Letter imposed PDF - The Anarchist Library

14 Pages·2006·0.1 MB·English

TheAnarchistLibrary
Anti-Copyright
Mutual Acquiescence or
Mutual Aid?
Ron Sakolsky
November 18, 2012
Most of us have made a compact, saying “Let us
make a convention. Let us agree to call what we
are feeling not ‘pain’ but ‘neutral,’ not ‘dull un-
ease’but‘wellenough,’not‘restlessdissatisfaction
intermitted by blowing up,’ but average ‘hanging
around.’Ourconsensusisthathowweliveistoler-
able.IfIask,‘Howareyou?’youmustsay,‘Pretty
good.’ And if I do not remind you, you must not
remindme.Toallthisweswear.”1
RonSakolsky
MutualAcquiescenceorMutualAid?
—PaulGoodman
November18,2012
The hugger-mugger totality wants nothing and
ModernSlavery:TheLibertarianCritiqueofCivilization,
does nothing. They are entangled with one an-
Issue#1
other, do not move, prisoners; they abandon
ScannedfromprintversionofModernSlavery;typosand
themselves to opaque pressures but they them-
errorsfixed.
theanarchistlibrary.org 1PaulGoodman.TheEmpireCity.NewYork,VintageBooks,1942/1977,
p.456.
selves are the power that lies upon them and mutual acquiescence and relating to one another differently
bindsthem,mindandlimb.2 inthespiritofmutualaid,weopenthedoortopossibility.
Notes:
—RobertWalser
WhatIwillrefertohereas“mutualacquiescence”istheso-
cialadhesivethatcementsthebricksofalienationandoppres-
sionwhichstructureourdailylivesintoawallofdomination.
Itisamajorobstacletothepracticeofwhatanarchistsreferto
as “mutual aid” in that the latter is concerned with providing
the cooperative means for vaulting that wall. While coopera-
tioncantakemanyforms,forPeterKropotkin,whodeveloped
theevolutionarytheoryofmutualaid3inrelationtohumanbe-
havior,itsquintessenceinthepoliticalrealmisanarchy.With
thatinmind,Iwilltakethelibertyhereofreferringtothecon-
ceptofmutualaidonlyintheanarchistsense,andwillconsider
thosecooperativehumanrelationshipsassociatedwithwelfare
statecapitalismandstatesocialismasbeingbuiltuponformsof
mutualacquiescencebecauseoftheirimplicitorexplicitstatist
assumptionswhichruncountertoanarchy.
Even in its least cooperative and most authoritarian forms,
mutual acquiescence cannot simply be equated with unmedi-
atedmassconformitytosocietalnorms.Thehierarchicalpower
of rulers and ruling ideas are reinforced by the interpersonal
collaboration of the ruled in their own servility. Such collab-
oration is composed of the paralyzing intermediary social re-
lationships that are the scaffolding of conformist assimilation
to the ideological authority of society and state. What makes
mutual acquiescence so insidious is that it is a form of social
controlthatisrootedintheeverydaypsychologicalandsocial
relationships of consent that compose the lived experience of
domination. Accordingly, an analysis of how mutual acquies-
cencepreventsandimmobilizesindividualandcollectiveforms
2Robert Walser. “The Street” in The Walk. New York: Serpent’s Tail,
1919/1992,p.124.
3PeterKropotkin.MutualAid.Boston:PorterSargent,1902/1955.
2 27
condition by both parties involved or a lack of objection sig- ofdirectactionallowsforamorenuancedmodelofdomination
nifyingpermission”[allitalicsmine].39 Extractingtheessence andresistancethancanbeaffordedbymerelyreferencingthe
of that legal language for our purposes here, and placing it in devastatingeffectsofconformityimposedfromabove.
