Anarchism: Difference between revisions

ANARCHISM DEFINED

In the book "Modern Science and Anarchism" (1903-13) a.o.t. Peter Kropotkin declares - and gives the reason why - anarchism is defined as an updated research front of libertarian social scientifical research, using the methods of modern natural sciences, i.e. mathematical relations, statistics etc. Anarchism: "Its method of investigation is that of the exact natural sciences, by which every scientific conclusion must be verified... (using) ... the concrete language of natural sciences, -- so we proceed in dealing with the facts of social life... -- not by the dialectic method, but by the natural-scientific method, the method of induction and deduction... We had better give up using the sonorous words which only conceal the superficiality of our semi-learning. In their time the use of these words was, perhaps, unavoidable -- their application could never have been useful.. No struggle can be successful if it is an unconscious one, and if it does not render itself a clear and concise account of its aim...

Perhaps we are wrong and they are right. But in order to ascertain who is right, it will not do either to quote this and that authority, to refer to Hegel's trilogy, or to argue by the "dialectic method." This question can be settled only by taking up the study of economic relations as facts of natural science. Whithout entering into further discussion of the principles of Anarchism and the Anarchist programme of action, enough has been said, I think, to show the place of Anarchism among the modern sociological sciences. Anarchism is an attempt to apply to the study of the human institutions the generalizations gained by means of the natural-scientific inductive method; and an attempt to foresee the future steps of mankind on the road to liberty, equality, and fraternity, with a view to realizing the greatest sum of happiness for every unit of human society. In Anarchism there is no room for those pseudo-scientific laws with which the German metaphysicians of the twenties and thirties had to consent themselves. Anarchism does not recognize any method other than the natural-scientific.

This method it applies to all the so-called humanitarian sciences, and, availing itself of this method as well as of all researches which have recently been called forth by it, Anarchism endeavors to reconstruct all the sciences dealing with man, and to revise every current idea of right, justice, etc., on the bases which have served for the revision of all natural sciences. Whether or not Anarchism is right in its conclusions, will be shown by a scientific criticism of its bases and by the practical life of the future. But in one thing it is absolutely right: in that it has included the study of social institutions in the sphere of natural-scientific investigations; has forever parted company with metaphysics; and makes use of the method by which modern natural science and modern material philosophy were developed. Owing to this, the very mistakes which Anarchism may have made in its researches can be detected the more readily. But its conclusions can be verified only by the same natural-scientific, inductive-deductive method by which every science and every scientific concept of the universe is created."

This basic principle of Anarchism, per definition or seen as a methodological working hypothesis, is still valid and confirmed on all later anarchist congresses discussing this question in a scientifical, matter of fact, way. This libertarian, scientifical, way of thinking and research, praxeology i.e. human action research included, is the way to settle disputes, make action programs based on the anarchist principles in general, and develope anarchism further, - it is the basic methodological framework of anarchism and the Anarchist International. The other basic principles of anarchism are presented and discussed at (Click on) http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html and via links of this web-site.

The most basic principles related directly to Kropotkin's definition of anarchy, anarchism and social sciences in general, as an updated research front, are the following:

( 1 ) Anarchies vs archies. Societal, political-economical systems, including organizations and political tendencies; economical, political or politological, sociological and anthropological systems, may be anarchies or the negation of anarchy = archies. Thus the total amount of societal systems S = anarchy + archy <=> S = anarchies + archies.

( 2 ) Archies may be expressed as x-archy, where x is one of a set of systems characteristics of archs, say, ( mon, olig, poli, plut, ochl, matri, patri, hier, etc; but not an) or a logical union of several x-es reflecting different forms of archy/archies as opposed to anarchy/anarchies , i.e. the negation of x-archy = archies.

( 3 ) Possibility of anarchy. It is assumed that these terms reflect concepts that may be defined in a way that anarchy is not impossible in reality, i.e. the amount of anarchies in real terms is greater than the empty set, zero.

( 4 ) Significant anarchy = anarchy. As anarchy is the negation of x-archy it may not have any significant amount of x-archy. Thus anarchy may have zero or insignificant amounts of archies. The significant level is defined on aggregated dimensions.

( 5 ) Dimensions: a) There are an economic dimension and a non-economical dimension in societal, political-economical, system context: One aggregated economical, and one aggregated non-economical dimension, i.e. related to political/administrative rank. Empirically this may reflect economic remuneration and political/administrative rank of organizational system's maps. b) The economical dimension measures socialism vs capitalism, where capitalism is significant economical archies (x-archy) and the non-economical dimension reflects autonomy vs statism, where statism is significant political/administrative archies. c) Along these two dimensions different forms of anarchy and archies (x-archy), are measured and mapped. The degree of socialism = 100% - degree of capitalism. The degree of autonomy = 100% - degree of statism.

