TheAnarchistLibrary Anti-Copyright The Anarchist Banker Fernando Pessoa 1922 OriginalTitle:OBanqueiroAnarquista TranslatedbyMargaretJullCosta We had just finished having supper. Opposite me sat my friend, the banker—a well-known capitalist and tycoon— absent-mindedly smoking his cigar. The conversation had been gradually petering out for some time and now lay defunct between us. I tried to revive it with an idea that had justsurfacedinmymind.Smiling,Iturnedtohimandsaid,“I knowwhatI’vebeenmeaningtoaskyou.Someonetoldmea fewdaysagothatyouusedtobeananarchist. — There’s no ‘used to’ about it. I was and I am. I haven’t changedinthatrespect;Istillamananarchist. —That’sagoodone!You,ananarchist!Inwhatwayareyou an anarchist? Unless, of course, you’re not using the word in its… FernandoPessoa —Initspropersense?IcanassureyouthatIam. TheAnarchistBanker —Youmeantosay,then,thatyouareananarchistinexactly 1922 thesamewayasallthosepeopleinworkers’organizationsare anarchists? You mean that there’s no difference between you theanarchistlibrary.org andthemenwhothrowbombsandformtradeunions? —Ofcoursethere’sadifference,ofcoursethereis,butitisn’t cal;theyaremysticalanarchistsandIamascientificanarchist; the difference that you’re imagining. Do you perhaps doubt they are anarchists who bow the knee and I am an anarchist thatmysocialtheoriesaredifferenttotheirs? whostandsupandfightsforfreedom.Inshort:theyarepseudo- —Ah,nowIsee!Intheory,you’reananarchist,butinprac- anarchistsandIamananarchist. tice… — I’m as much an anarchist in practice as I am in theory. Andwiththat,wegotupfromthetable. Indeed,inpractice,I’mmuchmoreofananarchistthanthose Lisbon,January1922 otherpeopleyoumention.Mywholelifeprovesit. —What? —Mywholelifeprovesit.It’sjustthatyou’veneverthought aboutthesethingsclearly.That’swhyyouthinkthatwhatI’m sayingisnonsenseorthatI’mmerelyplayingwithyou. —Idon’tunderstandawordofit!Unless…Unlessyouthink of your life as being disruptive and anti-social, and are using ‘anarchism’inthatsense. —I’vealreadytoldyouthatIamusingtheword‘anarchism’ initspropersense. —Allright,butIstilldon’tunderstand.Areyousayingthat there’snoconflictbetweenyourtrueanarchistictheoriesand the life you lead, your present life? Do you want me to be- lievethatyourlifeisidenticaltothatofthosepeopleordinarily termed‘anarchists’? — No, that’s not it at all. What I mean is that, between my theories and how I lead my life, there is no divergence at all, but absolute conformity. It’s true that my life is not like that ofthosetradeuniontypesorofpeoplewhothrowbombs.Itis theirlivesthatarenottrulyanarchistic,thatfallshortoftheir anarchistic ideals, not mine. The theory and practice of anar- chismmeetinme,yes,inme—banker,financier,tycoonifyou like—andthere’snoconflictbetweenthem.Youcomparedme to those fools in the trade unions, to those people who throw bombs, in order to demonstrate that I am quite different from them. I am, but the difference is this: they (yes, they and not I) are purely theoretical anarchists; I am an anarchist in both theory and practice. They are foolish anarchists and I am an 2 35 oneperson.Whydoyoucriticizemyachievingwhatfreedom intelligent anarchist. Therefore, I am the true anarchist. They, Icould?Whydon’tyoucriticizethosewhohaven’tdoneso? the people in the trade unions, the ones who throw bombs (I —Iknow.Butthosemendidn’tdowhatyoudidbecausethey did the same once until I emerged from that into my true an- werelessintelligentthenyou,orelselackedthewillpower… archism),theyarethedetritusofanarchism,thewhoresofthe — Ah, my friend, those are natural inequalities, not social greatlibertariandoctrine. ones. Anarchism can do nothing about that. The degree of in- —Comeoffit,that’sridiculous.Howdoyoureconcileyour telligence or willpower of an individual is down to him and life,Imeanyourlifeinbankingandcommerce,withanarchist Nature;thesocialfictionsthemselvescontributenothing.AsI theory?Howcanyoudothatifyousaythatby‘anarchistthe- saidbefore,therearenaturalqualitieswhichonecanpresume ory’youmeanexactlythesameasordinaryanarchistsmean? will be perverted by humanity’s long