Anarchist economics

31 Pages·2016·1.13 MB·English

Anarchist economics
Anarchisteconomicsisthesetoftheoriesandpractices For the influential German individualist anarchist
of economic activity within the political philosophy of philosopher Max Stirner "private property is a spook
anarchism. which“livesbythegraceoflaw”andit“becomes'mine'
only by effect of the law”. In other words, private
property exists purely “through the protection of the
1 Historical overview State,throughtheState’sgrace.”Recognisingitsneedfor
state protection, Stirner is also aware that "[i]t need not
make any difference to the 'good citizens’ who protects
1.1 Earlyviews
themandtheirprinciples,whetheranabsoluteKingora
constitutionalone,arepublic,ifonlytheyareprotected.
Andwhatistheirprinciple,whoseprotectortheyalways
'love'? Not that of labour”, rather it is “interest-bearing
possession. . . labouringcapital, therefore. . . labour
certainly,yetlittleornoneatallofone’sown,butlabour
ofcapitalandofthe—subjectlabourers”."[2]
PierreJosephProudhonwasinvolvedwiththeLyonsmu-
tualists and later adopted the name to describe his own
teachings.[3]InWhatIsMutualism? ClarenceLeeSwartz
gives his own account of the origin of the term, claim-
ingthat"[t]heword“mutualism”seemstohavebeenfirst
usedbyJohnGray,anEnglishwriter,in1832.”[4]Proud-
honopposedgovernmentprivilegethatprotectscapitalist,
banking and land interests, and the accumulation or ac-
quisitionofproperty(andanyformofcoercionthatled
toit)whichhebelievedhamperscompetitionandkeeps
wealthinthehandsofthefew.
Proudhon favoured a right of individuals to retain the
productoftheirlabourastheirownproperty,butbelieved
that any property beyond that which an individual pro-
duced and could possess was illegitimate. Thus, he saw
private property as both essential to liberty and a road
to tyranny, the former when it resulted from labour and
was required for labour and the latter when it resulted
in exploitation (profit, interest, rent, tax). He generally
calledtheformer“possession”andthelatter“property.”
For large-scale industry, he supported workers associa-
JosiahWarren tionstoreplacewagelabourandopposedtheownership
ofland.
The early English anarchist William Godwin's views on
Josiah Warren is widely regarded as the first US
economics could be summarized as follows: “he envis-
anarchist,[5] and the four-page weekly paper he edited
agesthepossibilityofspecializationinthevariouscrafts,
during1833,ThePeacefulRevolutionist,wasthefirstan-
whichwouldleadtoaman’sfollowingthetaskforwhich
archistperiodicalpublished.[6]JosiahWarrentermedthe
hehadthegreatestaptitude,anddistributinghissurplus
phrase "Cost the limit of price", with “cost” here refer-
products to whoever may need them, receiving what he
ringnottomonetarypricepaidbutthelaboroneexerted
himselfneedsofotherthingsfromthesurplusproduced
toproduceanitem.[7]Therefore,"[h]eproposedasystem
by his neighbours, but always on the basis of free dis-
topaypeoplewithcertificatesindicatinghowmanyhours
tribution, not of exchange. It is evident that, despite
ofworktheydid. Theycouldexchangethenotesatlocal
his speculations on the future of machinery, Godwin’s
timestoresforgoodsthattookthesameamountoftime
idealsocietyisbasedontheeconomicsofhandcraftsand
cultivation.”[1] toproduce.”.[5]
1
2 1 HISTORICALOVERVIEW
Warrenputhistheoriestothetestbyestablishinganex- equalityofallandabsolutelyindependentofallpolitical
perimental “labor for labor store” called the Cincinnati government”, in which each worker will have the “right
Time Store where trade was facilitated by notes backed totheenjoymentofthegrossproductofhislaboursand
byapromisetoperformlabor. Thestoreprovedsuccess- therebythemeansofdevelopinghisfullintellectual,ma-
fulandoperatedforthreeyearsafterwhichitwasclosed terialandmoralpowersinacollectivesetting.”Thisrev-
sothatWarrencouldpursueestablishingcoloniesbased olutionarytransformationcould“onlybetheoutcomeof
on mutualism. These included "Utopia" and "Modern thespontaneousactionoftheproletariatitself,itstrades
Times.” Warren said that Stephen Pearl Andrews' The bodiesandtheautonomouscommunes.”[14]
ScienceofSociety,publishedin1852,wasthemostlucid
Due to its links to active workers’ movements, the
andcompleteexpositionofWarren’sowntheories.[8]
International became a significant organization. Karl
In Europe an early anarchist communist was Joseph Marx became a leading figure in the International and
Déjacque, the first person to describe himself as a member of its General Council. Proudhon’s fol-
"libertarian".[9][10] Unlike and against Proudhon, he ar- lowers, the mutualists, opposed Marx’s state socialism,
gued that, “it is not the product of his or her labor that advocating political abstentionism and small property
theworkerhasarightto,buttothesatisfactionofhisor holdings.[15][16]
her needs, whatever may be their nature.”[11][12][13] Re-
In1868,followingtheirunsuccessfulparticipationinthe
turning to New York he was able to serialise his book
League of Peace and Freedom (LPF), Russian revolu-
inhisperiodicalLeLibertaire,JournalduMouvementso-
tionary Mikhail Bakunin and his collectivist anarchist
cial. Publishedin27issuesfromJune9,1858toFebruary
associates joined the First International (which had de-
4, 1861, Le Libertaire was the first anarcho-communist
cided not to get involved with the LPF).[17] They allied
journalpublishedintheUnitedStates.
