EAST BAY ANARCHIST BOOKFAIR

47 Pages·2012·0.45 MB·English

EAST BAY
ANARCHIST
BOOKFAIR
A READER
2
Instead of an Introduction
The following texts were com-
piled for the amusement of all
those participating in the First An-
nual East Bay Anarchist Bookfair.
Each set of texts corresponds to a
facilitated conversation. Those
conversations will be held at the
bookfair, on Saturday December
1st, 2012. It should be noted that
all the following texts are excerpts
or abridgments (unfortunately, the
manner in which the texts have Conversations & Time Slots:
been excerpted is not always
clearly marked). However, we 11.00 am
tried to pull from texts that are
already available, for free, online. Stage 1a. The Event
Outside 1b. The Event
Note: some of these texts nuzzle
and lean into us, and we weep 12.30 pm
with the joy of recognizing our-
selves and our desires. In other Stage 2a. Pleasure
texts, we find much to critique Outside 2b. Pleasure
and to question. The hope is that
these booklets will pop off, like lit- 3.00 pm
tle sparks from a fire, or perhaps
float about town, like the parasol Outside Violence versus Non-
of a dandelion seed. If you catch Violence: a Debate
one, mark it up with your number
2 pencil. Prepare questions. Let’s 4.30 pm
unravel all the critical issues.
Stage 3a. Nature
See you at the fairgrounds! Outside 3b. Crisis
6.00 pm
Stage What is To Be Done?
3
4
You are waiting for the revolu-
tion? Let it be! My own began a
long time ago! When you are
ready (god, what an endless wait!)
I won't mind going with you for a
while. But when you stop, I shall
continue on my way—toward the
great and sublime conquest of the
nothing!
– Renzo Novatore
THE
EVENT
5
The Anarchist Tension in everything I do—a way of being an
Alfredo M. Bonanno anarchist continually—not coming to
agreements, make little daily compro-
What is anarchism? It might seem mises, etc? Anarchism is not a concept
strange that I should take up such a that can be locked up in a word like a
problem in this situation, since I know gravestone. It is not a political theory.
for certain that there are many anar- It is a way of conceiving life, and life,
chists here; I know them personally. young or old as we may be, whether we
And if nothing else, anarchists should are old people or children, is not some-
at least know what anarchism is. Yet it thing final: it is something we must wa-
is necessary to take up the question ger day after day. When we wake up in
‘What is anarchism?’ time and time the morning and put our feet on the
again. Even in a few words. Why is ground, we must have a good reason
that? This does not normally happen for getting up. If we don’t it makes no
in other expressions of life, in other ac- difference whether we are anarchists or
tivities or ideas that define themselves not. We might as well stay in bed and
to be something or other, with some sleep. And to have a good reason we
foundation. must know what we want to do be-
cause for anarchism, for the anarchist,
So anarchists keep asking themselves
there is no difference between what we
the same question: What is anarchism?
do and what we think, but there is a
What does it mean to be an anarchist?
continual reversal of theory into action
Why? Because it is not a definition that
and action into theory. That is what
can be made once and for all, put in a
makes the anarchist unlike someone
safe, and then considered to be a heri-
who has another concept of life and
tage, to be tapped little by little. Being
crystallizes this concept in a political
an anarchist does not mean one has
practice, in political theory. This is
reached a certainty or said once and
what is not normally said to you, this is
for all, ‘There, from now on I hold the
what you never read in the newspa-
truth and as such, at least from the
pers, this is what is not written in
point of view of the idea, I am a privi-
books, this is what school jealously
leged person’. Anyone who thinks like
keeps quiet about, because this is the
this is an anarchist in word alone. In-
secret of life: never ever separate
stead the anarchist is someone who
thought from action, the things we
really puts themselves in doubt as such,
know, the things we understand, from
as a person, and asks themselves: What
the things we do, the things with which
is my life, according to what I do and
we carry out our actions.
in relation to what I think? What con-
nection do I manage to make each day […]
6
So that is why anarchists keep coming to, and the daily experience of the
back to the question of what anar- things we can and do, do. A precise
chism is. Because anarchism is not a relationship of change, of transforma-
political movement. Or rather it is, but tion.