co-existencewith social If I understand you correctly, you’re saying that you’re differ- fictions,buttheperversionconsistsnotintheexcellenceoroth- entfromthembecauseyouaremoreofananarchistthanthey erwiseofthosequalities,whicharegivenbyNaturealone,but are,isthatso? in their application. Stupidity or lack of willpower have noth- —Itis. ing to do with the application of those qualities; it has to do —ThenIdon’tunderstandatall. withtheirdegreeofexcellence.That’swhyIsaythattheseare —Doyouwanttounderstand? natural inequalities over which no one has any power what- —Ido. soever, and no form of social modification can modify them Hiscigarhadgoneout.Heslowlyrelitit,watchingthematch either,justasIcannotbecometalloryoushort. as it burned out, then placing the match delicately in the ash Except… Except in certain cases, for example, when the tray. Looking up after a moment, he said, “Listen. I was born hereditaryperversionofnaturalqualitieshasgonesofarthat amongst the working classes of this city. As you can imagine, it touches the person’s actual temperament. It’s possible that I inherited neither a good position in society nor good living acertaintypeofpersonmightbeborntobeaslave,naturally conditions.WhatIdidhavewasasharpintellectandastrong born to be a slave, and is therefore incapable of making any will. Those, however, were natural gifts which my low birth effort to free themselves. But in that case, what have they to couldnottakeawayfromme. dowith afree society,orwith freedom? Ifa manwas born to I was a worker, I worked, I had a hard life. In short, I was be a slave, then freedom, being contrary to his nature, would, like most of the people who inhabit that world. I wouldn’t forhim,beaformoftyranny. say that I’d ever gone hungry—though I came close once or twice—which doesn’t mean that it couldn’t have happened. There was a short pause. Suddenly, I burst out laughing. I That doesn’t change anything that occurred subsequently; it said,“Youreallyareananarchist,butevenafterhearingwhat changesnothingofwhatI’mgoingtotellyounow,orofwhat you say, I still can’t help laughing when I compare you and mylifewasoris. yourfellowanarchistsoutthere. I was an ordinary worker. Like most people, I worked be- —Myfriend,I’vealreadytoldyou,I’vealreadyproveditto cause I had to and I worked as little as possible. I was intel- you,andIrepeatitagain.Theonlydifferenceisthis:theyare ligent though. Whenever I had the opportunity, I would read, purelytheoreticalanarchists,Iamboththeoreticalandpracti- argue about things, and, since I was no fool, I began to feel 34 3 agreatsenseofdissatisfaction,anoverwhelmingfeelingofre- continueitstyranny.IfyoudestroyedCapitalbutnotthecap- voltagainstmyfateandagainstthesocialconditionsthatmade italists,howmanycapitalistswouldremain?Doyousee? my fate what it was. I’ve alreadysaid that my fate was not as —Yes,you’reright. badasitcouldhavebeen,but,atthetime,itseemedtomethat —Myboy,theabsoluteworstyoucanaccusemeofisthatI IwasabeingtowhomFatehaddealtoutallkindsofinjustices mayhaveaddedslightly—very,veryslightly—tothetyrannyof andhadmadeuseofsocialconventioninordertodoso.Iwas thesocialfictions.Theargumentisabsurd,though,because,as about twenty years old at the time, twenty-one at most, and I’vealreadysaid,thetyrannywhichIshouldnothavecreated, thatwaswhenIbecameananarchist. and which I did not create, is something else entirely. There’s anotherweakpointinyourargument:bythesamereasoning, He stopped for a moment, turned to me and then went on, youcouldaccuseageneralwhotakesuparmsforhiscountry leaning forwards slightly. “I was always pretty clear-thinking. ofharminghiscountrybylosinganumberofmeninhisown Ifeltrebellious.Iwantedtounderstandmyrebellion.Ibecame army,menhehadtosacrificeinordertowin.Ifyougotowar, a conscious and convinced anarchist, the same conscious and youbothwinandlose. convincedanarchistIamtoday. — That’s all very well, but there’s another thing… The true — And is the theory you believe in today the same as you anarchistwantsfreedomnotonlyforhimself,butalsoforoth- believedinthen? ers. It seems to me that he