>>> Brett Knowlton <brettk at unica-usa.com> 08/17/99 02:18PM >>>
Charles,
>Are there any historical examples of anarchist revolutions or Chomskyian
>revolutions that we can contrast with the history of the Russian
Revolution >and Soviet Union and other historical communist revolutions ?
The Spanish Civil War is the best example. It didn't last for very long, and you could argue that it wasn't truly anarchist, but at the very least it had a strong anarchist flavor.
(((((((((((((
Charles: I certainly respect the Spanish Republic (which as a republic and therefore state, and thus I assume did not fit an anarchist model). And I respect the defense of the Republic and anti-fascist fight. However, a condition of war is not optimum for measuring a projected continous condition of society. And I am certain you are not speaking of the war aspect, but there was not much chance to build a peaceful model.
Plus, I asked about how to consolidate the anarchist society's force against capitalist counterrevolution, and the Spanish Civil War is an example of failure to win the counterrevolution.
(((((((((((
I've heard the Mahknovists in the Ukraine during the Russian Civil War used as another example, but I know very little about that situation. There are some other very minor examples, like the Kronstadt uprsising at the end of the Russian Civil War as well.
(((((((((
Charles: These are also during war.
((((((((((
Sticking with the Spanish Civil War, the anarchist controlled regions seemed to do quite well, i.e., agricultural production rose, industrial output increased, land reform was instituted, etc. They collapsed becuase they were crushed militarily, not due to any internal problems. Of course they were only around for a year or two as well, so you don't have a lot to go on.
>Theoretically, how does the anarchist revolution consolidate its force
against >bourgeois counter-revolution ?
Same way the communist revolutions defended themselves - armed force. The Red Army won the Russian Civil War. If they had lost, I'm sure some kind of capitalist government would have been set up. Same thing with anarchist revolutions, only up until now the anarchists have always been successfully suppressed by reactionary elements.
((((((((((((
Charles: After the overt counterrevolutionary war will come a "cold war" with anarchism. How will anarchist society defend the gains it wins in the longer run against capitalism's efforts to reinstitute capitalism ?
((((((((((((
>When the target is far off, this utopian project begins to become
equivalent >to the pie in the sky of other utopian projects, even religious
utopias. Also, >little actual experience with anarchist utopian practice in
changing the world >compounds this. The result is a need for more to
inspire action in those >challenging capitalism.
>
>Ironically, Engels' scientific , in constrast with utopian , socialist
theory >is directed at invigorating revolutionary spirit, elan, enthusiasm,
that >necessary to move people to action to change things. If it can only
be reached >by future generations, it becomes equivalent to heaven after
death for this >living generation.
I'm not familiar with Engels, but I don't see any reason why his socialist theory is any less utopian or more scientific than Albert and Hahnel's formulation. Nothing in AH's proposals prevents instilling people with enthusiasm or revolutionary spirit. This is your claim, which in my view is unjustified.
(((((((((((((
Charles: Is the anarchist theory based on what it considers a scientific understanding of history ? This is the source of the scientific claims by Engels, that historical materialism, the theory underlying _The Manifesto of the Communist Party_ is a scientific theory of history, and the working class's role in revolutionary change out of capitalism to socialism is scientifically based. History tends toward it. Because history tends toward it , it is likely, and not some dream for several generations from now, but possible within our lifetime. This doability helps with enthusiasm in bringing it about.
(((((((((((
Besides, socialist revolution seemed pretty far off in 1850. Were Marx's ideas merely utopian pie in the sky?
(((((((((((
Charles: Well, that's exactly the point. Marx and Engels put forth their theory as specifically NOT pie in the sky by and by , but an improvement of this world and doable in their lifetime. It might occur in their lifetime, and it might not, but the objective conditions of history were ripe for proletarian revolution especially in the advanced capitalist countries. The question was could the subjective factor fulfill the objective potential. It didn't except in the Paris Commune some.
Same issue in Lenin's time. Might, might not, but really ripe now. And it did fulfill its potential, but not its full potential. The Socialist revolution occurred in Russia.
(((((((((((
By your logic his efforts would have been pointless at the time.
(((((((((
Charles: See above.
Charles
(((((((((((((((((
It takes time to convince people, to educate them to the point that they are ready to take the leap. Even then it may take a catalytic event. Would the Russian Revolution have happened without WWI? Its an open question, and this was after several generations of socialist organizing and agitation.