(6 ) Anarchism and other -isms. Anarchy is the negation of archies related to the economical and political/administrative dimensions, i.e. significant. Capitalism is significant economical plutarchy, including hierarchy and may be other x-archies mentioned in an economical context. Statism is defined as political/administrative monarchy, oligarchy, polyarchy, ochlarchy (mob rule), the archies of rivaling states within the state, i.e. chaos; and the tyranny of structurelessness i.e. desorganization, and/or political plutarchy, and it may also include other archies, say, being matriarchy, if the main rulers are women.

1. Statism without plutarchy = marxism ((state-) communism, state-socialism);

2. statism plus plutarchy = fascism (populism included);

3. anarchy = anarchism = socialism without statism;

4) plutarchy without statism = liberalism, - i.e. significant.

Libertarian (in the meaning of 'libertaire' (french) or 'libertær' (nordic)), is a synonym for anarchist. Anarchy and anarchism are sometimes called the third alternative, social form, or way. (This must not be mixed up with Tony Blair's non-anarchist "third way = neue mitte" of Gerard Schröder, or Adolf Hitler's "dritte reich".)

Archies (x-archy) are defined equal to authority and State in societal context. Thus anarchy and anarchism are systems without any significant authority and State, in societal context, i.e. economical and political/administrative, also called political broadly defined. (These societal, political concepts of state and authority, must not be mixed up with statism and the authoritarian degree, as defined related to economical-political mapping.)

( 7 ) Significant level at 50%. Anarchy has less than 50% archies, x-archy, aggregated on the two relevant dimensions, on a scale from 0 => 100%. Thus more than 50 % archies, x-archy of relevant x-es, aggregated on the economic and/or the non-economic dimension, is not anarchist, not anarchy. Thus anarchy has 100-50% socialism and 100-50% autonomy, and archies have less of one or both, i.e. more than 50% capitalism and/or statism.

( 8 ) Anarchy defined: Anarchy means coordination, management significant without ruling and rulers (not without rules), and archies mean management and coordination with ruling and rulers, i.e. significant. From greek 'an', as in anaerobe vs aerobe, i.e. keeping what is essential of the object, (in this case system, management, coordination) but without the special characteristic mentioned in the suffix, i.e. 'archy', ruling and ruler(s), from anarchos (ruler) and archein (ruling, being first).

( 9 ) Not totalitarian: The question of anarchy vs archies is limited to the societal political-economical system's management and coordination. Other hierarchies and rankings, say, level of skills or scientifical knowlegde, rankings of games, sports and arts, etc., are principally not included when accounting for anarchy vs archies. What is interesting in anarchist perspective is whether or not the system has significant authority, i.e. ruling and rulers - or not, with respect to the societal managent and coordination.

(10) Not valid concepts. Concepts as anarcho-archy = anarchy-x-archy in any form, meaning significant "both with and without ruling" are not allowed for, these are nonsens and not logical and scientifical. Thus anarcho-marxism, anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-chaos, anarchy = chaos etc, are nonsens and not valid concepts, but confused Orwellian "1984" "newspeak" that should be avoided.

In addition to these axioms and most basic principles of social sciences, anarchy and anarchism and other -isms, other principles of policy defining authority more precise and concrete in a societal context, structural and functional included, must be introduced, and the significant level of anarchy vs archies must be calibrated for applied and practical research and analysis. This is a.o.t. discussed on the file http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html , search for 'calibration' and 'principles'.

A BRIEF NOTE ON THE FOUR MAIN FORMS OF ANARCHISM

The four main tendencies of anarchism and the respective sections of the Anarchist International, have historical roots back to the 19th century:

The International of Social-Individualist Anarchism, ISIA, the libertarian systems between advanced marxian social-democracy and social liberalism on the Economical-Political Map, is mainly rooted back to Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's research on an anarchist third social form between communism, in the meaning of state-socialism, and liberalism, in progressive direction medio 1800s. The terms third alternative, road and social form may sometimes be used as labels on anarchism in general, but are usually referring to the social-individualist sector of the anarchist quadrant of the EP-map. Social-individualist anarchism may also be called just social anarchism, federalist or mutualist anarchism. However the word mutualism may also be used in a more narrow meaning, as a name of the libertarian co-operative movement, and may then sometimes have a more individualist approach.