wants freedom for the whole of —Itis.Thereisonlyonetrueanarchisttheory.Ibelievethe humanity. same thing I always did, ever since I became an anarchist, as —Ofcourse,butI’vealreadysaidthatbytakingthecourse you’llsee. of action I’ve described, which is the only possible anarchist As I was saying, I was, by nature, clear-thinking, and I be- course of action, each person has to free himself. I freed my- came an anarchist. Now what is an anarchist? He is a person self; I did my duty not only by myself but in respect of free- in revolt against the injustice of people being born socially domtoo.Whydidtheothers,mycomrades,notdothesame? unequal—that’s basically what it is. From that springs his re- I didn’t stop them. Had I the stopped others, then my doing bellionagainstthesocialconventionsthatmakethatinequality so,thatwouldhavebeenacrime.Ididnoteventrytoconceal possible. What I’m explaining now is the psychological route, from them the true anarchist course of action; I explained it thereasonwhypeoplebecomeanarchists;we’llgettothethe- to them very clearly as soon as I discovered it. The course of oreticalpartinamoment.Fornow,imaginewhyanintelligent action itself prevented me doing more than that. What more maninmycircumstanceswouldfeelrebellious.Whatdoeshe could I do? Force them to follow the same path as myself? I seeintheworld?Onemanisbornthesonofamillionaire,pro- wouldnothavedonesoevenifIcouldhavebecausethatwould tectedfromthecradlefromallthemisfortunesthatmoneycan havemeantimposingfreedomonthemandthatisagainstmy avoidormakebearable,ofwhichtherearemany.Anotherman anarchist principles. Help them? I couldn’t do that either, for isbornpoor,justanothermouthtofeedinafamilywherethere the same reasons. I’ve never helped anyone, because that im- are already too many mouths to feed and not enough food to plies a diminution of someone else’s freedom; it’s against my goaround.Onemanisbornacountoramarquisandthusen- principles. You’re simply accusing me of not being more than joys the respect of everyone, whatever he does. Another man 4 33 — No, my boy, you’re wrong. I didn’t create any tyranny. is born as I was, and has to behave with absolute rectitude in Thetyrannythatcouldhaveresultedfrommystruggleagainst ordertobetreatedlikeahumanbeing.Somemenarebornin social fictions is a tyranny that does not come from me and conditionsthatallowthemtostudy,totravel,toeducatethem- thereforeIdidnotcreateit.Itisintrinsictothesocialfictions selves,tobecome(youmightsay)moreintelligentthanothers themselves,andIdidnotaddtoit.Thattyrannyisthetyranny who are by nature more intelligent than them. And so it goes intrinsictoallsocialfictionsandIcouldnot,nordidItryto,de- on,inallaspectsoflife. stroyanysocialfictions.ForthehundredthtimeIrepeat:only We can do nothing about Nature’s injustices, but why a social revolution can destroy social fictions; until that time, shouldn’twedosomethingabouttheinjusticesofsocietyand a perfect anarchist course of action like mine can only subju- its conventions? I accept—I have no option but to do so—that gate the social fictions, and subjugate them only in relation amanmightbesuperiortomebecauseNaturegavehimmore to the anarchist who follows that course of action, because it talent, strength, or energy; what I cannot accept is that he is does not allow for those fictions to be subjugated for long. It my superior by virtue of artificial qualities, qualities he did isnotaquestionofnotcreatingatyranny,butofnotcreating not have when he left his mother’s womb, but which he had a new tyranny, creating a tyranny where there was none be- the good fortune to be given as soon as he was born: wealth, fore. Anarchists working together, influencing each other, as socialposition,aneasylife,etc.Myanarchismwasbornoutof I said, create amongst themselves a new tyranny, quite apart the rebellion I felt against those things, the anarchism which, from the tyrannies of existing social fictions. I did not create asIsaid,Istillholdto,completelyunchanged. such a tyranny. Given the conditions of my particular course ofaction,Icouldnothavedoneso.No,myfriend,Icreatedonly