themselves with the federalist socialist sections of the
International,[18] who advocated the revolutionary over-
1.2 Economics in organized mass social throwofthestateandthecollectivizationofproperty. A
similarpositionwasadoptedbytheWorkers’Federation
anarchism
oftheSpanishRegionin1882,asarticulatedbyananar-
chistveteranoftheFirstInternational,JosepLlunasiPu-
jals, in his essay, “Collectivism.”[14] The collectivist an-
archistsadvocatedremunerationforthetypeandamount
of labor adhering to the principle “to each according to
deeds";[19]
Anarchistcommunismasacoherent,moderneconomic-
political philosophy was first formulated in the Ital-
ian section of the First International by Carlo Cafiero,
Emilio Covelli, Errico Malatesta, Andrea Costa and
other ex-Mazzinian Republicans.[20] Out of respect for
Mikhail Bakunin, they did not make their differences
with collectivist anarchism explicit until after Bakunin’s
death.[21]Thecollectivistanarchistssoughttocollectivize
ownership of the means of production while retaining
payment proportional to the amount and kind of labor
of each individual, but the anarcho-communists sought
to extend the concept of collective ownership to the
products of labor as well. While both groups argued
against capitalism, the anarchist communists departed
fromProudhonandBakunin, whomaintainedthatindi-
vidualshavearighttotheproductoftheirindividuallabor
andtoberemuneratedfortheirparticularcontributionto
production. But, Errico Malatesta put it: "...instead of
running the risk of making a confusion in trying to dis-
tinguishwhatyouandIeachdo, letusallworkandput
PeterKropotkin everythingincommon. Inthiswayeachwillgivetosoci-
etyallthathisstrengthpermitsuntilenoughisproduced
for every one; and each will take all that he needs, lim-
The anti-authoritarian sections of the First International
itinghisneedsonlyinthosethingsofwhichthereisnot
proclaimed at the St. Imier Congress (1872) that “the
yetplentyforeveryone.”[22]
aspirations of the proletariat can have no purpose other
thantheestablishmentofanabsolutelyfreeeconomicor- Bytheearly1880s,mostoftheEuropeananarchistmove-
ganization and federation, founded upon the labour and
1.3 Anarchismeconomicsinpractice: theSpanishRevolution 3
ment had adopted an anarchist communist position, ad- outline of anarcho-communism; its ideas were taken up
vocatingtheabolitionofwagelabouranddistributionac- bytheSaragossacongressoftheCNTinMay1936.[23]
cording to need. Ironically, the “collectivist” label then TheSpanishanarchisteconomistDiegoAbaddeSantil-
becamemorecommonlyassociatedwithMarxiststateso- lanpublishedaninfluentialtreatiseoneconomics,ElOr-
cialistswhoadvocatedtheretentionofsomesortofwage ganismoEconomicodelaRevolucion(TheEconomicOr-
systemduringthetransitiontofullcommunism. Thean- ganizationoftheRevolution).[23]
archist communist, Peter Kropotkin, attacked this posi-
Hesawthat:
tioninhisessay,“TheCollectivistWagesSystem”,which
wasreprintedinhisbookTheConquestofBreadin1892.
“Ouridealisthecommunewhichisassociated,
CafieroexplainsinAnarchyandCommunism(1880)that
federated,integratedintothetotaleconomyof
private property in the product of labor will lead to un-
thecountry,andofothercountriesinastateof
equal accumulation of capital and, therefore, the reap-
revolution.” To replace the single owner by a
pearanceofsocialclassesandtheirantagonisms,andthus
hydra-headedownerisnotcollectivism,isnot
theresurrectionofthestate: “Ifwepreservetheindivid-
self-management. Theland, thefactories, the
ualappropriationoftheproductsoflabour,wewouldbe
mines, themeansoftransportaretheproduct
forcedtopreservemoney,leavingmoreorlessaccumula-
oftheworkofallandmustbeattheserviceof
tionofwealthaccordingtomoreorlessmeritratherthan
need of individuals.”[11] At the Florence Conference of all. Nowadaystheeconomyisneitherlocal,nor
evennational,butworld-wide. Thecharacter-
the Italian Federation of the International in 1876, held
istic feature of modern life is the cohesion of
in a forest outside Florence due to police activity, they
all the productive and distributive forces. “A
declaredtheprinciplesofanarcho-communism.
socialized economy, directed and planned, is
animperativenecessityandcorrespondstothe
trendofdevelopmentofthemoderneconomic
1.3 Anarchism economics in practice: the world.”[23]
SpanishRevolution
Santillan was to play an important part in the Spanish
Mainarticles: SpanishRevolutionandAnarchistCatalo- Revolution. He became a member of the central com-
nia mitteeoftheanti-fascistmilitia, amemberoftheCata-
lan Economic Council, and Economics Minister of the
In the strong anarchist movement in Spain the de- Catalangovernment.[23]
batebetweencollectivismandanarcho-communismwas Anarchist historian George Woodcock reports that “For
revived.[23] “This double base, both industrial and ru- several months the armed forces in these regions were
ral, had turned the libertarian communism of Spanish mostly anarchist controlled militia units. The factories
anarcho-syndicalism in somewhat divergent directions, werelargelytakenoverbytheworkersandrunbyC.N.T.
theonecommunalist,theothersyndicalist. Thecommu- committees,whilehundredsofvillageseithersharedout
nalism was expressed in a more local, more rural spirit, or collectivized the land, and many of them attempted
onemightalmostsay: moresouthern,foroneofitsprin- tosetuplibertariancommunesofthekindadvocatedby
cipal bastions was in Andalusia. Syndicalism, on the Kropotkin.”
otherhand,wasmoreurbanandunitarianinspirit—more
northerly,too,sinceitsmaincenterwasCatalonia.