thenon-legalisticcontextofmutualacquiescencethatwehave Beyond the compliant nature of the behaviors themselves,
beenexploringsofar,itbecomesevidentthatsimilarrelation- mutual acquiescence does have an institutional context. The
shipsof“acceptance,”“lackofobjection”and“permission”can mutualdimensionofsuchinstitutionalformsofdominationis
beaddressed. intrinsicallylinkedtotheexistenceofthestateandismirrored
If the relationships that constitute and perpetuate the state bytheeconomy.AccordingtotheTiqquncollective,“Themore
are the negation of mutual aid in the anarchist sense of that societies constitute themselves in states, the more their sub-
term, then the theoretical concept of mutual acquiescence jectsembodytheeconomy.Theymonitorthemselvesandeach
might be the missing link in understanding how Landauer’s other;theycontroltheiremotions,theirmovements,theirincli-
conditional notion of the state and Kropotkin’s theory of nationsandbelievethattheycanexpectthesameself-control
mutualaidultimatelyfittogether. fromothers.Theylinkup,putthemselvesinchainsandchain
If such mutually acquiescent relationships are considered themselvestoeachother,counteringanytypeofexcess.”4Such
“conditional” in not only the legal sense, but in Landauer’s collusive relationships of self-enslavement in which we relin-
sense of being constitutive of the state, then the subversive quishourpotentialpowerasindividualsandcollectivitiesare
nature of mutual aid becomes clear. In terms of property, atthecoreofmutualacquiescence.
rather than feuding over “acceptance” or “lack of objection” Liketherelationshipsofempoweredsolidaritythatanimate
or “permission” in relation to the specifics of property lines, mutual aid, disempowering relationships of mutual acquies-
as is the case with the legalistic form of mutual acquiescence cence are complex. Taken together in practice, both compose
recognized by the courts; anarchists question, and seek to an individual’s ensemble of social relationships. Moreover,
directly undermine, private (or state) property as a societal theyaredifferentiatedandimpactedbysocialconstructionsof
institution. In doing so, we envision not the preservation class,ethnicity,race,andgender.Asanexample,afamilythat
of social stasis but the emancipatory possibilities of social one is born into can be characterized by relationships of mu-
rupture in relation to the idea of property and the myriad tual acquiescence, but these can crisscross with a primary or
manifestations of enclosure by which it manifests itself in secondary affiliation which one has with an anarchist affinity
our lives. The anarchist practice of mutual aid allows us to groupinsuchawaythattherelationshipsofonemaymodify
simultaneously challenge the inevitability of a particular or detract from the other. Alternatively, family ethnicity and
social reality and embrace those anti-authoritarian desires political affinity can reinforce one another as was the case
that mutual acquiescence urges us to dismiss as contrary to with the German, Jewish and Italian anarchist groups that
our own self-interest or to deny as unattainable. By rejecting flourishedintheUSinthelatenineteenthandearlytwentieth
centuries.Yet,eveninthelatterhistoricalcase,theegalitarian
39“MutualAcquiescenceLawandLegalDefinition,”USLegal,Inc.http:/ 4Tiqqun.IntroductiontoCivilWar.LosAngeles:Semiotext(e),2010,p.
/uslegal.com/Aug21,2010. 85.
26 3
relationships of mutual aid still might have possibly been creationofan“overloaded”cognitivespaceinwhichattention
undermined by the hierarchical practices associated with itself is under siege. Going beyond a reliance on the Freudian
patriarchaldominationorreinforcedbythelackofthem.Just conceptofpsychologicalrepressionininvestigatingthecause
as the individual balance between relationships based upon ofalienation,heexplainsourcurrentmalaiseasbeingrelated
mutual acquiescence and those associated with mutual aid to the forms of “over-communication” that characterize the
can shift and is not necessarily fixed over the course of one’s psychologically disaggregating milieu of digital connectiv-
lifetime,anarchismitselfisalwaysintheprocessofbecoming. ity. Within the context of the Infosphere, he explores the
If the relationships that constitute and perpetuate the state schizophrenia-inducing environment of intense velocity,
are the negation of mutual aid in the anarchist sense of that over-inclusivity and excessive visibility that characterize
term, then the theoretical concept of mutual acquiescence semiocapitalism. These are the flows that can engender panic
might be the missing link in understanding how Landauer’s and encourage dependence on those institutions of authority
conditional notion of the state and Kropotkin’s theory of that offer to provide shelter from the storm. Even in the
mutualaidultimatelyfittogether. activist milieu, the ultimate irony is that though the internet
Emphasizing this sense of fluidity, Gustav Landauer con- may be strategically used with mutual aid in mind, the result