He again paused for a moment, as if considering how he freedom.Ifreedoneperson.Ifreedmyself.Becausemycourse should continue. He inhaled the smoke from his cigar, then ofaction—which,asIprovedtoyoubefore,wastheonlytrue slowly exhaled, blowing the smoke out to one side of me. He anarchist course of action—did not allow me to free anyone turned to me again and was about to go on. I, however, inter- else.TheonepersonIwasabletofree,Ifreed. rupted him: “Just one question, purely out of curiosity. Why —Allright,Iagree,butbythattoken,onecouldalmostbeled didyoubecomeananarchist?Youcouldhavebecomeasocial- tobelievethatnorepresentativeofthesocialfictionsexercises ist or taken up some other similar advanced philosophy. That anytyrannywhatsoever. would have fitted in with your feelings of rebellion. I deduce — They don’t. The tyranny is wielded by the fictions them- fromwhatyou’vesaidthat,byanarchism,youunderstand(and selvesandnotbythemenwhorepresentthem;theyare,ifyou I think it’s fine as a definition) a revolt against all social con- like, the means those fictions use to tyrannize society, just as ventionsandformulae,togetherwiththedesireandintention a knife is the means used by a murderer to kill. But I’m sure toabolishthemall. you don’t believe that abolishing knives would do away with —That’sright. murderers.Whatwouldhappenifyoudestroyedallthecapital- —Whydidyouchoosethatparticularlyextremeformulation ists in the world, but kept Capital? The following day, capital andnotoneoftheothermoremoderateones? would be in the hands of others and, through them, it would —I’lltellyou.Igaveallthatalotofthought.Obviously,Iread aboutallthosetheoriesinpamphletsandIchoseanarchism,an 32 5 extremetheoryasyouquiterightlysay,forreasonswhichIcan banking life. It might be of interest, especially certain aspects sumupinafewwords. ofit,butit’snotreallyrelevanttothematterunderdiscussion. Iworked,Istruggled,Iearnedmoney.Iworkedharder,Istrug- He stared into space for a moment. Then he turned to me gledharder,Iearnedmoremoney.Intheend,Iearnedalotof again. money.Imustconfess,myfriend,thatIdidnotworryaboutthe — The true evil, indeed, the only evil, are the social con- means; I used whatever means I could—sequestration, finan- ventions and fictions which become superimposed on natural cial sophistry, unfair competition. So what? Was I supposed realities—everything from family to money, from religion to to worry about means when I was combating social fictions theState.Wearebornmanorwoman,Imean,wearebornto which were both immoral and unnatural? I was working for growintoadultmenandwomen.Wearenotborn,intermsof freedom and I had to use what weapons I could to combat naturaljustice,tobeahusbandortoberichorpoor,justaswe tyranny. The foolish anarchist who throws bombs and shoots are not born to be Catholic or Protestant, to be Portuguese or peopleknowsthatheiskillingpeople,whilealsoknowingthat English.Allthesethingsaresocialfictions.Nowwhyarethese hisdoctrinesdonotincludethedeathpenalty.Heattacksone socialfictionsabadthing?Preciselybecausetheyarefictions, formofimmoralitybycommittingacrimebecausehebelieves becausetheyarenotnatural. that immorality is worthy of a crime if it is to be destroyed. MoneyisasgreatanevilastheState,andtheinstitutionof His course of action is foolish because, as I’ve already shown, thefamilyaswrongasreligion.Itdoesn’tmatterwhatthesefic- inanarchistterms,thatcourseofactioniswrong-headedand tionsare.Theycouldbedifferentthings,andtheywouldbejust counter-productive;asfarasthemoralityofthatcourseofac- asbadbecausetheywouldstillbefictions,becausetheywould tionisconcerned,however,itisintelligent.Now,thecourseof superimpose themselves on, and mask, natural realities. Now, actionIfollowedwascorrectand,asananarchist,Ilegitimately apartfrompureanarchism,anysystembasedonthedesireto usedallpossiblemeanstogrowrich.Ihaverealizedthelimited abolish each and every one of these fictions is also a fiction. dream of a practical, clear-thinking anarchist. I am free. I do To put all our desires, all our efforts, all our intelligence into whatIwant,withinlimitsofcourse.Mymottoasananarchist replacing,orcontributingtoreplacing,onesocialfictionwith was‘freedom’,sofine,Ihavefreedom,thekindoffreedomthat another is an absurdity, not to say a crime, because it means our imperfect society allows one to have. I wanted to combat creating a social disturbance with the express aim of leaving socialfictions,soIdidand,what’smore,Ibeatthem. everythingexactlyasitwasbefore.Ifwebelievethatsocialfic- tionsareunjustbecausetheycrushandoppresswhatisnatural “Hangon,hangon”,Isaid.