The social-individualist anarchism has between 50% and 75% degree of anarchy. Several libertarian thinkers have worked along the same lines as Proudhon later on, - Bertrand Russell and Ragnar Frisch are among the most famous. Russel is advocating "a form of Guild Socialism, leaning more, perhaps, towards Anarchism than the official Guildsman would wholly approve. It is in the matters that politicians usually ignore - science and art, human relations, and the joy of life - that Anarchism is strongest...", p 210 "Roads to Freedom - Socialism, Anarchism and Syndicalism" (1918, revised 1919)*. Frisch evolves his libertarian third alternative in several works, The unenlightened plutarchy, Economic democracy, The three stages, Why objectivity, In the spirit of Henrik Wergeland, The upper class mentality is alive, Socially orientated or plutarchical-orientated planning, Hour of destiny, Gloomy May Day - or hope? etc.

The Anarcho-Collectivist International, ACI, has historical roots to Michael Bakunin, who developed the Proudhonian ideas leftwards, building on his federalist ideas. The collectivist principle of remuneration, "from each according to ability, to each according to the product of his labor" or similar notions, is connected to this form of anarchism. The collectivists understood that full communism would not be immediately realizable. At the 1886 Congress of the Leage for Peace and Freedom, Bakunin called himself "collectivist", and stated: "I want society and collective or social property to be organized from the bottom up by way of free association, and not from the top down by means of any authority whatsoever. In this sense I am a collectivist." The libertarian federalist rule "organized from the bottom up by way of free association, and not from the top down by means of any authority whatsoever", in the meaning of both political/administrative and economically broadly defined, ideally or practically, i.e. significant, is basic to anarchism in general.

Anarcho-collectivism had a strong influence on anarcho-syndicalism later on. Well known other works within the anarcho-collectivist tradition are written by James Guillaume and later in the 1930s by Diego Abad de Santillan. Another tendency is Nestor Makhno's council anarchism of the Russian revolution in Ukraine. However the later "platformism" developed by Peter A. Arshinov, an associate of Makhno, who went over the border to marxism on the Economical-Political Map and joined the Bolsheviks, must be rejected as not being anarchism, but in reality being semilibertarian or authoritarian marxism. M. Bakunin's left Hegelian dialectical statements are also principally rejected as pseudo-science by Kropotkin and later anarchists, but several of Bakunin's other ideas are still valid as anarchist working hypothesis. Anarchist collectivism must not be mixed up with marxian collectivism, council communism included, sometimes wrongly called "anarcho-marxism", and often just called collectivism, without adjective. Some of Bakunin's ideas may have a more social-individualist than collectivist approach, and the earlier non-anarchist, typically dialectical, writings of Bakunin is of little to zero interest in anarchist perspective.

The Anarcho-Individualist International, AII, is historically mainly rooted back to Benjamin Tucker (1854-1939) and his essays published in "Liberty" from 1881. His principal publication was "State socialism and Anarchism" (1899). Tucker developed Prodhoun's ideas rightwards on the Economical-Political Map. The general idea is individual, rightful possession within a mutualist and federalist framework, but rejecting plutarchy/capitalism. Another famous thinker of this anarchist tendency is Henrik Ibsen, developing his "non-State" theory in letters, plays and other works, discussing libertarian alternatives to the State as a societal concept via his social laboratory, experimental style. Max Stirner (Kaspar Schmidt) is a pre-anarchist thinker often mentioned in this connection, however his left Hegelian dialectical ideas are prinicipally rejected as pseudo-science, but some of Stirner's ideas and ironical statements are still valid anarchist individualism. Anarcho-individualism must not be mixed up with liberalist individualism, sometimes wrongly called "anarcho-capitalism", i.e. "anarchy-plutarchy" - "both without and with ruler significantly", and thus it is a contradictive, non-scientifical concept that must principally be rejected. Liberalistical individualism may also just be called individualism without adjective, and this is not anarchist.