“The beginnings of collectivization seem to
Spanish anarchist theoreticians were somewhat divided havebeensimilarinvillagesandfactories. The
onthissubject. Asectionofthemhadgiventheirhearts landlords in the villages had fled, the Civil
toKropotkinandhiseruditebutsimplisticidealizationof Guardshadbeenkilledorchasedaway,andthe
thecommunesoftheMiddleAgeswhichtheyidentified village syndicate would transform itself into a
withtheSpanishtraditionoftheprimitivepeasantcom- popularassemblyinwhicheveryvillagercould
munity. Their favorite slogan was the “free commune.” participate directly in the affairs of the com-
BakuninwasthefounderoftheSpanishcollectivist,syn- munity. An administrative committee would
dicalist, and internationalist workers’ movement. Those be elected, but this would operate under the
anarchiststendedtofollowhimandhisdiscipleRicardo constant supervision of the population, meet-
Mella.[23] They were concerned with economic unifica- ingatleastonceaweekinfullassemblytohas-
tion and believed that a long transitional period would tentheachievementoffreecommunism. Inthe
be necessary during which it would be wiser to reward factoriestheprocesswassimilar,withawork-
labor according to the hours worked and not according ers’ committee becoming responsible to the
to need. They envisaged the economic structure of the generalassemblyofthesyndicate,andtechni-
future as a combination of local trade-union groupings cians(inafewcasestheformerownersorman-
andfederationsofbranchesofindustry.[23] In1932,the agers)planningproductioninaccordancewith
SpanishanarchisttheoreticianIsaacPuentepublishedan theworkers’views.”[1]
4 2 THEORETICALECONOMICSYSTEMS
2 Theoretical economic systems
equal conditions for all members, on pain of a relapse
intofeudalism.”[32]Asforcapitalgoods(man-made,non-
land, "means of production"), mutualist opinion differs
2.1 Classicaltheoreticaleconomicsystems
on whether these should be commonly managed public
assetsorprivateproperty.
In a chronological and theoretical sense, there are
classical—those created throughout the 19th century—
andpost-classicalanarchistschools—thosecreatedsince
themid-20thcenturyandafter.
2.1.1 Mutualism
Mainarticle: Mutualism(economictheory)
Mutualism is an anarchist school of thought which can
betracedtothewritingsofPierre-JosephProudhon,who
envisioned a society where each person might possess a
means of production, either individually or collectively,
with trade representing equivalent amounts of labor in
the free market.[24] Integral to the scheme was the es-
tablishmentofamutual-creditbankwhichwouldlendto
producersataminimalinterestrateonlyhighenoughto
coverthecostsofadministration.[25] Mutualismisbased
onalabortheoryofvaluewhichholdsthatwhenlaboror
itsproductissold,inexchange,itoughttoreceivegoods
orservicesembodying“theamountoflabornecessaryto
produceanarticleofexactlysimilarandequalutility”.[26]
Somemutualistsbelievethatifthestatedidnotintervene,
as a result of increased competition in the marketplace,
individuals would receive no more income than that in
proportion to the amount of labor they exert.[27] Mutu-
alistsopposetheideaofindividualsreceivinganincome
throughloans,investments,andrent,astheybelievethese
individualsarenotlaboring. Someofthemarguethatif WhatisProperty? Or, anInquiryintothePrincipleofRight
state intervention ceased, these types of incomes would andofGovernmentbyPierreJosephProudhonbyPierreJoseph
disappearduetoincreasedcompetitionincapital.[28] Proudhon
Though Proudhon opposed this type of income, he ex-
pressed: "... I never meant to ... forbid or suppress, by
sovereign decree, ground rent and interest on capital. I Evolution Mutualism, as a term, has seen a variety
believethatalltheseformsofhumanactivityshouldre- of related uses. Charles Fourier first used the French
mainfreeandoptionalforall.”[29] Insofarastheyensure term “mutualisme” in 1822,[33] although the reference
theworkersrighttothefullproductoftheirlabor,mutu- was not to an economic system. The first use of the
alistssupportmarketsandprivatepropertyintheproduct noun“mutualist”wasintheNew-HarmonyGazettebyan
of labor. However, they argue for conditional titles to American Owenite in1826.[34] Intheearly1830s, a la-
land,whoseprivateownershipislegitimateonlysolong bororganizationinLyons,France,calledthemselvesthe
asitremainsinuseoroccupation(whichProudhoncalled “Mutuellists.”PierreJosephProudhonwasinvolvedwith
“possession.”)[30] the Lyons mutualists and later adopted the name to de-
scribehisownteachings.[3]
Proudhon’sMutualismsupportslabor-ownedcooperative
firms and associations[31] for “we need not hesitate, for In What Is Mutualism? Clarence Lee Swartz gives his