“That’sallverywell,butthere’s in Man, why put all our efforts into replacing them with new somethingyou’vemissedout.Theconditionsofyourcourseof fictions, if instead we can put all our efforts into destroying actionwere,asyouyourselfproved,notonlytocreatefreedom them? butalsotonotcreatetyranny.Youdidcreatetyranny.Asase- That seems to me conclusive. But just suppose that it isn’t; questrator, as a banker, as an unscrupulous financier—forgive supposesomeoneobjectsthatthisisallverywell,buttheanar- me, but you yourself used such terms—you created tyranny. chistsystemsimplyisn’tpracticable.Let’sexaminethataspect You’ve created as much of a tyranny as any other representa- oftheproblem.Whywouldtheanarchistsystemnotbepracti- tiveofthesocialfictionsthatyouclaimtofight. 6 31 at the beginning of my career as a fully conscious anarchist? cable?Allfreethinkingpeoplebasethemselvesontheprinciple And do you remember that, at the time, I told you that I had notonlythatthepresentsystemisunjust,butonthefactthat resolved them artificially—emotionally rather than logically? there is some advantage, some justice in replacing it with a Yousaw,quiteclearly,thatIdidnotresolvethembylogic… fairersystem.Ifwedon’tthinklikethat,thenwearenotfree- —Yes,Iremember. thinkersatall;wearemerelybourgeois.Nowwheredoesthat —AnddoyourememberthatItoldyouthat,lateron,when criterionofjusticecomefrom?Fromwhatisnaturalandtrue I found the true way forward for anarchism, that I did then asopposedtowhataresocialfictionsandtheliesofconvention. resolvethemlogically? Something that is natural is entirely natural, not half-natural, —Ido. oraquarter,oraneighth.Fine—now,eitherwhatisnaturalis — This is how I resolved them. The difficulties were as fol- practicable socially, or it isn’t; in other words, either society lows: it is not natural to work for anything, whatever it is, canbenatural,orsocietyisessentiallyfictitiousandcannever without receiving a natural, that is, selfish reward for it; and benatural.Ifsocietycanbenatural,thenit’spossibletocreate it is not natural to put all that effort into something without an anarchist or free society, as is only right, because an anar- havingtherewardofknowingthatyouraimwillbeachieved. chist society is entirely natural. If society cannot be natural, Thosewerethetwodifficulties.Theywereresolvedbythean- if (for some reason we needn’t bother with here) it cannot be archist course of action that my reasoning led me to realize otherthanfictitious,thenwesimplymakethebestofabadjob. wastheonlytruecourseofaction.Theresultofthatcourseof Within that inevitable fictitiousness, we make it as natural as action was that I would grow rich; there you have the selfish possibleinorderthatitcanbeasjustaspossible. reward.Theaimwastoachievefreedom;bymakingmyselfsu- Whichisthemostnaturalfiction?Nofictionisnaturalinit- periortothepowerofmoney,thatis,byfreeingmyselffromit, self,becauseitisafiction;inourcase,themostnaturalwould Iwouldachievefreedom.Iwouldonlyachievefreedomformy- betheonethatseemsthemostnatural,thatfeelsthemostnat- self, of course, but, as I have already established, freedom for ural.Whichfictionseemsorfeelsmostnaturaltous?Theone allcanonlycomewiththedestructionofallsocialfictions,via weareusedto.