”(Proudhon 1840)

At first our mind does not wish to reconcile these two phenomena as identical; but upon closer inspection we may begin to see the parallel. Murder is too end the life of another through execution. Slavery forces one to forfeit their life for the sake of somebody’s profit. If one is too live merely for someone else’s gain, and that alone; are they truly better off than dead?

If one is doing so for a good reason such as a parent living purely for their children or an activist living purely for their cause than certainly, because those things hold a legitimate importance and bear meaning too the individual.

However if one is living purely for the profit of a malignant superior whom they did not choose, than I say they may as well seek liberation or die trying.

While the majority of us do not live under such conditions this may just as fluently speak to smaller more personal instances, which may only pose a risk to certain degrees of comfort, wealth, free time and or reputation. A perfect example would be liberation from a destructive addiction, a toxic partner, an unfair landlord or a shitty job that has a hold on you.

 2. “What is property! may I not likewise answer, It is robbery, without the certainty of being misunderstood; the second proposition being no other than a transformation of the first? “(Proudhon 1840)

If we are a mere microcosm of the earth; than any attempt to lay claim on it is in fact a glorified act of robbery.

If you go hiking through the woods and catch a tick, does that tick now legally possess the right to unpack, set up shop, start a dynasty, partition your skin, seize your bodies means of production and create a monopoly on your skin cells and hair follicles?

Didn’t think so; most of us would likely remove it as soon as we were aware of it’s presence, which causes one too wonder if this is part of the planet’s agenda.

The irony here is that some conservative thinkers are fond of deeming those who collect social security parasites; while this in a sense this may be true, they are in fact only leaching off a larger and more destructive parasite. In another sense this need not be true. Unlike real parasites, every parasitic force in this world has the ability to become a mutualite. That is too say that you contribute something to your host. If every parasite underwent this transformation, the world would be a perfect place.

This is not communism, this is not too say you work only for the state, but you work for the state and yourself. I believe however taxes aren’t a very good way to accomplish this. Charity, and investments into the quality of life of the public at whatever reasonable level you can afford, ought to be mandatory and replace the idea of taxation.

That said a perfect society, would be a capitalist direct-democratic society in which anyone with wealth and power was an egalitarian who thought like a Green-Market Socialist, an Anarcho-syndicalist , or an outright saint. Those who believe such a feet to be out of reach will be in for a rude awakening.

     3. Property is robbery! That is the war-cry of ’93! That is the signal of revolutions!”(Proudhon 1840)

This was also the war cry of 2000s anarcho-punk band Wingnut dishwashers Union on their track ‘Proudhon in Manhattan’ “Throw your hands in the air cause property is robbery.”

4. “If your conscience is free, if your mind can unite two propositions and deduce a third therefrom, my ideas will inevitably become yours.” (Proudhon 1840)

Proudhon makes it a point to inform us that utilizing what he has left us will require arduous deductive reasoning in order to read between the overlapping borders of his ideological web.

The process of deducing additional information from the cross reference of two statements will be key in the analysis of his work.

5.”every perception received by the mind is determined by certain general laws which govern the mind;”(Proudhon 1840)

That is to say that we view all that we are met with in terms of how our mind wants us too see it. To say that our individual perspectives are sculpted by and in conformity with our worldview.

That while our worldview may grow and change it always serves to reconcile our experiences and knowledge with it’s own most primitive form.

6.”If the mind has no innate ideas, it has at least innate forms” (Proudhon 1840)

If the mind cannot produce ideas which are purely independent of what it is exposed to, it would still however possess the ability to take shape and execute functions which exist independently of the mind.

Systems like anarchism and communism may be modeled and replicated in the mind while existing independently of it’s container.

Likewise our minds may take variants of pre-determined shapes according to what types of problems we want too solve, what kind of tasks we wish to complete, and how we wish to exist and portray ourselves.

This allows archetypal personality types such as Tyrant, Artist, Peasant, Merchant and Scholar to take forms which are transient of the minds they occupy.