we have no choice. . . it is necessary to form an AS- ownaccountoftheoriginoftheterm,claimingthat"[t]he
SOCIATIONamongworkers. . . becausewithoutthat, word“mutualism”seemstohavebeenfirstusedbyJohn
theywouldremainrelatedassubordinatesandsuperiors, Gray, an English writer, in 1832.”[4] When John Gray’s
and there would ensue two . . . castes of masters and 1825LectureonHumanHappinesswasfirstpublishedin
wage-workers, which is repugnant to a free and demo- the United States in 1826, the publishers appended the
craticsociety”andso“itbecomesnecessaryforthework- PreambleandconstitutionoftheFriendlyAssociationfor
ers to form themselves into democratic societies, with MutualInterests, located atValleyForge. 1826alsosaw
2.1 Classicaltheoreticaleconomicsystems 5
thepublicationoftheConstitutionoftheFriendlyAssoci- dissolublylinkedtohisnotionsofindustrydemocracyand
ationforMutualInterestsatKendal,Ohio. workers’ self-management.”[41] K. Steven Vincent notes
inhisin-depthanalysisofthisaspectofProudhon’sideas
By1846,PierreJosephProudhonwasspeakingof“mu-
that“Proudhonconsistentlyadvancedaprogramofindus-
tualité" in his writings, and he used the term “mutuel-
trialdemocracywhichwouldreturncontrolanddirection
lisme”,atleastasearlyas1848,inhis“ProgrammeRévo-
oftheeconomytotheworkers.” ForProudhon,"...strong
lutionnaire.”WilliamB.Greene,in1850,usedtheterm
workers’ associations . . . would enable the workers to
“mutualism” to describe a mutual credit system similar
determinejointlybyelectionhowtheenterprisewastobe
to that of Proudhon. In 1850, the American newspaper
directedandoperatedonaday-to-daybasis.”[42]
The Spirit of the Age, edited by William Henry Chan-
ning, published proposals for a “mutualist township” by
JoshuaKingIngalls[35] andAlbertBrisbane,[36] together
2.1.2 Collectivistanarchism
with works by Proudhon,[37] William B. Greene, Pierre
Leroux,andothers. Mainarticle: Collectivistanarchism
ForAmericananarchisthistorianEuniceMinetteSchus-
ter “It is apparent...that Proudhonian Anarchism was to Collectivist anarchism (also known as anarcho-
befoundintheUnitedStatesatleastasearlyas1848and collectivism) is a revolutionary[43] doctrine that ad-
thatitwasnotconsciousofitsaffinitytotheIndividual- vocates the abolition of the state and private ownership
ist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl An- of the means of production. Instead, it envisions the
drews...William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian means of production being owned collectively and
Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form.”.[38] controlled and managed by the producers themselves.
Later Benjamin Tucker fused Stirner’s egoism with the For the collectivization of the means of production, it
economicsofWarrenandProudhoninhiseclecticinflu- was originally envisaged that workers will revolt and
entialpublicationLiberty. Mutualismhasbeenassociated forcibly collectivize the means of production.[43] Once
withtwotypesofcurrencyreform. Labornoteswerefirst collectivization takes place, workers’ salaries would be
discussedinOwenitecirclesandreceivedtheirfirstprac- determined in democratic organizations based on the
ticaltestin1827intheTimeStoreofformerNewHar- amount of time they contributed to production. These
monymemberandindividualistanarchistJosiahWarren. salarieswouldbeusedtopurchasegoodsinacommunal
Mutual banking aimed at the monetization of all forms market.[44]
of wealth and the extension of free credit. It is most
This contrasts with anarcho-communism where wages
closely associated with William B. Greene, but Greene
would be abolished, and where individuals would take
drew from the work of Proudhon, Edward Kellogg, and
freely from a storehouse of goods “to each accord-
WilliamBeck,aswellasfromthelandbanktradition.
ing to his need.” Thus, Bakunin’s “Collectivist Anar-
Mutualistsarguethatassociationisonlynecessarywhere chism”, notwithstanding the title, is seen as a blend of
thereisan organiccombinationofforces. Forinstance, individualismandcollectivism.[45]Collectivistanarchism
anoperationthatrequiresspecializationandmanydiffer- ismostcommonlyassociatedwithMikhailBakunin,the
entworkersperformingtheirindividualtaskstocomplete anti-authoritariansectionsoftheFirstInternational,and
aunifiedproduct,i.e.,afactory. Inthissituation,work- theearlySpanishanarchistmovement.
ers are inherently dependent on each other – and with-
outassociationtheyarerelatedassubordinateandsupe-
rior, master and wage-slave. An operation that can be
performed by an individual without the help of special-
izedworkersdoesnot requireassociation. Proudhonar-
guedthatpeasantsdonotrequiresocietalform,andonly
feignedassociationforthepurposesofsolidarityinabol-
ishingrents,buyingclubs,etc.