(Youunderstand,don’tyou?By‘natural’Imean asocialrevolution,andIcouldnotmakethatsocialrevolution whatisinstinctive;whateverisnotinstinctive,butbearsallthe alone. The point is this: I aim for freedom, I achieve freedom; marksofinstinctivebehaviour,ishabit.Smokingisnotnatural, I achieve what freedom I can because, obviously, I can only itisnotaninstinctiveneed—but,ifwegetusedtosmoking,it achieveafreedomthatisachievable.Andyousee,apartfrom becomesnaturaltous,itcomestofeellikeaninstinctiveneed.) demonstrating that this anarchist course of action is the only Now which social fiction has become habitual in us? The trueone,theveryfactthatitautomaticallyresolvesallthelog- present system, the bourgeois system. Logically, then, we ei- icaldifficultiesthatmightopposeananarchistcourseofaction therdecidethatanaturalsocietyisarealpossibilityandthus isstillfurtherproof. becomedefendersofanarchism,orwedecidethatitisnotpos- SothatwasthecourseofactionIfollowed.Isettoworkto sible and become defenders of the bourgeois regime. There is subjugatethefictionofmoneybygrowingrich.Isucceeded.It nointermediatehypothesis.Doyouunderstand? tooksometimebecauseitwasagreatstruggle,butImanaged —Icertainlydo.Thatseemstomeabsolutelyconclusive. it.There’snoneedformetotellyouaboutmycommercialand 30 7 —It’snotquiteconclusive.Thereisanotherobjectionofthe portant,atleastinourdayandage,ismoney.HowcouldIsub- samesorttodealwith.Youmightagreethattheanarchistsys- jugate money, or to be more precise, the power and tyranny tem can be put into practice, but you might doubt that it can of money? I could do so by freeing myself from its influence bedonesuddenly—thatis,thatyoucanmovefromabourgeois and power, thereby placing myself beyond its influence and society to a free society without there being one or more in- renderingitpowerlessoverme.Doyouunderstand?Iwasthe termediate stages or regimes. Anyone making this objection one combating it; if I were to render it powerless over every- acceptsthatananarchistsocietyisbothgoodandpracticable, one,thatwouldnotbesubjugatingitbutdestroyingit,because buthesensesthattheremustbesomesortoftransitionalstage thatwouldbeputtinganendonceandforalltothefictionof betweenabourgeoissocietyandananarchistone. money.Ihavealreadyestablishedthatasocialfictioncanonly Right,letussupposethatthisisso.Whatisthatintermedi- be destroyed by social revolution and dragged along with the ary stage? Our aim is to create a free, anarchist society; that othersocialfictionsinthefallofbourgeoissociety. intermediarystagecanthereforeonlybeastagethatprepares How could I make myself superior to money? The simplest humanityforafreesociety.Thatpreparationcanbeeitherma- waywastoremovemyselffromitssphereofinfluence,thatis, terialorsimplyintellectual—thatis,itcaneithertaketheform fromcivilization—togointothecountryandliveoffrootsand of a series of material or social changes that slowly adapt hu- drink spring water, to walk around naked and live as the ani- manity to a free society, or it can take the form of a steadily malslive.Butthis,apartfromtheobviousdifficultiesinvolved, increasing campaign of propaganda or consciousness-raising would not be combating a social fiction; it would not be com- whichpreparessocietyintellectuallytowantafreesocietyor bating anything, it would be running away. It’s true that any- toacceptit. one who avoids joining in a fight also avoids being defeated Let’s look at the first case: the gradual, material adaptation byit.Morally,though,heisdefeated,preciselybecausehedid of humanity to a free society. It’s impossible—more than that, not fight. There had to be another way, a way that would in- it’s absurd. You can only make a material adaptation to some- volve fighting, not fleeing. How could I subjugate money by thing that already exists. Neither of us could adapt ourselves fighting it? How could I shrug off its influence and tyranny materially to fit in with the social milieu of the 23rd century, overmewithoutavoidingcontactwithit?Therewasonlyone evenifweknewwhatitwouldbelike;andthereasonwecan’t wayforward.Iwouldhavetoacquiremoney,Iwouldhaveto isbecausethe23rdcenturyanditssocialmilieudonotasyet acquire enough of it not to feel its influence, and the more I existmaterially.Thuswereachtheconclusionthat,inthepas- acquired,thefreerIwouldbefromthatinfluence.WhenIsaw sagefromabourgeoissocietytoafreesociety,theonlypossi- thisclearly,withalltheforceofmyanarchistconvictionsand