ceived of not only anarchy, but the state as a living organism. maystillbeaperpetuationofmutualacquiescencebecauseof
By postulating that the state is based upon lived social rela- thewayinwhichmorehuman-scaleformsofcommunication
tionships, he explained how it might be deposed. It is in this areoverwhelmedbydigitalhyper-simulation.38
sensethathefoundcommongroundwithanarchistslikeMax Anotheraspectofthepsychologicalbasisofmutualacquies-
Stirnerinconceptualizingthestateasa“spook.”InLandauer’s cenceisrelatedtothenatureofpersonalidentityinthedemo-
words, “People do not live in the state. The state lives in the craticcapitaliststate.Here,theownershipofpropertyisoneof
people.”“5 thedefiningfactorsina“successful”or“unsuccessful”personal
For Landauer then, both the state and capital exist as rela- identity.Inanyauthoritariansociety,evenonethatchoosesto
tions between people. As he puts it, “The state is a social rela- callitself“democratic,”lawandorderispolicednotjustbycops,
tionship,acertainwayofpeoplerelatingtooneanother.Itcan butbyanundercurrentofintertwinedrelationshipsofmutual
be destroyed by creating new social relationships, i.e. by peo- acquiescencethatineffectgoverndailylife.Someoftheserela-
ple relating to one another differently.”6 Kropotkin’s concept tionshipsarecodifiedintolawinawaythatrevealstheghost
ofmutualaidisjustsuchawayof“relatingtooneanotherdif- withinthemachine.WhenIfirstformulatedarudimentaryver-
ferently.” Using the latter’s terminology, Landauer envisioned sion of the term “mutual acquiescence” as an anarchist con-
theantidotetothe“passivity,”“compliance”and“indifference” ceptual tool, I had no idea that these two words already had
a particular legal meaning in American jurisprudence. I have
since discovered that in relation to property law, mutual ac-
quiescence means “an agreement indicating acceptance of a
5GustavLandauer.“Tucker’sRevelation”inRevolutionandOtherWrit-
ings,editedbyGabrielKuhn.Oakland,CA:PMPress,2010,p.249.
6GustavLandauer.“WeakStatesmen,WeakerPeople”inRevolutionand 38Franco“Bifo”Berardi.TheSoulatWork:FromAlienationtoAutonomy.
OtherWritings,editedbyGabrielKuhn.Oakland,CA,PMPress,2010,p.214. LosAngeles:Semiotext(e),2009,pp106–183.
4 25
sheconsiderstobethedeadeningvirtualityofthenetworked thathedecriedasbeingfoundinthedevelopmentof“aspirit
society. In her recent polemic, The Reality Overload: The Mod- ofmutualaid.”7
ern World’s Assault on the Imaginal Realm, she states, “Even Hefurtherelaboratedonthisspiritelsewhereasbeingchar-
asitlaunchesambushafterambushupontheunrealityofour acterized by “peoples uniting in freedom.”8 Such an invigorat-
desires, there is nothing ‘virtual’ about this reality. In fact it ingspiritofreciprocityandcollectivetransformationthrough
is overflowing, a reality overload, coming to besiege us at the mutualaidcanbecontrastedwithKropotkin’sdepictionofthe
very depths of our being.”36 In essence, she contends that we debilitating “spirit of voluntary servitude that is cleverly cul-
arefaced with“a realitythathas almostsucceeded in making tivated in the minds of the young in order to perpetuate the
us confuse the virtual and the imaginary.”37 Even those who subjectionoftheindividualtotheState.”9SaulNewmantraces
would not go as far as she does in totally dismissing any rad- the theory of voluntary servitude back to the sixteenth cen-
ical potential that might be available within the virtual realm tury formulations of Etienne de la Boetie in order to explain
might still find it instructive to question the relationship be- the ways in which an internalized desire for self-domination
tweenvirtualityandmutualacquiescence. canthwartthecreationofthekindofradicalsubjectivitythat
How many of us are imprisoned in the closed logic of a isattheheartofthepost-anarchistproject.10YetNewmanfails
computerrationalityinwhichappearancesarenotmerelydis- to mention Kropotkin’s use of the term voluntary servitude
played on the screen as simulations of experience, but have andmissesanopportunityheretolinktheconcepttotheclas-
becometheexperienceitself?Towhatextenthavewelostour sical anarchist tradition through the influence of both Boetie
bearings in what is predominantly a cyberspace sea of ersatz and Kropotkin on Landauer. Reincorporating voluntary servi-
realizations of our most radical desires? To what degree has tude into anarchist theory, while at the same time bypassing
thedesireforempoweredsolidarityuponwhichmutualaidis
built been debased and co-opted by the fan club mentality of
7GustavLandauer.“TheAbolitionofWarByTheSelfDeterminationof
theubiquitoussocialnetworkingsitesthatsooftenactascon- thePeople:QuestionstotheGermanWorkers”inRevolutionandOtherWritings,
temporary vehicles for a mutual acquiescence in which your editedbyGabrielKuhn.Oakland:PMPress,p.227.
identityisaformofpropertythatcanbeassessedbycalculat- 8GustavLandauer.“TheSocialistWay,”inRevolutionandOtherWrit-
ings,editedbyGabrielKuhn.Oakland:PMPress,p.195.
ingthenumberofyourFacebook“friends.”