only in a minor aspect. The fact that
the anarchist movement presents itself […]
historically as a political movement
Can we wait for a day to come, a great
does not mean that this exhausts all the
day that will turn the world upside
anarchist potential for life. Of course
down? What the anarchists of the last
there are anarchists there, or at least
century called ‘la grande soirée’? The
one should assume there are, the kind
great evening or the great day — ‘le
of comrades who have begun their
grand jour’ — in which forces no one
own insurrection individually, have be-
could foresee would end up taking over,
come aware of the context of obliga-
exploding into that social conflict we
tion and coercion that they are forced
are all waiting for, called revolution? So
to live in. But anarchism is not just
everything will change and there will
that, it is also a tension, the quality of
be a world of perfection and joy? This
life, the strength we manage to draw
is a millenarian idea. Now that we are
out of ourselves, the capacity to
reaching the end of the millennium it
change the reality of things. Anarchism
could take root again. But conditions
is the whole of this project of trans-
have changed. This is not reality, it is
formation linked to what we realize in
not this waiting that interests us. What
ourselves when we bring about our
does interest us is another kind of in-
own personal transformation. So it is
tervention, a far more modest one, but
not a quantifiable fact that can be his-
one that is capable of achieving some-
toricized. Nor is it an event that will
thing. As anarchists we are called to do
simply occur in the course of time, ap-
something. We are called by our own
pearing through particular theories,
individual responsibility. From the
people, movements as well as, why not,
moment the idea lights up our mind,
precise revolutionary acts. There is al-
not the idea of anarchy, but of justice,
ways something more than the sum of
freedom, when these ideas illuminate
these elements, and it is this something
our minds and we see the swindle be-
more that continues to make anar-
fore us — which today more than ever
chism live on in other ways. So we con-
before we can define a democratic
tinually need to maintain a relationship
swindle — what can we do? We must
between this tension towards some-
set to work, and this setting to work
thing absolutely other, the unthinkable,
also means organizing ourselves. It
the unsayable, a dimension we must
means creating the conditions of refer-
realize without very well knowing how
7
ence and relating between anarchists, union bargaining and developing it
conditions that must be other than right to the realization of the revolu-
those of the past. tion through the general strike. So ac-
cording to the anarcho-syndicalists, the
For reality has changed. As I have said Society of the future, the free anarchist
before, they are building a different Society, was to be nothing other than
man, a de-qualified man, and they are the present Society freed from power
building him because they need to but with the same productive struc-
build a de-qualified society. They have tures, no longer in the hands of the
removed the figure of the worker from capitalists but in the hands of the col-
the centre of the conception of the po- lective which would manage them in
litical society as it was, after de- common.
qualifying him. In the past the worker
bore the greatest brunt of exploitation. This concept is quite impracticable to-
That is why it was thought that this so- day for various reasons. First of all, be-
cial figure would necessarily give birth cause technological transformation has
to the revolution. It is sufficient to think made it impossible for there to be a
of the Marxist analysis. Marx’s Capital simple passage from the present society
is dedicated to the ‘liberation’ of the to the future one we desire to live in. A
worker. When Marx speaks of man, he direct passage would be impossible for
means the worker. In his analysis of the simple reason that it is not possible
value, he is talking of the work pace; in to use information technology in liber-
his analysis of alienation, he is talking ated forms, in a liberatory way. The
about work. There is nothing that does new technologies and computer tech-
not concern work. But that is because nology applications have not limited
the worker was central to the Marxist themselves to bringing about certain
analysis at the time when it was devel- modifications in particular instruments,
oped. The working class could be seen they have transformed all the other
to be the centre of the social structure. technologies as well. The factory, for
instance, is not simply a structure of
Using different analyses, anarchists also the past with the addition of computer
came close to a consideration that the technology but has become a comput-
worker’s position was the centre of the erized factory, which is quite different.