The Commune-Anarchist International, CAI, is the section of anarcho-communism, communist anarchism, anarchist communism, communalist anarchism and commune related anarchism in general. This anarchist tendency is historically mainly rooted back to Pjotr Kropotkin, and his works on communist anarchism. Kropotkin and other writers developed anarcho-communism from Bakunin's anarchist collectivism, also investigating the anarchist ideal for a future with much higher labor productivity than today, optimal population etc. The communist remuneration principle "From each according to ability, to each according to needs" is a part of this form of anarchism. This principle may be implemented in different ways, and must be seen in connection with the principles of efficiency and fairness and other anarchist principles. The commune-anarchist systems have between 75% and 100% degree of anarchy. Errico Malatesta discussed a less ideal form of anarcho-communism. Communist anarchism has been seen as an ideal aim for most anarchist political tendencies in long term perspective. Communist Anarchism is of form of Anarchism, not Communism as such, i.e. without adjective. It must not be mixed up with marxism, communism, council communism, soviet union, statecommunism and statesocialism, i.e. the whole or a section of the marxian/marxist quadrant of the Economical-Political Map. Some council commies and trotskyites have introduced the term "anarcho-marxism", sometimes also wrongly called 'anarchist' communism or similar. This is however an extreme form of marxism, and not anarchism. Marxian policy with a dash of anarchist rhetorics is marxism - not anarchism. "Anarcho-marxism" is "anarchy-statism", "anarchy-archies", i.e. contradictive, and not a scientifical concept, and thus is not anarchist, i.e. scientifical.

Kropotkin discussed these four main tendencies of anarchism in his book "Modern Science and Anarchism", 1903-1913, summarizing the research front of anarchism of those days. The research on the four main tendencies of anarchism continued in the 20th century and is still going on. While there were a lot of discussions between the different tendencies of anarchism in the 19th and early 20th century, often based on misunderstandings, a more pluralist framework was developed in the later part of the 20th century. The four main libertarian tendencies were confirmed as sections of the Anarchist International in the Anarchist Manifesto and program of the Northern sections of IFA, ISBN 82-90468-09-1, see Folkebladet No 4 (1983) and IFA-Solidaritet No 8 (1983), declaring:

"Locally, for different branches and workers of different occupations etc. there may be variations among the organizational forms within anarchism. Thus it is a.o.t. possible to practice different forms of anarchism at the same time. Anarchism take for granted respect and tolerance between different anarchist tendencies,... (a.o.t.)... anarcho-mutualists**,... -individualists,... -collectivists,... -communists..., or, i.e. - anarchists pure and simple."

When the Anarchist International world wide was confirmed at the International Anarchist Congresses in 1998 and 2000, the four main economical-political sections mentioned above were expanded universally.

I addition to these main four tendencies of anarchism, anarchofeminism, ecoanarchism and anarchosyndicalism may be mentioned as anarchist tendencies dealing with special forms of repression.

Manifeste Anarchoféministe Anarchafeminist Manifesto Translated from French (Bulletin C.R.I.F.A. No 44 mars -avril 1983 p. 12)

---

All over the world most women have no rights whatsoever to decide upon important matters which concern their lives. Women suffer from oppressions of two kinds: 1) the general social oppression of the people, and 2) secondly sexism - oppression and discrimination because of their sex.

There are five main forms of oppression:

- Ideological oppression, brainwash by certain cultural traditions, religion, advertising and propaganda. Manipulation with concepts and play upon women's feelings and susceptibilities. Widespread patriarchal and authoritarian attitudes and capitalistic mentality in all areas.

- State oppression, hierarchical forms of organization with command lines downwards from the top in most interpersonal relations, also in the so-called private life .

- Economic exploitation and repression, as a consumer and a worker in the home and in low-salary women's jobs .

- Violence, under the auspices of the society as well as in the private sphere - indirectly when there is coercion because of lack of alternatives and direct physical violence.

- Lack of organization, tyranny of the structurelessness which pulverizes responsibility and creates weakness and inactivity.

These factors work together and contribute simultaneously to sustain each other in a vicious circle. There is no panacea to break the circle, but it isn't unbreakable.

Anarcha-feminism is a matter of consciousness. The consciousness which puts guardians off work. The principles of a liberating society thus stand perfectly clear to us.

Anarcha-feminism means women's independence and freedom on an equal footing with men. A social organization and a social life where no-one is superior or inferior to anyone and everybody is coordinate, women as well as men. This goes for all levels of social life, also the private sphere.

Anarcha-feminism implies that women themselves decide and take care of their own matters, individually in personal matters, and together with other women in matters which concern several women. In matters which concern both sexes essentially and concretely women and men shall decide on an equal footing.

Women must have self-decision over their own bodies, and all matters concerning contraception and childbirth are to be decided upon by women themselves.

It must be fought both individually and collectively against male domination, attitudes of ownership and control over women, against repressive laws and for women's economic and social autonomy and independence.

Crisis centers, day care centers, study and discussion groups, women's culture activities etc. must be established, and be run under womens's own direction.