9PeterKropotkin.TheState:ItsHistoricRole.London:FreedomPress,
While not specifically referencing surrealism or Le Brun’s 1898/1987,p.55.
book, Franco “Bifo” Berardi uses similar language in tracing 10Saul Newman. “Voluntary Servitude Reconsidered: Radical Politics
contemporary forms of alienation to an “overdose of reality” and the Problem of Self-Domination,” in Post-Anarchism Today 1.2010, pp.
31–49.Interestingly,thoughNewmandoes,atonepoint,usetheterm“ac-
and an infocratic regime whose power is built upon the
tiveacquiescence”(whichhehaselsewherereferredtoas“willfulacquies-
cence”)inpassingwithreferencetothemicropoliticsofsubmission,henever
36AnnieLeBrun.TheRealityOverload:TheModernWorld’sAssaulton pursuesitstheoreticalimplicationsinrelationtothemutualityofthatacqui-
the Imaginal Realm. Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2000/2008, p. 4. escence.WhileIfindNewman’sworkbothinformativeandcomplementary
ThoughlittleknownwithintheNorthAmericananarchistmilieu,thisbook tomyowninmanyways,ratherthanusetheunwieldypost-anarchistterm
bysurrealistdefenderofthe“ecologyoftheimagination,”AnnieLeBrun,is “voluntaryinservitude”whichhehascoinedasaradicalcounterpointtothe
richinanarchistreferencesandallusions. conceptofvoluntaryservitude,Iwillherereferinsteadtothealreadyexist-
37Ibid,p.68. ing,widelyusedandmoreexpansiveterm,mutualaid,inthatcapacity.
24 5
Kropotkin’sthinkingonthesubject,obscuresthewayinwhich Why then is the spectacle itself so alluring? Perhaps it is
voluntaryservitudeinforms,andisinformedby,thetheoryof because,asGeorgioAgambenhasposited,itisbaseduponthe
mutualaid.Iprefertousemyoriginalformulationoftheterm expropriationofthehumandesireforcommunity.“Thisiswhy
“mutual acquiescence” precisely because of its linguistic rela- (precisely because what is being expropriated is the very pos-
tionshiptothelivingconceptofmutualaid.11 sibility of a common good) the violence of the spectacle is so
Relationships that exemplify mutual acquiescence inhibit destructive;butforthesamereasonthespectacleretainssome-
ourabilitytoconstructotherrelationshipsthatmightdisplace thing like a positive possibility that can be used against it.”35
those upon which the state is built. If the relationships that All too typically, however, such a quest to detourn the spec-
constituteandperpetuatethestatearethenegationofmutual tacle,andinsodoingunleashthecommunitarianaspectscap-
aid in the anarchist sense of that term, then the theoretical tured by it, is channeled into the safety-valve relationships of
concept of mutual acquiescence might be the missing link mutualacquiescencethatcharacterizereformism.Byengaging
in understanding how Landauer’s conditional notion of the with the democratic spectacle of reform rather than adopting
state and Kropotkin’s theory of mutual aid ultimately fit anungovernablestrategyof“inoperativeness”inordertosab-
together. With this conjunction in mind, it becomes clear otageordismantletheapparatusesofpower,liberalsacceptac-
that we cannot simply eliminate the state from above, but quiescentrolesbybecoming“concernedcitizens,”bywritinga
need to replace those relationships of mutual acquiescence letterofprotesttoagovernmentofficialorcorporateCEO,by
that prevent our disengagement from it with ones involving electing,orapplaudingtheappointmentof,anewcharismatic
mutual aid. As James Horrox has pointed out, “Landauer’s leader to follow down the garden path of “green capitalism,”
analysis of state power anticipated the central premise of byconfiningtheirpoliticalzealtopetitioningthepowers-that-
Foucault’s governmentality thesis… his notion of capitalism beforredressoftheirgrievances,orimmersingthemselvesin
and the state as sets of relations between subjects (discourse) evermore technologically-mediated forms of communication
rather than as ‘things’ that can be smashed (structures).”12 In whichcaneasilylendthemselvestoappropriationbythemar-
thisFoucaldiansense,itistheauthoritariandiscoursebetween ketandsurveillancebythestate.