social world. Think of the anarcho- Bearing this in mind we can only men-
syndicalist analyses. For the anarcho- tion these concepts in a very general
syndicalists it was a question of taking way because it would take time to go
the concept of trades union struggle to into them adequately. So we must rec-
its extreme consequences, freeing it ognize that it is not possible to use this
from the narrower dimension of trades patrimony. This passage runs parallel
8
to the end of the myth of the centrality tional proposal of anarcho-syndicalism
of the working class. saw a strong syndicalist movement
which, penetrating the working class
Now, in a situation where the working and organizing almost the whole of it,
class has practically disintegrated, the was to bring about this expropriation
possibility of an expropriation of the and passage. This collective subject,
means of production no longer exists. who was probably mythical from the
So what is the conclusion? The only start, no longer exists even in its mythi-
possible conclusion is that this set of cal version so what sense would there
instruments of production we have be- be in a syndicalist movement of a revo-
fore us be destroyed. The only possible lutionary nature? What sense would
way is to pass through the dramatic there be in an anarcho-syndicalist
reality of destruction. If the revolution movement? None at all.
we imagine and which moreover we
cannot be certain will ever come about, So the struggle must begin elsewhere,
it will not be the revolution of the past with other ideas and methods. That is
that saw itself as one single event that why we have been developing a cri-
might even take place in a day or one tique of syndicalism and anarcho-
fine evening but will be a long, tragic, syndicalism for about fifteen years.
bloody affair that could pass through That is why we are, and define our-
inconceivably violent, inconceivably selves, insurrectionalist anarchists. Not
tragic processes. because we think the solution is the
barricades — the barricades could be a
All this is the kind of reality we are tragic consequence of choices that are
moving towards. Not because that is not our own — but we are insurrec-
what we desire, not because we like tionalists because we think that anar-
violence, blood, destruction, civil war, chist action must necessarily face very
death, rape, barbarity. It is not that, but serious problems. These problems are
because it is the only plausible road, not desired by anarchism but are im-
the road that the transformation posed by the reality that those in power
wanted by those ruling us and who are have built, and we cannot obliterate
in command have made necessary. them simply by wishing them away.
They have moved on to this road. We
cannot change all that with a simple An anarchist organization that projects
flight of fancy, a simple dream. In the itself into the future should therefore
past hypothesis where a strong working be agile. It cannot present itself with
class existed, one could fool oneself the cumbersome characteristics and
about this passage and organize ac- quantitative heaviness of the structures
cordingly. For example, the organiza- of the past. It cannot present itself in a
9
dimension of synthesis like organiza- contrary, a group that meets to discuss
tions of the past where the anarchist things and in discussing prepares itself
structures claimed to sum up reality in for doing and through that doing con-
‘commissions’ that treated all the vari- tributes to developing discussion that
ous problems, making decisions at pe- transforms itself into discussion about
riodical congresses on the basis of the- things to be done, this is the mecha-
ses that even went back to the last cen- nism of the affinity group. So how then
tury. All this has seen its day, not be- can affinity groups enter into contact
cause a century has passed since it was with others where the deepened
thought out, but because reality has knowledge that exists in the single
changed. group does not necessarily exist? This
contact can be assured by informal or-
That is why we maintain there is a ganization.
need for the formation of small groups
based on the concept of affinity, even But what is an informal organization?
tiny groups made up of very few com- There could be relationships of an in-
rades who know each other and formal kind between the various affin-
deepen this knowledge because there ity groups that enter into contact with
cannot be affinity if one does not have each other in order to exchange ideas
knowledge of the other. One can only and do things together, and conse-
recognize one’s affinities by going into quently the existence of an organiza-
the elements that determine one’s dif- tion, also very widespread throughout
ferences, by frequenting each other. the country, comprised of even tens, or
This knowledge is a personal fact, but why not, hundreds of organizations,
it is also a question of ideas, debate, structures, groups of an informal char-
discussions. But in relation to the first acter based on discussion, periodic
points we made this evening, if you analyses, things to be done together,
remember, there can be no going into etc. The organizational logic of insur-
ideas if there is not also a practice of rectional anarchism is different to the
bringing about actions. So, there is a organizations we mentioned earlier
continual reciprocal process of going concerning anarcho-syndicalism.The
into ideas and realizing actions. organizational forms referred to here
in a few words merit going into, some-
A small group of comrades, a small thing I cannot do now in the dimen-
group who simply meet in the evening sion of a conference. But such a way of
to have a chat would not be an affinity organizing would, in my opinion, re-
group but a group of friends, pub- main simply something within the an-
mates who meet in the evenings to talk archist movement were it not also to
about anything under the sun. On the realize relations beyond it, that is
10