The traditional patriarchal nuclear family should be replaced by free associations between men and women based on equal right to decide for both parts and with respect for the individual person's autonomy and integrity.

Sex-stereotyping in education, media and at the place of work must be abolished. Radical sharing of the work by the sexes in ordinary jobs, domestic life and education is a suitable mean.

The structure of working life must be radically changed, with more part-time work and flat organized cooperation at home as well as in society. The difference between men's work and women's work must be abolished. Nursing and taking care of the children must concern men just as much as women.

Female power and female prime ministers will neither lead the majority of women to their ends nor abolish oppression. Marxist and bourgeoisie feminists are misleading the fight for women's liberation. For most women it is not going to be any feminism without anarchism. In other words, anarcha-feminism does not stand for female power or female prime ministers, it stands for organization without power and without prime ministers.

The double oppression of women demands a double fight and double organizing: on the one hand in feminist federations, on the other hand in the organizations of anarchists. The anarcha-feminists form a junction in this double organizing.

A serious anarchism must also be feminist otherwise it is a question of patriarchal half-anarchism and not real anarchism. It is the task of the anarcha-feminists to secure the feminist feature in anarchism. There will be no anarchism without feminism.

An essential point in anarcha-feminism is that the changes must begin today, not tomorrow or after the revolution. The revolution shall be permanent. We must start today by seeing through the oppression in the daily life and do something to break the pattern here and now.

We must act autonomously, without delegating to any leaders the right to decide what we wish and what we shall do: we must make decisions all by ourselves in personal matters, together with other women in pure female matters, and together with the male fellows in common matters.

Ecoanarchism defined by the Green Anarchist International Associaton, GAIA - a section of the Anarchist International (AI). The Confederation is a loose network of libertarians related to environmental political economy broadly defined, human & social ecology included.

The network is historically mainly rooted back to the 1960s and 1970s in Europe and America, and was officially confirmed as a section of the Anarchist International at the IFA-congress in Oslo 1982, deciding a.o.t. the following: "Political, economic and cultural co-operation was mentioned, in unions, co-operative and collective movement, ecology and environmental protection, feminism, youth movement... The aim should be an organizational integration of all anarchists ...To promote such a development the congress decided uninamously to establish a nordic IFA secretariate.... This is a.o.t. documented in the Bulletin C.R.I.F.A. no 42 novembre 1982 p. 5. and Folkebladet No 4/1983 and IFA-Solidaritet No 8/1983. The Anarchist Manifesto ISBN 82-90468-09-1 of the Northern sections of IFA published in 1983, confirms the branch of "anarcho-ecologists (environmental and resource-movement)" within the general program.

The eco-anarchist section was later expanded universally when the Anarchist International world wide was officially confirmed at the International Anarchist Congress in Oslo medio December 1998 and later. The eco-anarchists sometimes change the red part of the anarchist flag (se above) with green, and the "Green Grass" movement, sometimes including other groups, say, semilibertarians, in a broad based eco-political front, has used a circled logo with a green, a black and a red segment. Green anarchist youths sometimes may use a green flag with a black @-logo, or a black flag with a green @-logo.

The eco-anarchist movement must not be mixed up with neo-luddist, primitivist and similar groups and policies, i.e. authoritarian and far from anarchist. The eco-anarchist movement has a rational, libertarian socialist basis for its policy, and rejects principally marxian and other dialectical type ideology, "new-age" and/or "Skippy&Disney" utopian based "animal liberation", vegetarian fanatism, irrational environmentalism, and similar authoritarian tendencies. The eco-anarchist movement is clearly opposed to and in general denounces the sometimes fanatical and irrational tendencies and guru-hierarchies we have seen within the ecology and green movement in general, as well as terrorism and ochlarchy tendencies, sometimes wrongly called "anarchist" in the media.

GAIA is engaged in all kinds of environmental issues, also, say, work-place environment included problems with ochlarchy (mob rule) and bad physical environment. This item may be closely related to the anarchist principle of autogestion. Sometimes there may be conflicting interests between GAIA and the environmental issues on the one hand, and on the other the anarcho-syndicalist and other sections of the Anarchist International, primarily interested in market goods and services in public and private sector, and not the environmental factors in general. The Anarchist International has several ways to deal with such conflicts based on fairness, efficiency, social justice and other anarchist principles.

