Evolutionary anarchism: is it possible?

Submitted by Xesau in Anarchism

Hello fellow comrades,

This has been on my mind for a while now, and I thought I would ask it here.

  • Do you think that it is possible to evolve our current society into an anarchist one, making the state more and more obsolete little by little, without a revolution?
  • What kind of small scale (community) projects could help evolving into an anarchist society?
  • How could we go about abandoning private property in communities?
11

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

theblackcat wrote (edited )

Do you think that it is possible to evolve our current society into an anarchist one, making the state more and more obsolete little by little, without a revolution?

If you mean anarcho-communism then no, that would be democratic socialism.

What kind of small scale (community) projects could help evolving into an anarchist society?

Individualist anarchism, on the other hand, is all for everyday anarchism. Food Not Bombs is a good example. But individualist anarchists don't believe that we will morph the state into anything worthwhile by participating in the political process. Individualists reject the system entirely as they aren't arrogant enough to believe they can change it from within.

How could we go about abandoning private property in communities?

Everyone contributes money to buy land to form a commune. Since we're living under liberalism, there need to be two things:

The external reality, which is that the land is privately owned by the community.

The internal, practical reality, which is that the community has agreed to share the land and live and work together. Each family would have their own personal property (their home and a small garden), while farms and factories would be communally operated.

5

Defasher wrote (edited )

There's another option - squatting. I squat land I don't own and there are wild/feral fruit trees on it that I harvest and share.

Eventually you get evicted from the land by the state, but then you can just find another place to squat/feed yourself.

3

Xesau OP wrote

Just like those ANAL squatters in London.

2

Lenny wrote

I'm an individualist so I believe in trying to live anarchy every day of my life.

But achieving anarchism is a constant struggle, there is no finish line you cross where you've suddenly created anarchy - Even if you do manage to create an anarchist utopia, keeping the community and its members from falling back into old habits is a daily struggle.

3

CogInTheMachine wrote

Basically this is what MLs and other transitionnal commies have been into. Marx claimed that it would require a thousand years for the true communist society to be the dominant order.

The character O'Brien in 1984 told a similar thing.

Just keep working and wait in line as much as you want... supporting false political solutions and whatev.

The Commune is possible where you are. Why not just doing it, here and now?

1

Xesau OP wrote

I should clarify what I meant.

My question whether it would be possible/feasible to organise private society in such a way that it makes government obsolete.

2

CogInTheMachine wrote (edited )

My question whether it would be possible/feasible to organise private society in such a way that it makes government obsolete.

But of course that's possible. Not only possible, but necessary. As Machiavelli said, the basics you need to insure are the means to subsist for the people participating... So to say: 1- food and 2- (self-)defense. Black Panthers -agree with them or not- have understood this principle. Without this stuff, you're likely to not be taken seriously by newcomers.

I'd also say that providing with shelter is also equally important to food in big cities, if not more.

The funny games and relationships, they'll just follow as usual.

That's what we are still to bring to people, to prove that the "commune" can work. Broken windows don't feed, and not-so-convingly bring means of deterrence or defense, even tho they may build a power dynamic. You need some structures that provide with relevant forms of sustenance, so that some people may be tempted to abandon wage slavery or welfare for these ways of living.

3

RespectWomen wrote

Basically this is what MLs and other transitionnal commies have been into. Marx claimed that it would require a thousand years for the true communist society to be the dominant order.

This is simply not true. Lenin stated something like it requiring five centuries for the labourers to emancipate theirselves, but I don’t think that Marx ever said anything like that.

The character O'Brien in 1984 told a similar thing.

Honestly, I think that the main reason why 1984 has persistent popularity is because it was a useful utility to pushing antisocialism.

Just keep working and wait in line as much as you want... supporting false political solutions and whatev.

Uh, no?

The Commune is possible where you are. Why not just doing it, here and now?

Because it requires the permission & cooperation of others.

1

Xesau OP wrote

Exactly this.

And it doesn't only require the cooperation of those who live within the "borders" of the commune - if you manage to get their support, that's always great of course - but the state would always try to counteract such a development!

1