disciplined subjects which constitutes the process of mutual Intermsofsuchtechnologicalmediation,AnnieLeBrunhas
acquiescencethatmustbechallenged. written a devastating critique of the paving over of the con-
Surrealist Penelope Rosemont has insisted in her seminal vulsivepowerofwhatsurrealiststermtheMarvelousbywhat
pieceonLandauerthatdiscoursesofcontrolcanbeoverturned
bythepoeticlanguageofdesirethatalwaystakesunexpected 35GiorgioAgamben.TheComingCommunity.Minneapolis:University
ofMinnesotaPress,1993,p.79andWhatIsAnApparatus?Stanford:Stan-
paths in revolutionary situations. Such poetic discourses, in-
fordUniversityPress,2009,pp.2–24.Whetheritispossibletoeffectivelyen-
gageinresistancewithinwhatSituationistsrefertoas“thespectacle”with-
11RonSakolsky,“WhyMiseryLovesCompany,”inSwiftWinds.Port- outhavingthoseeffortsrecuperated,orrebrandedinreformistterms,isa
land,Oregon:EberhardtPress,2009,p.25.Thisarticleoriginallyappearedin questionattheheartoftworecentthought-provokingbooks.SeeStephen
GreenAnarchy(Summer/Fall2006). Duncombe.Dream:Re-ImaginingProgressivePoliticsinanAgeofFantasy.
12James Horrox, “Reinventing Resistance: Constructive Activism in New York: New Press, 2007 and Brian Holmes. Unleashing The Collective
GustavLandauer’sSocialPhilosophy”inNathanJunandShaneWahl.New Phantoms: Essays in Reverse Imagineering. Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia,
PerspectivesonAnarchism.NewYork:LexingtonBooks,2009,p.199. 2008.
6 23
radical subjectivity and the unrestricted flow of mutual aid in spiredbywhatLandauerreferredtoasthe“vagabondageofthe
theflamesofinsurrection.34 imagination”appearinemancipatorymomentswiththe“swift-
Whensocialcalamityorupheavalstrikes,wearenotalone. ness of dreams” in which everything seems possible. It was
Weencounterothersinasimilarsituationwhomayeitherseek just such a mythopoetics of resistance capable of confronting
tosurviveatourexpenseorelsejointogethertobuildrelation- routinely docile relationships of obedience and inspiring so-
ships based upon cooperation which suddenly seem possible cial outbreaks of surrealism that intrigued both Walter Ben-
when the walls of mutual acquiescence come tumbling down. jamin and Herbert Marcuse and continues to animate what
However, though the anarchist trace is never completely ab- Stephen Shukaitis refers to as “surrealism’s attempt to realize
sent from them, not all cooperative relationships create anar- thepoweroftheimaginationineverydaylife.”13 AsRosemont
chyinpractice.Theproclivityformutualaid,whichKropotkin furtherelaborates,“Landauersoughtatotalrevolution–aleap
illuminated as being an aspect of human nature that is essen- beyondconventionallimitsnotonlyinpoliticsandeconomics,
tialto thesurvivalofthehumanspecies,caninsteadbechan- but also in culture, in the individual’s emotions, in the life of
neled into the mutual acquiescence of reformism, where it is themind.”14
systematicallydegradedandstrippedofitsanarchistpotential. Landauer’svisionofwhathecalled“structuralrenewal”was
In appealing to those who cringe at the conservative survival not predicated only on the dramatic circumstances of the rev-
of the fittest strategy but who find the anarchy of mutual aid olutionaryuprising.Heprizedthewayinwhichtheanarchist
tobeabittoofrighteningor“unrealistic,”mutualacquiescence dreamoflibertyandcommunitycouldmanifestitselfattheso-
offers the liberal alternative of reform. Instead of battling for cietal level in the construction of dynamic new cultural alter-
survival against one’s peers in Hobbesian fashion or (perish nativesfoundeduponwhatwewouldtodaycallhorizontality
thethought)collectivelyengaginginautonomousdirectaction, and autonomy, and, at the personal level, in the formation of
the reformist version of mutual acquiescence urges us to put individualrelationshipsofreciprocitybaseduponadesirefor
ourfaithinrequesting/demandinglegalisticremediesfromthe experiencing the more expansive reality of anarchy denied to
stateorparticipatingintheelectoralpoliticscharadebyrally- us by relationships of mutual acquiescence. While mutual ac-
ing around such Obamaesque advertising slogans as “change quiescenceblockstheflowofmutualaid,relationshipsofmu-
youcantrust.”Radicalchangeisconsidered(ifitisconsidered tualaidcanin turnactasa catalyticagentinthe dismantling
at all) to be impossible anyway, and we are instead directed oftheconditionedsocialrelationshipsofmutualacquiescence.