7.”(That) very thing which exists implies the ideas of substance, mode, relation, number.”(Proudhon 1840)

For something to exist:

  1. It must consist of one or more smaller somethings (substance)

2. Must be identifiable with some form of categorically qualitative property (mode)

3. Must have the ability to interact with other somethings (relation)

4. Must be rationally quantifiable. (number 

9. “Even when we are fighting against a principle which our mind thinks false … we obey it while attacking it” (Proudhon 1840)

This speaks to a strange situation many who seek communities or roles of resistance find themselves in. It causes one to antagonize the host from the inside, yet itself being a working component of that society.

Kinda like an unending game of ‘devils advocate’; in which ones mind is always always at odds with the bodies actions due to ideological or emotional friction created by the subjected scenario therein.


10. This principle, impaired by our ignorance, is honored and cherished; for if it were not cherished it would harm nobody, it would be without influence … what is it? Can it be religion? (Proudhon 1840) 

The answer is yes.

People have used religion as an excuse to do harm but this does not make any religion inherently harmful. One may also make the same claim about the Arts, Philosophy and Mathematics. For all of these exist primarily to serve as tools for our mental canvas and a point of reference for thoughts and ideas.

The exception being religion (and art depending on how you look at it) in serving for it’s subscribers as a way to facilitate spiritual growth or a ‘personal connection’ with God/Universe/Allah/Yahweh if you believe in that sort of thing.

Faith is something I would probably recommend purely because it has improved my quality of life, but everyone is and ought to always be free to form their own choices and beliefs.

The last thing I want is too appear as if I’m telling anybody what they ought to believe; unless that consists of telling people to believe in equal opportunity, non-violence, and freedom of speech.  

11. Do unto others that which you would that others should do unto you; Do not unto others that which you would not that others should do unto you.(Proudhon 1840)

This age old wisdom is still repeated today as the golden rule of ‘treat others how you’d like to be treated’ I don’t think the fact that it carries a tremendous amount of merit on any and every level of the social sphere needs much explaining.

Well this just covers the tip of the iceberg for this work, but I don’t wanna drag you along all day just quite yet. If you find this sort of stuff interesting, by all means read the original text! I hope all of you have a wonderful day, and let us not forget ladies and gentleman: PROPERTY IS ROBBERY!

 

On Bakunin’s Catechism(1851)

Original Text (1971 English Translation)

Before my intentions have the chance to be skewed I want to explicitly state that I strongly disagree with all anti antisemitic claim made by Mikhail Alexandrovich Bakunin.

Despite this flaw of character I find most of his other sociological outlooks to be in many ways quite innovative, under examined and potentially even prophetic(if one believes in that sort of thing).

For those who are unaware of who he is, (I suspect many would be as not many people I have met have the desire nor time to study anarchist philosophy.) Bakunin was a Russian political-philosopher became well known for a school of ideological thought known as syndicalism.

This is often thought to be a sub-type of anarchism, and while Bakunin certainly did carry many anarchist ideals along with a very-anti-authoritarian outlook, I question whether or not I would consider the fundamental ideas behind the initial backbone of this theory established throughout his 1851 work: Catechism to be inherently anarchistic.

Regardless the translator cites this accreditation in the preface by H. E, Kaminski which refers to this work as “The spiritual foundation of the entire anarchist movement….”

Herein are many of the defining principals and conditions which it posited, along with an attempt to analyze, simplify, and draw associative connections throughout to the best of my ability.

“III. Freedom is the absolute right of every adult man and woman to seek no other sanction for their acts than their own conscience and their own reason, being responsible first to themselves and then to the society which they have voluntarily accepted.”(Bakunin 1851)

Here we can see the anti-authoritarian fail-safe that will become a backbone to protect the anarchist ideal from the less libertarian parts of this theory. This means that all individuals ought to possess the right to voluntarily choose what society or ‘syndicate‘ one would like to live in. This also guarantees the anarchist-friendly principal which allows any to act as an autonomous entity if one so desires.

Furthermore, it advocates that while their responsibility to their society ought to be upheld, their duty to satisfy their own basic necessities for themselves ought to supersede, which to me sounds like an idealistic portrayal of certain aspects found in modern capitalism.