Green anarchist policy is based on a) general, ecological and environmental scienticifical knowledge, b) decent treatment of animals for food, c) a "leave the world in better shape to our children than we got it from our parents", "live and let live", "ecological variety" & "polluting units are responsible for cleaning up", etc. policy, d) a general skepticism vis-a-vis genetical manipulations, especially in a world based to a large extent on statism and plutarchy, as such research may, in worst case scenaria, be the basis for authoritarian, dystopian hell-societies much more authoritarian and worse than Orwell's "1984", e) optimal resource, ecological and environmental management as a part of the general political-economy, f) as mentioned - a rational, libertarian socialism, the anarchist principles in general.

Several libertarian writers have made contributions to eco-anarchism throughout the years, however the book "Post-scarcity Anarchism" (1971) by Murray Bookchin* gave the movement a major boost. The Hegelian type dialectical tendencies in some of his works are however pseudoscience, and are thus principally rejected as not valid anarchism. Later on Murray Bookchin left the anarchist movement and the research front of green anarchism has been developed further, without the dialectical framework, by other libertarian researchers.

Anarchosyndicalism defined by the International Workers of the World, IWW/AI - affiliated to the IFA - L'Internationale des Fédérations Anarchistes - The International of the Federations of Anarchists - The International of Anarchist Federations (IAF) and the Anarchist International (AI).The Confederation consists of anarchosyndicalists in the Anarchist Federations of Denmark, Finland, Norway, Finland, and in several other countries of the Anarchist International broadly defined, from Iceland to the New Artisan and Workers' Union in Mauritius, etc. i.e. world wide.

This section of the Anarchist International was founded/reorganized at the The First Nordic Anarchist Congress 15-17 october 1982 in Oslo, and further developed at later congresses, and it is rooted back to the in Geneva 1886 founded 1st International's i.e. the IWMA - International Workingmen's Association's conference at Saint-Imier, in The Swiss Confederation, 15-16.09.1872. At this conference it was decided an anarchist resolution denouncing all forms of political power, i.e. political/administrative and economically broadly defined. Also a solidarity and fellowship pact was decided upon by the delegates. The resolution put forward by Michael Bakunin 16.09.1872, under the title "The political action of the proletariate", at the Saint-Imier congress, should not be forgotten. The Anarchist International had meetings several times during the years passing by, first within the framework of the IWMA 1872-77, later related to other international anarchist congresses.

Bakunin's famous word of wisdom: "Liberty without socialism is privilege, injustice; socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality", is still valid. Another important event in the international anarchist and labor movement's history is the "Haymarket affair" related to the Chicago anarchists in 1886, the backround and origin of May Day as the international workers' day, see http://www.anarchy.no/mayday.html .

The Anarchist International (IFA) was reorganized at a congress in Carrara (Italy) 31/8-5/9 1968. The purpose of the congress was, among other things, to create a world wide anarchist organization as an alternative to "Cohn Bendit et autres gauchistes", also called "the children of Marx". Anarchists were tired of people presenting basically marxist or marxian ideas as anarchism. In the following years, several congresses were organized, see http://www.anarchy.no/ifadok.html .

The anarchosyndicalist branch was as indicated above officially confirmed as a section of the Anarchist Internatinal at the IFA-congress in Oslo 1982, deciding a.o.t. the following: "El principal tema de este congreso ha sido la cooperación anarquista nórdica. El acuerdo se ha hecho sobre la aceptación de una cooperación muy ampllia. La cooperación ideológica [i.e. political] económica y cultural ha sido enfocada sobre los ountos siguientes: la acción de los anarquistas en los sindicatos, el movimiento colectivista, cooperativista, el movimiento ecologista, feminista, el apoyo a los jovenes..." This is a.o.t. documented in the Bulletin C.R.I.F.A. no 42 novembre 1982 p. 4. , plus Folkebladet No 4/1983 and IFA-Solidaritet No 8/1983. The Anarchist Manifesto ISBN 82-90468-09-1 of the Northern sections of IFA published in 1983, confirms the branch of "anarko-syndikalister (fagbevegelse), i.e. anarcho-syndicalists (labor confederation/movement)" within the general program.

The anarchosyndicalist section was later expanded universally when the Anarchist International world wide was officially confirmed at the International Anarchist Congress in Oslo medio December 1998 and later.

In 1997 the term Anarchist International (AI) was officially introduced, although mentioned several times before, say, in International Journal of Anarchism, IJ@ no 10/26 (15) in 1985. The constitution of the Anarchist International AI was as mentioned officially confirmed on the International Anarchist Congress, i.e. the 5th Anarchist Biennial, arranged by the NAC/IFA/AI in Oslo medio December 1998. The AI is a broader organization and network than the IFA anarchist federations of some countries in the South and North, see http://www.anarchy.no/ai.html .