to take a seat on the bandwagon of spectacular dissent. Since Yet, while his legacy as a theorist is often identified with the
both spectacular society and mutual acquiescence are based creationofsuchprefigurativebeachheadsofsocialrevolution,
upon social relations between people that are rooted in pas- Landauer understood that the shedding of the constraints of
sivity, when taken in tandem, they can reinforce one another
inunderminingtheformationofrelationsofmutualaid,even
amongdissenters. 13Stephen Shukaitis. Imaginal Machines: Autonomy and Self-
Organization in the Revolutions of Everyday Life. Brooklyn, NY: Au-
tonomedia,2009,p.20.
34AKThompson.BlackBloc,WhiteRiot.Oakland,CA:AKPress,pp.122, 14PenelopeRosemont,“GustavLandauer,”FreeSpirits:AnnalsoftheIn-
148. surgentImagination.SanFrancisco:CityLightsBooks,1982,p.175.
22 7
mutual acquiescence can likewise occur in the heat of insur- ceral level in disaster situations, along with the transcendent
gency. realization that it is the alienation of “normal” life that is the
Surrealist Penelope Rosemont has insisted in her seminal realdisaster.In this moment of intensity,disaster can take on
pieceonLandauerthatdiscoursesofcontrolcanbeoverturned the radical liminality of a temporary autonomous zone, carni-
bythepoeticlanguageofdesirethatalwaystakesunexpected val or revolution. As Solnit explains, “It’s anarchic, a joy that
paths in revolutionary situations. Such poetic discourses, in- theordinaryarrangementshavefallentopieces–butanarchic
spired by what Landauer referred to as the “vagabondage of in that the ordinary arrangements structure and contain our
the imagination” appear in emancipatory moments with the lives and minds; when they cease to do so, we are free to im-
“swiftnessofdreams”… provise,discover,change,evolve.”31Andthiskindofcollective
Ashe has expressed it,“The first step inthe struggle of the evolutionisbaseduponmutualaidratherthanbeingreduced
oppressedandsufferingclasses,aswellasintheawakeningof toanindividualizedversionofsurvivalofthefittest.
the rebellious spirit is always insurgency, outrage, a wild and In such extraordinary situations, it is my contention that
raging sensation. If this is strong enough, realizations and ac- what has been referred to here as mutual acquiescence is
tionaredirectlyconnectedtoit;bothactionsofdestructionand temporarily suspended, and in its place spontaneously arise
actions of creation.”15 Though Landauer opposed propaganda those latent and suppressed cooperative aspects of human
ofthedeedwhenitcametopoliticalassassinations,heunder- nature which culminate in acts of mutual aid that often go
stood that the insurrectionary upheaval of social war and the beyond mere survival. In such disastrous times, we witness
blossoming of the insurgent imagination went hand in hand. and experience collaborative forms of direct action springing
DavidGraeber,anactiveparticipantinboththeglobaljustice up from the ruins and can participate in the fabrication of a
and Occupy Wall Street movements, has added direct action more vibrant society. These disaster utopias are not aberra-
totheprefigurativelexicon.“Initsessencedirectactionisthe tions of human nature. Rather, they are affirmations of what
insistence, when faced with structures of unjust authority, on ismostanarchicaboutit.Assheconcludes,“Infindingadeep
acting as if one is already free. One does not solicit the state. connection with one another, people also found a sense of
One does not even necessarily make a grand gesture of defi- power, the power to do without the government, to replace
ance.Insofarasoneiscapable,oneproceedsasifthestatedoes its functions, and to resist it in many ways.”32 It is in this
notexist.16 Morespecifically,asAKThompsonhaselaborated sense that mutual aid may be considered to truly be a “recipe
in relation to the enabling essence of “becoming” implicit in for disaster” in the most affirmative CrimethInc sense of that
the black bloc tactic, “Rioting–despite being an essentially re- term.33 Similarly,beyond“disasterutopias,”thoseengagingin
actionaryformofactivity–allowsitsparticipantstoconcretely direct action by using the black bloc tactic create the kind of
prefigure the society they want to create. This is so because situational catastrophe that locates both the unleashing of a
the riot yields political subjects that are able to produce the
31RebeccaSolnit.AParadiseBuiltinHell:TheExtraordinaryCommuni-
15GustavLandauer.“TheSocialistWay”inRevolutionandOtherWrit- tiesThatAriseinDisaster.NewYork:Viking/Penguin,2009,p.117.
ings,editedbyGabrielKuhn.Oakland:PMPress,2010,p.191. 32Ibid,p.144.