“V. The freedom of each is therefore realizable only in the equality of all. The realization of freedom through equality, in principle and in fact, is justice.”(Bakunin 1851) 

Contrary to his anti-Semitic claims he appears to display a very Egalitarian sociological outlook. This is demonstrated by the claim that the freedom of all is a necessary requirement for the freedom of any. It does this by positing equality to be responsible and inherently required for the existence of genuine freedom.

“VII. Absolute rejection of every authority including that which sacrifices freedom for the convenience of the state.” (Bakunin 1851)

Here we can see anarchist fundamentals beginning to take shape. This makes a broad call which underlies a key ideal common among most if not all anarchist thinkers being the abolition of all authoritarian power structures.

This Particularly addresses administrative functions of society which infringe on the Liberty of it’s people in order to maintain order and protect the interests of leadership. It’s easy to see imagine that Bakunin probably would’ve despised the United states Patriot Act!

“Liberty must result from the greatest possible realization of individual liberty, as well as of liberty on all levels of social organization.”(Bakunin 1851) 

Unlike many modern conceptions of Anarchism, Bakunin’s theory did not inherently call for the abolition of organized society, merely the parasitic authoritarian power structures. He believed that in the absence of all authoritarian leadership, humans would still be capable of fully organizing themselves around the necessities of liberty and the preservation of collective interests such as production, maintenance of equality through justice; and functions which serve the general good of society such as education and health services.

At first this comes off as a bit Utopian, but think about it. If the cells in our body could evolve over time into a working homeostasis as complex as the human body, who’s to say that humans could not also be capable of doing the same on a macro-cosmic scale. As if the principals of biological evolution were carrying over into sociological evolution.

To some this may start to be sounding a bit like Marxism, and while many key ideas of Karl Marx are compatible with the ideas of Bakunin he seems to condense the Marxist societal model into only a portion of his own, allowing it to mutually coexist with multiple other flavors of voluntary cooperation.

Bakunin believed that society ought to be formed “according to the principles of free association and federation.” This can be a little difficult to fathom at first, but once you catch on, an entire new world of possibility for the socioeconomic future of mankind becomes available for contemplation.

“\The life of each nation is subordinated to a plethora of different historical, geographical, and economic conditions, making it impossible to establish a model of organization equally valid for all. Any such attempt would be absolutely impractical. It would smother the richness and spontaneity of life which flourishes only in infinite diversity and, what is more, contradict the most fundamental principles of freedom.”(Bakunin 1851)

Above is what I believe to be one of the most compelling arguments for the development of such a system. This vastly multi-paradigmatic societal system could potentially be compared to the different organ structures which make up an organism, as well as the different components which compose a working machine, depending on how one would prefer to look at it.

With this principal in place, societies could theoretically coexist in such a way that a barter capitalist society, a 60s counter-culture styled hippy commune, a direct-democracy, and a socialist-republic could all co exist peacefully as co-operating participants of a larger collective unit, and everyone would get a voluntary choice over which type of society they would like to live under if any, or start there own should they please. This allows for lack of better words the existence of a modular form of society.

In some ways this could almost be seen as similar to modern day United States… If we were to eliminate the need for federal and state governments as we know them today, instead delegating all leadership to court systems and what appears to be the purest form of popular sovereignty I have yet to come across.

Bakunin goes into further detail into explaining the intricacies of his ideas throughout the rest of the essay as well as his many subsequent works. These are however outside the scope of this article’s goal of painting a broad conceptual analysis and explanation of his often overlooked and poorly understood syndicalist-anarchist school of thought.

I hope we all were able  to get something out of this. Even more so, I hope you are inspired to read further into the works of Bakunin and the world of Anarchist Philosophy and political theory in general.

Since I began reading his works the revolutionary ideas within have never ceased to stir up, intrigue, and inspire the intellectual capacities of my mind. You can likely expect more on him as I progress through his work and occupy myself with the contemplation, association, and analysis of his thoughts and ideas.

Until than I wish you all a wonderful day/evening/!

.