The International Journal of Anarchism, IJ@, is the only officially mandated and publicly registered organ of the Anarchist International AI-IFA-IAF, the IWW/AI included. There are sections/federations for support work, community action, research and different tendencies of anarchism broadly defined, among them as mentioned the anarchosyndicalist section International Workers of the World - IWW/AI.

The IWW/AI, i.e. the Anarchist International-WW must not be mixed up with the Industrial-WW, founded in 1905 in the USA. The Industrial-WW is mainly a leftist marxist/marxian* organization, neither anarchist, libertarian nor anarchosyndicalist, i.e. outside the anarchist quadrant on the Economical Political map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html .

The IWW/AI forms a junction between the Anarchist International in general, and the general syndicalist and trade unions world wide.

The network of the IWW/AI broadly defined is usually just called the INTERNATIONAL.

IWW/AI promotes anarchosyndicalism, anarchism; decentralism, free contracts, federalism and real democracy etc. as opposed to statism, centralism, slave-contracts and other authoritarian tendencies in the unions and generally, see http://www.anarchy.no/oslo_conv.html and www.anarchy.no all around.

Especially IWW/AI works for 1. Citizen remuneration above the powerty line. 2. A significant higher minimal salary - it must pay to work! The purpose of this is to do away with relative slave-contracts in the different countries. Furthermore IWW/AI is for 3. unconditional support to free research from the people's perspective as opposed to the national or authorities' perspective, based on the non-dogmatic, non-dialectical, scientifical method suggested in Peter Kropotkin's "Modern Science and anarchism" (1903-13). Thus, also the left-Hegelian dialectical ideas of, say, Bakunin and Max Stirner, and later Daniel Guerin, Sam Dolgoff and Murray Bookchin, must principally be rejected as pseudoscience, similar to Marx and his followers' ideology.

IWW/AI works against 4. party political and state-socialist rule of unions, and 5. support to political parties from the budgets of the unions.

This is the general program of IWW/AI. There are however also some other cases that may be mentioned:

IWW/AI is also against the "all workers - one big union" strategy of the Industrial-WW and others, that reminds us of the Soviet Union, and their intrigues, lies and smearstories related to Jamal Hannah & co at jah@iww.org against the Anarchist International and its sections, similar to Marx's intrigues etc. against Bakunin in the First International. There is not so much new under the sun! Nobody should link up to this student commie type joke of an "industrial union" nor take it seriously. Boycott "Industrial-WW" in America!

There are also other marxist groups and fascists/neonazis posing as "anarchosyndicalists", "anarchobolsheviks", "anarchonationalists", "revolutionary syndicalists" etc., see http://www.anarchy.no/apt.html for an update. Say, in Sweden 1999 a real anarchosyndicalist Björn Söderberg of SAC was killed by two nazis, after trying to stop the fascist infiltration in a union-club. 23.10.1999 about 20-40000 persons all over Sweden demonstrated against fascism and to honor the memory of the brave syndicalist.

At the Anarchist Conference in Stockholm, arranged by the Nordic IFA secretariate and the Swedish section of the Anarchist International, in 1983, neonazi skinheads tried to infiltrate the movement, but strong measures were taken to stop these dangerous intruders. These efforts of the Anarchist International were however a good investment.... Our fellows at SAC have, as mentioned, been less successful dealing with this problem.

The IWW/AI calls on all anarchists, anarchosyndicalists included, to be on the alert against authoritarian infiltration: Fascists, nazists, trotskyites, lubbeists, red brigades, etc. A stitch in time saves nine - better look before you leap, i.e. organizations ruined, persons being wounded or be killed:

"The fight against fascism begins with the fight against bolshevism" - Otto Rühle -

Contact IWW/AI? http://www.anarchy.no/iwwai.html

---

Click on Links to see some federations related to the IWW/AI network broadly defined, i.e. organizations with significant factions of anarchosyndicalists. There are however more! There are no unions without anarchists, click on: http://www.anarchy.no/global.html

THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE INDUSTRIAL AND THE INTERNATIONAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD

• ) As mentioned the Anarchist International Workers of the World, must not be mixed up with the mainly marxian Industrial-WW. "We are Marxian ... in our critique of capitalism", Jim Crutchfield NYC General Membership Branch, Industrial Workers of the World, expresses in a mail to the International Workers of the World sent Wednesday, April 10, 2002. Steve Ongerth, Web Site Administrator of the Industrial Workers of the World

partly agrees in a letter sent Tuesday, April 16, 2002 "When Jim Crutchfield says that the IWW's critique of capitalism is "Marxian", he is correct, but so what? ... There's nothing to be ashamed of. Marx was correct about the evils of capitalism." Furthermore Jim Crutcfield in a letter sent April 11, 2002 declares: "You are correct in saying that the Industrial Workers of the World is outside the anarchist quadrant on (the) political map, and that is as it should be." We on the other hand declare that the International Workers of the World is significant within the anarchist quadrant on the Economical Political Map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html.