16David Graeber. Direct Action: An Ethnography. Oakland: AK Press, 33CrimethInc Workers Collective. Recipes for Disaster: An Anarchist
2009,p.203. Cookbook.Olympia,WA:CrimethInc.FarEast,2004(www.crimethinc.com).
8 21
ing in dangerous waters, or endlessly treading water in the world,subjectsthat–throughtheprocessoftransformationthe
doldrumsofalienation,mutualacquiescencereinforcestheso- riotentails–areforcedtoconfronttheunwrittenfuturewithin
cialacceptanceofaverycircumscribedsetofoptions.Inreac- them.”17 Inanyevent,whatevertacticaldifferencesintermsof
tionaryfashion,suchpaltryalternativesarerestrictedtoeither violenceandnon-violence,orovertstreetprotestascompared
the threatened “stick” of drowning or the promise of the so- to the infrapolitics of everyday resistance, may be present in
ciallyacceptablelifejacketofcompetitivesurvivalasa“carrot” agivensituation,thetransformativepowerofanarchistdirect
(i.e. the stick by other means). In either case, we are expected actionisrootedinanintrinsicwithdrawalofconsentfromthe
topsychologicallybuyintotherulesofthegameinsuchaway underlyinghierarchicalassumptionsofthedominantreality.
thatifwearewinners,itisattheexpenseofthosewhomight The question remains as to why certain individuals choose
otherwisebeseenascomrades,andifwearelosers,weareset mutual acquiescence over mutual aid. For many people, there
adriftinaseaoffearanduncertainty. is a cold comfort contained in mutual acquiescence precisely
However, as Rebecca Solnit meticulously documents in her because it is experienced as a familiar, even tolerable, social
moving book, A Paradise Built in Hell, time and again, when relationship, the social acceptability of which is keyed to an
facedwiththebreakdownofthesocialorderasaresultofnat- underlying desire for alignment with the parameters of what
ural disasters (like earthquakes) or technological collapse (as isconsideredtobelegitimateprotestintermsofthedominant
is the case with “blackouts”); a contradiction appears. On the political ideology. This ideology is in turn reiterated ad nau-
one hand, there are always some well documented incidents seambythemassmediainspectacularform,andenforcedby
ofselfishopportunism,butthelesspublicizedoftheseinvolve a nagging fear of state repression. In a political climate char-
theaggressivemilitaryresponseofeliteswhopanicaboutthe acterized by widespread feelings of powerlessness, mutual ac-
disruption of the social order which grants them their legiti- quiescenceisrootedinthesocialdenialofourabilitytomount
macy.Inthelattercase,thepublicisviewedasanunrulymob radical opposition. Therefore, in an estranged way, it allows
to be either controlled by force or else made physically and us to experience psychological relief in the face of seemingly
psychologicallydependentontheinstitutionalizedcharityde- overwhelmingodds,andthisisnotonlytrueforthosewhodo
livered by corporate benevolence or the welfare state. On the not involve themselves in resistance, but even for many who
other hand, however, in the vast majority of instances, a sce- activelyengageinprotest.
narioofsolidarityemergesthatshecharacterizesasa“disaster Asanexampleofthelatter,amutualacquiescencedynamic
utopia” that combines psychological liberation, social engage- canbegleanedfromthewidelycirculatedleft-liberalexplana-
mentandcommunity-mindedness.Inthelattercase,formsof tion for the police force’s failure to restrain those using the
self-organizationarecreatedamidstdisasterthatinvolvehero- black bloc tactic at the 2010 Toronto G20 summit. This expla-
ism, purposefulness, compassion, generosity and the unleash- nation attributed the largely unimpeded black bloc property
ingofdesire,transcendence,possibilityandagency. destruction spree not to the ability of direct actionists to out-
There is more to the disaster picture than the immobilizing maneuverthepolice,but,insteadtopoliceagentsprovocateur
despairexperiencedbytheoutsideobserverwitnessingtheme- whoallowedorevenprovokedthebloctorunamokinorderto
dia spectacle of victimization. When mutual aid is set in mo-
tion;exhilaration,orevenelation,canbeexperiencedatavis- 17AKThompson.BlackBloc,WhiteRiot.Oakland,CA:AKPress,p.27.
