anarchism...nationalism and culture (a reply to chuck and dennis)

Bryan Atinsky bryan at indymedia.org.il
Tue Oct 16 10:45:12 PDT 2001


Bryan: It seems to me that in the discussion about nationalism, the state, anarchism and such, especially between Chuck and Dennis, that there is a need to make clear the distinction between culture and state, especially in Anarchist thought (since that is the object of the discussion). Rudolf Rocker's (imho the best of the Anarchist thinkers) great book Nationalism and Culture juxtaposes Nation and culture against one another:

Rocker discusses how the nation-state's drive for:

"'purity of the culture'...by the deliberate elimination of foreign influences...is just as unnatural as it is futile, and merely shows that these peculiar fanatics for cultural autonomy have not understood at all the profound significance of the cultural process. Such distorted ideas have about the same meaning as saying to a man that he can attain to the highest state of manhood only if he eliminates women from his life..."

"Culture unlooses the shackles that the theological spirit of politics has fastened on the peoples. In this sense it is in its deepest essence revelotionary. We indulge in profound reflections about the evanescence of all existence and demonstrate that all the great kingdoms which have played a world-commanding role in history were irrevocably doomed to downfall as soon as they had attained the highest peak of their culture. A number of well known historians have even maintained that we have to do here with the inevitable operation of a definite law, to which all historic process is subject. But really the fact that the decline or downfall of a kingdom is not in any way equivalen to the decline of a culture should indicate to us where the actual causes of the downfall are to be sought. A political rulership can go down without leaving behind it a trace of its former existence; with a culture it is quite otherwise. It can, as it were, wither in a country where it has been disturbed in its natural growth. In this event it looks for new possibilities of development outside its old circle of operation, gradually enters upon new fields and fertilizes there germs that were in a sense waiting for fertilization. Thus there arise new forms of the cultural process, which doubtless differ from the old, but nevertheless carry in theim its creative forces. Macedonian and Roman conquerors could put an end to the political independence of the tiny Greek city-republics; they could not prevent the transplanting of Greek culture deep in Inner Asia, its growth to new bloom in Egypt, nor its intellectual vitalizing of Rome herself." (pp.346-48)

Bryan: So, if we can, to some degree, take Rocker's statements as generalizable to Anarchist thought as a whole, there would be no real contradiction in recognizing an (or many) American Culture(s), or even feeling a cultural connection to them, while at the same time rejecting the nationalist symbols of the culture such as the American flag. Why, on the one hand, is there a need to connect up American cultural forms organically to America as a nation-state formation (and all its state symbols)? And, why, on the other hand is there a need to reject the very notion of an (or many) American culture(s), as somehow implicated inseperably with nationalism and governmental forms? Neither is wholly true, each side overshoots its position.

Anyway, that is my two bits for now

Best Wishes,

Bryan

...by the way, below is what I was commenting on:

Chuck:
> That's funny, when I listen to jazz or rock n' roll, I never think about
> patriotism, the American flag, or even America. I also don't associate
> film noir or other interesting aspects of pop culture with America(tm).
> I don't know, it sounds like you've been watching some shallow Ken Burns
> documentary on "Anarchism." Either that, or you've gotten a
> one-dimensional Warner Brothers version of it.

Dennis: "Then you must not listen to Louis Armstrong, who made this connection rather clear (choosing the fake birthdate of July 4, 1900 for added symbolism). Nor have you read the thoughts of Charlie Parker, a quiet intellectual who revered much of the American experience, despite its racism. Then there's Elvis, the Beach Boys, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Howlin' Wolf, among many others. And how about Jimi Hendrix's version of "The Star Spangled Banner"? When asked if it was a protest version of the song, Hendrix replied, "It just sounds beautiful to me."

How you can disconnect such unique American forms from America itself is mind-boggling, but consistent with your single-dimensional take on reality."

Bryan Atinsky IMC-Israel English Editorial Coordinator http://www.indymedia.org.il -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20011016/11241a02/attachment.htm>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list