Mutualistsarguethatfreebankingshouldbetakenback
by the people to establish systems of free credit. They
contend that banks have a monopoly on credit, just as
capitalists have a monopoly on land. Kevin Carson is a
contemporary mutualist and author of Studies in Mutu-
alist Political Economy.[39] Carson holds that capitalism
has been founded on “an act of robbery as massive as
BakuninwithfellowmembersoftheIWAinBasel
feudalism”,andarguesthatcapitalismcouldnotexistin
theabsenceofastate. Hesays"[i]tisstateintervention
thatdistinguishescapitalismfromthefreemarket”.[40]As
RobertGrahamnotes,“Proudhon’smarketsocialismisin- Criticism of Marxism and relationship with other
anarchist classical currents The collectivist anar-
6 2 THEORETICALECONOMICSYSTEMS
chists at first used the term “collectivism” to distin- theestablishmentofanabsolutelyfreeeconomicorgani-
guish themselves from the mutualism of the followers zationandfederation,foundeduponthelabourandequal-
ofProudhonandthestatesocialistsassociatedwithKarl ityofallandabsolutelyindependentofallpoliticalgov-
Marx. Bakunin wrote, “we shall always protest against ernment”,inwhicheachworkerwillhavethe“righttothe
anything that may in any way resemble communism or enjoymentofthegrossproductofhislaboursandthereby
state socialism”, which Bakunin regarded as fundamen- themeansofdevelopinghisfullintellectual,materialand
tally authoritarian (“Federalism, Socialism, and Anti- moralpowersinacollectivesetting.”Thisrevolutionary
Theologism”,1867).[46] transformation could “only be the outcome of the spon-
taneous action of the proletariat itself, its trades bodies
The dispute between Mikhail Bakunin and Karl Marx
and the autonomous communes.”[14] A similar position
highlighted the differences between anarchism and
was adopted by the Workers’ Federation of the Spanish
Marxism. Bakunin argued—against certain ideas of a
Regionin1882,asarticulatedbyananarchistveteranof
number of Marxists—that not all revolutions need be
the First International, Jose Llunas Pujols, in his essay,
violent. He also strongly rejected Marx’s concept of
“Collectivism.”[14]
the "dictatorship of the proletariat", a concept that van-
guardist socialism including Marxism-Leninism would The difference between Collectivist Anarchism and
usetojustifyone-partyrulefromabovebyaparty'rep- Anarcho-Communism is that collectivist anarchism
resenting' the proletariat.[47] Bakunin insisted that rev- stresses collective ownership of productive, subsistence
olutions must be led by the people directly while any and distributary property, while communist anarchism
“enlightenedelite”mustonlyexertinfluencebyremain- negates the concept of ownership in favor of usage or
ing "invisible...not imposed on anyone...[and] deprived possessionwithproductivemeansbeingapossessionnot
of all official rights and significance”.[48] He held that ownedbyanyindividualorparticulargroup.[52][53]Com-
the state should be immediately abolished because all munist Anarchists believe that subsistence, productive
forms of government eventually lead to oppression.[47] and distributive property should be common or social
Bakunin has sometimes been called the first theorist of possessions while personal property should be private
the"newclass",meaningthata'class’ofintellectualsand possessions.[54]Collectivistanarchistsagreewiththis,but
bureaucrats running the state in the name of the peo- disagreeonthesubjectofremuneration;somecollectivist
ple or the proletariat—but in reality in their own inter- anarchists, such as Mikhail Bakunin, believe in the re-
ests alone. Bakunin argued that the “State has always muneration of labor, while communist-anarchists, such
been the patrimony of some privileged class: a priestly asPeterKropotkin,believethatsuchremunerationwould
class, an aristocratic class, a bourgeois class. And fi- leadtotherecreationofcurrencyandthatthiswouldneed
nally, when all the other classes have exhausted them- a State.[55] Thus, it could be said that collectivist anar-
selves, the State then becomes the patrimony of the bu- chistsbelieveinfreedomthroughcollectiveownershipof
reaucraticclassandthenfalls—or,ifyouwill,rises—to productionandacommunalmarketofsortstodistribute
the position of a machine.”[49] Also Bakunin had a dif- goodsandservicesandcompensateworkersintheform
ferent view as compared to Marx’s on the revolutionary of remuneration. Thus, collectivist anarchism could be
potentialofthelumpenproletariatandtheproletariat. As seenasacombinationofcommunismandmutualism.
such “Both agreed that the proletariat would play a key
The Anarchist FAQ compares and contrasts collectivist
role,butforMarxtheproletariatwastheexclusive,lead-
anarchismwithcommunistanarchismthisway:
ing revolutionary agent while Bakunin entertained the
possibility that the peasants and even the lumpenprole-
tariat (the unemployed, common criminals, etc.) could The major difference between collec-
rise to the occasion.[50] Bakunin “considers workers’ in- tivists and communists is over the question
tegrationincapitalasdestructiveofmoreprimaryrevolu- of “money” after a revolution. Anarcho-
tionaryforces. ForBakunin,therevolutionaryarchetype communists consider the abolition of money
isfoundinapeasantmilieu(whichispresentedashaving tobeessential,whileanarcho-collectivistscon-
longstandinginsurrectionarytraditions,aswellasacom- sidertheendofprivateownershipofthemeans
munistarchetypeinitscurrentsocialform—thepeasant of production to be the key. As Kropotkin
commune)andamongsteducatedunemployedyouth,as- noted, "[collectivist anarchism] express[es] a
sorted marginals from all classes, brigands, robbers, the stateofthingsinwhichallnecessariesforpro-
impoverishedmasses,andthoseonthemarginsofsociety duction are owned in common by the labour
who have escaped, been excluded from, or not yet sub- groupsandthefreecommunes,whiletheways
sumed in the discipline of emerging industrial work...in ofretribution[i.e. distribution]oflabour,com-
short,allthosewhomMarxsoughttoincludeinthecate- munist or otherwise, would be settled by each
goryofthelumpenproletariat.”[51] group for itself.”[56] Thus, while communism
and collectivism both organise production in
The anti-authoritarian sections of the First International
commonviaproducers’associations,theydif-
proclaimedattheSt. ImierCongress(1872)that“theas-
fer in how the goods produced will be dis-
pirationsoftheproletariatcanhavenopurposeotherthan
tributed. Communism is based on free con-
2.1 Classicaltheoreticaleconomicsystems 7
sumption of all while collectivism is more consumptionanddistributionshouldbe self-determined
likelytobebasedonthedistributionofgoods byeachindividualwithoutarbitraryvalueassignedtola-
according to the labour contributed. How- bor, goods and services by others. In place of a mar-
ever,mostanarcho-collectiviststhinkthat,over ket, most anarcho-communists support a currency-less
time, as productivity increases and the sense gifteconomywheregoodsandservicesareproducedby
of community becomes stronger, money will workers and distributed in community stores where ev-
disappear.[57] eryone(includingtheworkerswhoproducedthem)ises-
sentiallyentitledtoconsumewhatevertheywantorneed
as“payment”fortheirproductionofgoodsandservices.