blekindofadaptation,evolution,ortransitionisanintellectual allthelogicofaclear-thinkingman,onlythendidIenterthe one—thegradualadaptationofpeople’smindstotheideaofa presentphase—thecommercialandbankingphase—ofmyan- freesociety.However,intheareaofmaterialadaptation,there archism. isonefurtherhypothesis. He rested a moment from the increasingly violent enthusi- —Nomorehypotheses,please! asmwithwhichheexpoundedhisargument.Then,stillsome- — My dear boy, any clear-thinking man has to examine all what heatedly, he went on with his narrative. “Now do you possibleobjectionsandrefutethembeforehecanconsiderhim- rememberthetwologicaldifficultiesthatItoldyouhadarisen 8 29 be in any way shaken? They would not. Social fictions are selfsureofhisdoctrines.Besides,thisisallinreplytoaques- not like a political situation that might depend on a small tionthatyouaskedme. number of men, sometimes on one man alone. The bad thing —Allright… about the social fictions are the fictions themselves, not the — As I was saying, in the area of material adaptation there individuals who represent them, precisely because that is all isstillonefurtherhypothesis.Andthatisarevolutionarydic- theyare:representatives.Besides,anattackonthesocialorder tatorship. always produces a reaction. Things don’t necessarily remain —Whatdoyoumeanbythat? the same, and sometimes they get worse. Suppose, as is only — As I explained, there can be no material adaptation to natural,thatIweretobehunteddownafterthatattack;what somethingthatdoesnotexistmaterially.However,werethere ifIwerehunteddownanddealtwithinsomewayoranother? suddenlytobeasocialrevolution,therewouldexist,notafree If I had done away with a dozen capitalists, what would that society(becausehumanityisnotasyetpreparedforthat),but have achieved? Only my disappearance, if not my death. And the kind of dictatorship that wishes to institute a free society. evenifIweremerelysenttoprisonorintoexile,theanarchist Somethinglikeafreesocietywouldthenalreadyexist,albeitin cause would have lost a fighter for the cause, whereas the averysketchy,rudimentaryform.Therewouldthenbesome- twelve capitalists I had disposed of would not be a loss to thing in material existence to which humanity could adapt it- bourgeois society because the component parts of bourgeois self.Weretheycapableofargumentorthought,thatisthear- society are not fighters, they are purely passive elements, for gumentthatwouldbeusedbythefoolswhodefendadictator- the ‘struggle’ lies not with the members of bourgeois society ship of the proletariat. That argument is, of course, not theirs butwiththesocialfictionsuponwhichthatsocietyisfounded. butmine.Iproposeitasanobjectiontomyself.And,asIwill Now social fictions are not people that one can shoot. Do showyou,itisfalse. you understand? It wouldn’t be like a soldier in one army Whileitexistsandwhateveritsaimsoritsmainideas,arev- killing twelve soldiers in the enemy army; it would be like a olutionary regime is materially only one thing, a revolution- soldier killing twelve civilians of the nation being defended aryregime.Nowarevolutionaryregimemeansadictatorship by that enemy army. It would be senseless killing, because it of war or, to be blunt, a despotic military regime, because a wouldnoteliminateasinglecombatant.Icouldnot,therefore, state of war is imposed on society by a part of that same so- hopetodestroythesocialfictionsinwholeorinpart.Iwould ciety, the part that took power by revolutionary means. And have to subjugate them. I would have to overcome them by what happens? Anyone adapting themselves to that regime, subjugation,byrenderingthempowerless. to its immediate, material reality, that of a despotic military regime, is becoming adapted to just that: a despotic military Hesuddenlypointedatmewithhisrightindexfinger.