Thus, these two organizations are quite something different related to the economical political map: 1. The International-WW is anarchist /anarchosyndicalist, and 2. the Industrial-WW is mainly not, and they should never be mixed up by the media or others. Both organizations declare they are against capitalism, but the Industrial-WW has mainly a marxist criticism, the International-WW an anarchist criticism. These are significantly not the same as the anarchist criticism is based on libertarian principles and anarchist political economy broadly defined, while the Marxian is based on historical materialistic dialectics and labor theory of value etc, marxist economics and sociological ideology, i.e. mainly pseudoscience. Furthermore the International-WW has a clear cut anarchist alternative and aim, while the Industrial-WW says they have no clear cut ideology, but indirectly they mainly operate with a) a rather vague marxian communist, socialist and syndicalist mixed partly contradictive type of program, with a dash of libertarian rhetoric, based on "one big industrial union", without b) a clear cut anarchist, consistent, system based on all of the libertarian principles as practical policy and aim. The important question is not what you are against, but what you are for , i.e. the real alternative directly or indirectly indicated by the policy. No union is non-political. If a union have no political actions, they are in reality for status quo. If nothing is clear cut, it is vague fogarchy, i.e. authoritarian. Thus Industrial-WW mainly claiming to be non-ideological and not political, may practically not be so. The policy will be found by investigations based on the general theory of revealed preferences.

In the 1950s, the Industrial-WW earned a place on the list of "subversive" US organizations, because they refused to agree to the provisions of the Taft-Hartley act (which required that Labor Unions renounce "Communism"). The Industrial-WW was then considered a "Communist" organization. It may also be mentioned that the Industrial-WW in the early 1990s overwhelmingly voted against joining the AIT/IWA/IAA, that no doubt convinced some syndicalists that the IWW was marxist and not anarcho-syndicalist. Neither are they members of the Anarchist International. What we have seen from so called libertarians, i.e really ochlarchs, in the Industrial-WW, such as Jamal Hannah & Co, have nothing to do with anarchist, anarchy or anarchism. The typical marxian bully ochlarchy of the Industrial-WW of today is also documented from somebody that have been mobbed just for speaking out and using his right to free speech. IIFOR has the documentation. If this goes on the International-WW will take actions against this marxian ochlarchy of the Industrial-WW. Conflicts must be solved in other ways than with ochlarchy against fellow workers. Consent if possible should not be manufactured by persecution and ochlarchy, but achieved freely in a libertarian way based on dialog and free, matter of fact, criticism. This does not mean that all members of the Industrial-WW are of this ochlarchical type. The dialog between the International Workers of the World and the so called Industrial continues so far.

But the International Workers of the World's point of view is that seen all in all the Industrial-WW is not significantly anarchist, but mainly some kind of marxian type organization on the economical-political map, mainly with some socialist, communist and syndicalist mixed tendencies and sometimes a bit vague libertarian rhetoric, sometimes a bit semilibertarian leftist, sometimes a bit more autoritarian and militant similar to "non-dogmatic" IS-trotskyites, some members this - and some members that, with no clear consistent policy, an thus also a bit chaotic authoritarian. The IIFOR also has documentation stating several "former" trotskyists and trotskyite friends were involved in the reorganization of the Industrial-WW after a long time where the union was practically finished after medio 1900s.Thus, the organization has developed into a typical "student commie type" joke of an authoritarian union, from a more or less libertarian or semilibertarian past in the beginning of the 20th century, - although not so many students perhaps. The boycott of the American Industrial-WW will continue as long as a faction of the Industrial-WW is spreading smearstories and making intrigues against the Anarchist International, and as long as they are posing and (wrongly) labeled as an anarchosyndicalist and libertarian syndicalist union, i.e. what they mainly not are. The Industrial-WW in America and other places is mainly marxian syndicalist - not anarchosyndicalist and anarchistical.