2.1.3 Anarchistcommunism
A gift economy does not necessarily involve an imme-
diate return (such as with remuneration); compensation
Mainarticle: Anarchistcommunism
comes in the form of whatever the person decides is of
equalvaluetotheirproductsoflabor(whatiscommonly
Anarchist communism (also known as anarcho- calledbartering). Anylimitsonproductionanddistribu-
communism and occasionally as free communism or tion would be determined by the individuals within the
libertarian communism[58]) is a theory of anarchism groupsinvolved,ratherthanbycapitalistowners,corpo-
which advocates the abolition of the state, markets, rations, investors, banks or other artificial market pres-
money, capitalism, and private property (while retain- sures. Crucially, the abstract relationship of “landlord”
ing respect for personal property),[59] and in favor of and “tenant” would no longer exist, as such titles are
common ownership of the means of production,[60][61] held to occur under conditional legal coercion and are
directdemocracy anda horizontalnetworkofvoluntary not absolutely necessary to occupy buildings or spaces.
associations and workers’ councils with production and (Intellectualpropertyrightswouldalsocease,sincethey
consumption based on the guiding principle: "from areaformofprivateproperty.)
each according to his ability, to each according to his
need".[62][63] Some forms of anarchist communism
such as insurrectionary anarchism are strongly influ-
enced by egoism and radical individualism, believing
anarcho-communism is the best social system for the
realization of individual freedom.[64][65][66][67] Most
anarcho-communistsviewanarcho-communismasaway
ofreconcilingtheoppositionbetweentheindividualand
society.[68][69][70][71][72]
Theabolitionofwagelaboriscentraltoanarchistcom-
munism. With distribution of wealth being based on
self-determinedneeds,peoplewouldbefreetoengagein
whatever activities they found most fulfilling and would
no longer have to engage in work for which they have
neither the temperament nor the aptitude.[72] Anarchist
communists argue that there is no valid way of measur-
ingthevalueofanyoneperson’seconomiccontributions
becauseallwealthisacollectiveproductofcurrentand
precedinggenerations.[73]
Anarchist communists argue that any economic system
basedonwagelaborandprivatepropertyrequiresaco-
ercive state apparatus to enforce property rights and to
maintain unequal economic relationships that inevitably
arise from differences in wages or amount of property.
Theyfurtherarguethatmarketsandsystemsofcurrency
divide labor into classes and assign arbitrary numerical
values to an individual’s work and attempt to regulate
production, consumption and distribution. They argue
The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin, influential work
thatmoneyrestrictsanindividual’sabilitytoconsumethe
whichpresentstheeconomicvisionofanarcho-communism
productsoftheirlaborbylimitingtheirintakewithprices
andwages.
Anarchist communists recognize money as fundamen- Evolution and role in early 20th century revolutions
tallyquantitativeinnature,ratherthanqualitative. They Anarcho-communismdevelopedoutofradicalsocial-
believeproductionshouldbeaqualitativematter,andthat ist currents after the French revolution[11][74] but was
8 2 THEORETICALECONOMICSYSTEMS
first formulated as such in the Italian section of the of military offensives leading to the conquest and oc-
FirstInternational.[20]Anearlyanarchistcommunistwas cupation of certain towns and districts in Baja Califor-
JosephDéjacque, thefirstpersontodescribehimselfas nia with the leadership of anarcho-communist Ricardo
"libertarian".[9][10] Unlike Proudhon, he argued that, “it Flores Magón.[78] Kropotkin’s The Conquest of Bread,
isnottheproductofhisorherlaborthattheworkerhasa whichFloresMagónconsideredakindofanarchistbible,
rightto,buttothesatisfactionofhisorherneeds,what- served as basis for the short-lived revolutionary com-
evermaybetheirnature.”[11][12] munesinBajaCaliforniaduringthe“Magónista”Revolt
of1911.[78]
Anarchistcommunismasacoherent,moderneconomic-
political philosophy was first formulated in the Ital- To date, the best-known examples of an anarchist com-
ian section of the First International by Carlo Cafiero, munistsociety(i.e.,establishedaroundtheideasasthey
Emilio Covelli, Errico Malatesta, Andrea Costa and existtodayandachievingworldwideattentionandknowl-
other ex-Mazzinian Republicans.[20] Out of respect for edgeinthehistoricalcanon),aretheanarchistterritories
Mikhail Bakunin, they did not make their differences duringtheSpanishRevolution[79] andtheFreeTerritory
with collectivist anarchism explicit until after Bakunin’s during the Russian Revolution. Through the efforts and
death.[21]Thecollectivistanarchistssoughttocollectivize influence of the Spanish Anarchists during the Spanish
ownership of the means of production while retaining RevolutionwithintheSpanishCivilWar,startingin1936
paymentproportionaltotheamountandkindoflaborof anarchistcommunismexistedinmostofAragon,partsof
each individual, but the anarcho-communists sought to the Levante and Andalusia, as well as in the stronghold
extend the concept of collective ownership to the prod- ofAnarchistCataloniabeforebeingcrushedbythecom-
uctsoflaboraswell. binedforcesoftheregimethatwonthewar,Hitler,Mus-
solini, Spanish Communist Party repression (backed by
While both groups argued against capitalism, the anar-
the USSR) as well as economic and armaments block-
chistcommunistsdepartedfromProudhonandBakunin,
adesfromthecapitalistcountriesandtheSpanishRepub-
whomaintainedthatindividualshavearighttotheprod-
licitself.[80]
uct of their individual labor and to be remunerated for
their particular contribution to production. But, Errico
Malatesta put it: "...instead of running the risk of mak- 2.2 Post-classical theorectical economic
ing a confusion in trying to distinguish what you and I
systems
each do, let us all work and put everything in common.
