Self-organization above all else?

One hundred years ago the anarchists did not say anything about self-organization. Over, self-organization commemorated Kropotkin, speaking about the future of society as a self-organizing society, rarely mention the phenomenon, and lesser-known ideologues of anarchism, but that's it occasionally. You can spend hours reading leaflets, resolutions and proclamations anarchists early twentieth century and never found it appeals to organize themselves or panic over other forms of organization.

But something happened for a hundred years. Anarchism left on the margins of political life, but among contemporary anarchists, self-organization has become a sacred cow, into something that is not allowed to criticize in any form.Today's libertarians are ready to drive around their sacred animal ritual dances, blow off the dust and think about it more and more myths. And then what kind of a cult without Holy Tradition? True their mythology has nothing to do with socialism in general, nor to anarchism in particular.

The first myth: self-organization is an indispensable attribute of anarchism.

First, the self-organization are quite capable of absolutely any representatives of political movements, as, for example, make the Nazis, who organize themselves into street gangs that attacked foreign workers and students.Secondly, the historical example shows us that the greatest success stories come from those anarchist formation which combines in its structure, elements of self-organization with a rigid organization, and even, in some places, the hierarchy. Trying to see for any signs of self-organization surest way to anarchy - is fraught with errors, such as attempts by some Russian anarchists draw voucher basis for the pogroms in Kondopoga.Self-organization at the moment - it's just a method. This method can be used by anyone, because no "anarhokopirayta" it is not necessary. Therefore we should not in every manifestation of self-organization to seek an opportunity to stick the side of the red and black ribbon.

Myth Two: In order to build self-organized society should organize itself now.

This myth is from the same category as the call to abandon the money right now, so bring communism tomorrow.Characteristically, no evidence of this postulate is usually not given, he, for some reason, should be axiomatic. The very idea of this kind comes from an idealistic concept of "if you want to change the world - change yourself", and attempts to implement it are as old as the world. However, practice shows that the world does not want me just because a certain group of people build their relations on a different principle than the surrounding. Human relationships are changing not only and not just because of their desires, how much under the influence of the environment.

The third myth: self-organization is the most effective form of cooperation.

Practice shows that the self-organization often crashes as soon as it was being applied to specific problems of smaller or larger groups.Discussions are beginning to sink in the details, speed of decision-making in this way do not hold, the responsibility is based, at best, on the positive personal qualities of the performer. This is due simply to smear the decision-making.When the decision is made not by one person, but a hundred - no one feels responsible for him, if only because all one hundred people for the consequences of wrong decision will not be responsible. And from such a disaster has long existed a panacea - a team of monitors and coordinates responsible for the decisions of appointed officials. Responsible, may be removed at any time, but on your site can enjoy the broadest powers. But this method, despite its apparent effectiveness, does not enjoy the confidence of the loyal followers of the sacred self.

On the example of these myths can be seen that the self-organization has become an end in itself so that began to be valued in itself, divorced from content.If you compare the two initiatives, one of which was self-organized, and the other not, then today's anarchist sympathies are on the side of the first, even if it's a failure. It is unlikely that such an approach can be advantageous. Everyone who considers himself an anarchist, you must decide what is more important to him - but the struggle forBoc society or the struggle for self-organization at any cost.

Add new comment

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Author columns

Антти Раутиайнен

The results of the first 30 years of “democracy” in Ukraine are, to put it mildly, unconvincing. The economy and the media are in the hands of rival oligarchs, corruption is at staggering levels, economic development lags behind many African countries, and in addition, the country has become the...

5 months ago
Denis Mikhaylenko and Nikita Uvarov
Антти Раутиайнен

This blog as a podcast: Spotify, Soundcloud This blog as video. Kansk is a city with a population of 90 000 in Siberia, Russia. The closest city with a million inhabitants is Krasnoyarsk, 250 kilometers westwards. Two boys, who turned 15 years old last year, Nikita Uvarov and Denis...

1 year ago