20 9
discredittheprotestandjustifythebilliondollarsecuritybud- onautonomousself-determinationandradicalformsofsolidar-
getfortheevent.Inordertoprovideacounterpointtosucha itytooverthrowtheentiresystemofprivilegethathasproved
misleading explanation of the events in Toronto, the Vancou- so perilous to our individual and collective safety in the first
ver Media Co-op published a firsthand critique in which the place.
analysisofeventsseemscongruentwiththeconceptofmutual In order to maintain legitimacy, the current incarnation of
acquiescence.AccordingtoZigZag,“Liberalreformistsdonot the democratic capitalist state links its strategies of integra-
believethatthestatecanbefoughtthroughmilitancy…when tionnottothelockstepconformityofthefacelessmasses,but
militantscarryoutaneffectiveattack,especiallyagainstsuch withmiserabilistversionsof“individualism.”Thedesireforin-
a massive security operation, it shatters the defeatist premise dividuality morphs into a contemporary version of success in
upon which reformism is based. The liberal response to such which the old Horatio Alger mythology of upward mobility
attacks is that they must be part of a ‘greater conspiracy.’”18 is replaced by the spectacular celebrityhood of YouTube, or
Putting that analysis in the context of global civil war, rather the “God Wants You To Be Rich” prosperity gospel preached
than a convoluted understanding of the image of flaming cop bytelevangelistic“pastorpreneurs,”motivationalspeakers,life
cars in Toronto being construed as evidence of the omnipo- coaches,andcorporatetrainers.Giventheunderlyingassump-
tenceofthepolice,wemightinsteadrecognizeitaswhatA.G. tionofequalityinademocraticcontext,thosewhoaredeemed
Schwarzhastermed,withreferencetotheGreekinsurrection “failures” can only blame themselves because of their lack of
ofDecember2008,a“signalofdisorder.”19Inthismoreempow- fortitude, intelligence or imagination. They have not learned
ering analysis, such intentionally unsettling gestures of “per- “TheSecret”ofcreatingtheirownreality.30Thisfeedingfrenzy
formative violence” as the burning of a cop car can break the ofvictim-blamingisinturnsociallyenforcedbyrelationships
spell of authority and have a ripple effect in spreading revolt ofmutualacquiescence.Accordingly,thoselabeledfailuresare
becausetheyfuelthenotionthat“anythingispossible.”20 considered to be the enemies of their own “happiness” as de-
In contrast, the aforementioned conspiratorial explanation fined by the kind of commodified success that is measured in
ofeventsinTorontobytheliberalleftcanbeseenasevidence consumer goods and fleeting fantasies of celebrity status that
thatmutualacquiescenceissodeeplyinculcatedinauthoritar- simultaneously define the good life and confine our imaginal
iansocietythatnotevenprotestersareimmunefromitsmen- lives.
tal fetters, especially if they are demanding reforms from the The problem then is not the sharks in the water, since they
are only doing what comes naturally to their species, but the
18Zig Zag. “Countering Conspiracy Theories on Police Response to kind of predatory society in which some privileged humans
BlackBloc,”Balaclava!(July16–31,2010),p.2.
areencouragedtothrowthosewhoaremorevulnerableover-
19A.G.Schwarz.“TheSpiritofDecemberSpreadRoundtheWorld,”in
boardandhidetheireyesorwatchthesportasiftherewasno
WeAreAnImageFromTheFuture:TheGreekRevoltofDecember2008,edby
A.G.Schwarz,TasosSagrisandVoidNetwork.Oakland:AKPress,2010,p. other choice. As a result, whether we find ourselves drown-
221.
20Panagoitis Papadimitropoulos. “You Talk About Material Damages, 30Barbara Ehrenreich. Bright-Sided: How the Relentless Promotion of
WeSpeakAboutHumanLife:PerceptionsofViolence,”inWeAreAnImage PositiveThinkingHasUnderminedAmerica.NewYork:MetropolitanBooks/
From The Future: The Greek Revolt of December 2008, ed by A.G. Schwarz, HenryHoltandCompany,2009.Aninterestingdebunkingofthecultofpos-
TasosSagrisandVoidNetwork.Oakland:AKPress,2010,p.71. itivethinking,thoughherconclusionsareultimatelyreformist.
10 19