Inthiswayeachwillgivetosocietyallthathisstrength
2.2.1 Participatoryeconomics
permitsuntilenoughisproducedforeveryone;andeach
willtakeallthatheneeds,limitinghisneedsonlyinthose
Mainarticle: Parecon
thingsofwhichthereisnotyetplentyforeveryone.”[22]
ThetheoreticalworkofPeterKropotkintookimportance
later as it expanded and developed pro-organizationalist Participatoryeconomics,oftenabbreviatedparecon,isan
andinsurrectionaryanti-organizationalistsections.[75] economicsystemproposedbyactivistandpoliticaltheo-
ristMichaelAlbertandradicaleconomistRobinHahnel.
During the Russian Revolution, anarchists such as
For Albert “participatory economics and participatory
Nestor Makhno worked to create and defend—through
societyprovideaworthy,viable,andevennecessaryand
the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine—
potentiallysufficientanarchistrevolutionaryvision.”[81]It
anarchist communism in the Free Territory of the
usesparticipatorydecisionmakingasaneconomicmech-
Ukraine from 1919 before being conquered by the
anism to guide the production, consumption and alloca-
Bolsheviks in 1921. A commander of the peasant
tionofresourcesinagivensociety. Proposedasanalter-
Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine, also
nativetocontemporarycapitalistmarketeconomiesand
known as the Anarchist Black Army, Makhno led a
also an alternative to centrally planned socialism, it is
guerrilla campaign opposing both the Bolshevik “Reds”
describedas“ananarchisticeconomicvision”,[82] andit
andmonarchist“Whites”. Therevolutionaryautonomous
couldbeconsideredaformofsocialismasunderparecon,
movement of which he was a part made various tacti-
themeansofproductionareownedbytheworkers.
cal military pacts while fighting various forces of reac-
tion and organizing the Free Territory of Ukraine, an The underlying values that parecon seeks to imple-
anarchistsociety, committedto resistingstateauthority, ment are equity, solidarity, diversity, workers’ self-
whethercapitalistorBolshevik.[76][77] management and efficiency. (Efficiency here means ac-
complishinggoalswithoutwastingvaluedassets.) Itpro-
After successfully repelling Austro-Hungarian, White,
poses to attain these ends mainly through the following
andUkrainianNationalistforces,theMakhnovistsmilitia
principlesandinstitutions:
forcesandanarchistcommunistterritoriesintheUkraine
wereeventuallycrushedbyBolshevikmilitaryforces. In (cid:15) workers’ and consumers’ councils utilizing self-
theMexicanRevolution,theMexicanLiberalPartywas
managerialmethodsfordecisionmaking,
established and during the early 1910s it led a series
(cid:15) balancedjobcomplexes,
2.2 Post-classicaltheorecticaleconomicsystems 9
(cid:15) remunerationaccordingtoeffortandsacrifice,and Thedemos,therefore,becomestheauthenticunitofeco-
nomiclife.
(cid:15) ParticipatoryPlanning.
The main characteristic of the proposed model, which
also differentiates it from socialist planning models like
Albert and Hahnel stress that parecon is only meant to
Parecon, is that it explicitly presupposes a stateless,
address an alternative economic theory and must be ac-
money-lessandmarket-lesseconomythatprecludespri-
companied by equally important alternative visions in
vate accumulation of wealth and the institutionalisation
the fields of politics, culture and kinship. The authors
ofprivilegesforsomesectionsofsociety,withoutrelying
have also discussed elements of anarchism in the field
on a mythical post-scarcity state of abundance, or sac-
of politics, polyculturalism in the field of culture, and
rificing freedom of choice. The proposed system aims
feminisminthefieldoffamilyandgenderrelationsasbe-
at satisfying the double aim of: (a) meeting the basic
ing possible foundations for future alternative visions in
needs of all citizens—which requires that basic macro-
these other spheres of society. Stephen R. Shalom has
economicdecisionshavetobemadedemocratically,and
begun work on a participatory political vision he calls
(b)securingfreedomofchoice—whichrequirestheindi-
"parpolity".
vidualtomakeimportantdecisionsaffectinghis/herown
life(whatworktodo,whattoconsumeetc.).
Therefore,thesystemconsistsoftwobasicelements: (1)
democraticplanning,whichinvolvesafeedbackprocess
between workplace assemblies, demotic assemblies and
theconfederalassembly,and(2)anartificialmarketusing
personalvouchers,whichensuresfreedomofchoicebut
avoidstheadverseeffectsofrealmarkets. Althoughsome
have called this system “a form of money based on the
labourtheoryofvalue”,[83]itisnotamoneymodelsince
voucherscannotbeusedasageneralmediumofexchange
andstoreofwealth.
AnotherdistinguishingfeatureofIDisitsdistinctionbe-
tween basic and non-basic needs. Remuneration is ac-
cording to need for basic needs, and according to effort
for non-basic needs. ID is based on the principle that
meetingbasicneedsisafundamentalhumanrightwhich
is guaranteed to all who are in a physical condition to
offer a minimal amount of work. By contrast, Parecon
guarantees that basic needs are satisfied only to the ex-
tent they are characterized public goods or are covered
bycompassionandbyaguaranteedbasicincomeforthe
unemployedandthosewhocannotwork[84]
MichaelAlbert,contemporaryanarchisteconomistproponentof
thePareconsystem.