“And regime. The idea that inspired the revolutionaries, the aims thatwaswhatIdid!”Heimmediatelywithdrewthegestureand theyespoused,havevanishedcompletelyfromthesocialreal- wenton. ity which is now occupied exclusively by a warrior mentality. — I tried to see what was the first and most important of So what emerges from a revolutionary dictatorship, and will thosesocialfictions.Forthat,morethananyother,wastheone emerge more fully the longer that dictatorship lasts, is a dic- Ishouldtrytosubjugate,trytorenderpowerless.Themostim- tatorialwarriorsociety—thatis,militarydespotism.Itcouldn’t 28 9 beanythingelse.Andithasalwaysbeenlikethat.Idon’tknow ideal than by focusing my efforts in some other direction. alotabouthistory,butwhatIdoknowonlyconfirmsmythe- Action is always more productive than consciousness-raising, ory; how could it not? What emerged from the political trou- except for people who are natural propagandists: the great bles in Rome? The Roman Empire and its military despotism. orators, capable of electrifying crowds and getting people to WhatemergedfromtheFrenchRevolution?Napoleonandhis follow them, or the great writers, capable of fascinating and military despotism. And you just wait and see what emerges convincing with their books. I don’t think I’m particularly fromtheRussianRevolution…Somethingthatwillsetbackthe vain, but if I am, at least I’m not vain about qualities I don’t creationofafreesocietybydecades,butthenwhatcanyouex- have.And,asIsaid,I’veneverthoughtofmyselfasanorator pectfromacountryofilliteratesandmystics? or a writer. That’s why I abandoned the idea of indirect Anyway, that’s beside the point. Do you understand what action as the path to follow in my activities as an anarchist. I I’msaying? therefore had to choose direct action, that is, I had to apply —Perfectly. my efforts to the practicalities of life, to real life. It required — You’ll understand then how I reached this conclusion. notintelligence,butaction.Fine.Sobeit. Aim: an anarchist society, a free society. Means: a seamless I therefore had to apply to practical life the fundamental changefromabourgeoissocietytoafreesociety.Thatchange process of anarchist action which I have already explained— willbepreparedforandmadepossiblebyanintense,compre- combatingsocialfictionswithoutcreatinganewtyranny,and, hensive, global propaganda campaign intended to predispose ifpossible,creatingaforetasteofafuturefreedom.Buthowon all minds to the idea of a free society and to weaken any EarthwasItoputthisintopractice? resistance. Obviously, by propaganda, I don’t just mean the What does combating social fictions mean in practical written and spoken word. I mean everything: direct and terms? It means war; it is war. And how do you make war on indirect action, anything that might predispose people to a social fictions? Even more important, how do you make war free society and weaken their resistance to its coming. Thus, at all? How do you conquer the enemy in any war? By one havingalmostnoresistancetoovercome,thesocialrevolution, of two ways: by killing him, that is, by destroying him; or by when it happens, will be fast, easy, and preclude any need to imprisoning him, that is, by subjugating him, by rendering set up a revolutionary dictatorship because there will be no himpowerless.Icouldn’tdestroyallsocialfictions;thatcould onetorepress.Ifthatisnotpossible,thenneitherisanarchism; onlybecarriedoutbyasocialrevolution.Untilthen,thesocial and if anarchism is impossible then, as I’ve just proved, the fictions could only be shaken, left hanging by a thread; they onlydefensible,fairsocietyisbourgeoissociety. would only be destroyed with the coming of a free society That’s why I became an anarchist and why and how I re- and the definitive fall of bourgeois society. The most I could jected as false and unnatural all other, less daring social doc- dointhatdirectionwastodestroy—todestroyinthephysical trines. sense of ‘to kill’—one or more members of the representative Andthatisthat.Nowbacktomystory. classes of bourgeois society. I studied this possibility and I saw that it was nonsense. Suppose I were to kill one, or two, Hestruckamatchandslowlylithiscigar.Hethoughtfora or a dozen people who represented the tyranny of the social whileandthenwenton:“Therewereseveralotherswhoshared fictions. What would be the result? Would the social fictions 10 27