2.2.3 Left-wingmarketanarchism
2.2.2 InclusiveDemocracy Mainarticle: Left-wingmarketanarchism
Mainarticle: InclusiveDemocracy
Leftwingmarketanarchism,aformofleft-libertarianism
and individualist anarchism[85] is associated with schol-
According to the ID project, economic democracy is arssuchasKevinCarson,[86][87]RoderickT.Long,[88][89]
the authority of demos (community) in the economic Charles Johnson,[90] Brad Spangler,[91] Samuel Ed-
sphere—which requires equal distribution of economic ward Konkin III,[92] Sheldon Richman,[93][94][95] Chris
power. Aswiththecaseofdirectdemocracy,economic MatthewSciabarra,[96] andGaryChartier,[97] whostress
democracytodayisonlyfeasibleatthelevelofthecon- the value of radically free markets, termed freed mar-
federateddemoi. Itinvolvestheownershipandcontrolof kets to distinguish them from the common conception
themeansofproductionbythedemos. Thisisradically whichtheselibertariansbelievetoberiddledwithstatist
different from the two main forms of concentration of andcapitalistprivileges.[98]Referredtoasleft-wingmar-
economic power : capitalist and 'socialist' growth econ- ket anarchists[99] or market-oriented left-libertarians,[95]
omy. It is also different from the various types of col- proponentsofthisapproachstronglyaffirmtheclassical
lectivist capitalism, such as workers’ control and milder liberal ideas of self-ownership and free markets, while
versions suggested by post-Keynesian social democrats. maintainingthat,takentotheirlogicalconclusions,these
10 3 ISSUESANDPROPOSALS
ideassupportanti-capitalist,[100][101][102]anti-corporatist, 3 Issues and proposals
anti-hierarchical,pro-laborpositionsineconomics;anti-
imperialism in foreign policy; and thoroughly liberal
3.1 Anarchistcriticismsofcapitalism
or radical views regarding such cultural issues as gen-
der, sexuality, and race. The genealogy of contempo-
This section is duplicated in Criticism of capital-
rary market-oriented left-libertarianism—sometimes la-
ism#Anarchistcriticismsofcapitalism.
beled “left-wing market anarchism”[103]'—overlaps to a
The authors of An Anarchist FAQ state that anarchists
significant degree with that of Steiner–Vallentyne left-
libertarianismastherootsofthattraditionaresketchedin
thebookTheOriginsofLeft-Libertarianism.[104]Carson–
Long-style left-libertarianism is rooted in nineteenth-
century mutualism and in the work of figures such
as Thomas Hodgskin and the individualist anarchists
Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner. While, with
notable exceptions, market-oriented libertarians after
Tuckertendedtoallywiththepoliticalright,relationships
betweensuchlibertariansandtheNewLeftthrivedinthe
1960s,layingthegroundworkformodernleft-wingmar-
ketanarchism.[105]Leftwingmarketanarchismidentifies
withLeft-libertarianism(orleft-winglibertarianism)[106]
which names several related but distinct approaches to
politics, society, culture, and political and social the-
ory,whichstressbothindividualfreedomandsocialjus-
tice. Unlike right-libertarians, they believe that neither
claiming nor mixing one’s labor with natural resources
isenoughtogeneratefullprivatepropertyrights,[107][108]
andmaintainthatnaturalresources(land,oil,gold,trees)
ought to be held in some egalitarian manner, either un-
owned or owned collectively.[108] Those left-libertarians
who support private property do so under the condition
thatrecompenseisofferedtothelocalcommunity.
Emma Goldman famously denounced wage slavery by saying:
“Theonlydifferenceisthatyouarehiredslavesinsteadofblock
2.2.4 Anarcho-capitalism slaves.”[120]
have long recognised that capitalism is, by its very na-
Mainarticle: Anarcho-capitalism
ture,hierarchical.[121] Theworkerissubjectedtotheau-
thorityofthebossduringworkinghours(sometimesout-
Anarcho-capitalism advocates the elimination of the sideworktoo). Theystatethat“Thishierarchicalcontrol
state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free mar- ofwagelabourhastheeffectofalienatingworkersfrom
ket.[109][110]Inananarcho-capitalistsociety,lawenforce- their own work, and so from themselves. Workers no
ment,courts,andallothersecurityserviceswouldbepro- longergovernthemselvesduringworkhoursandsoareno
videdbyprivatelyfundedcompetitorsratherthanthrough longer free.”[121] So this is why “Capitalism, by treating
taxation, and money would be privately and competi- labour as analogous to all other commodities denies the
tively provided in an open market. Therefore, personal key distinction between labour and other “resources”—
andeconomicactivitiesunderanarcho-capitalismwould that is to say its inseparability from its bearer—labour,
be regulated by privately run law rather than through unlikeother“property”,isendowedwithwillandagency.
politics. Anarcho-capitalismdevelopedfromradicalanti- Thus when one speaks of selling labour there is a nec-
state libertarianism drawing from Austrian School eco- essary subjugation of will (hierarchy)... Creative, self-
nomics, study of law and economics, and public choice managed work is a source of pride and joy and part of
theory.[111] what it means to be fully human. Wrenching control of
workfromthehandsoftheworkerprofoundlyharmshis
The majority of anarchist theorists do not consider
orhermentalandphysicalhealth.”[122] Theyalsoestab-
anarcho-capitalism as a part of the anarchist movement
lishthat:
due to the fact that anarchism has historically been
an anti-capitalist movement and for definitional rea-
sons which see anarchism incompatible with capitalist ...capitalism itself was created by state vi-
forms.[112][113][114][115][116][117][118][119] olence and the destruction of traditional ways