Anarchist Politics & Direct Action Rob Sparrow 1997 Contents TwodangersinAnarchistPoliticalPractice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 AnarchismandtheState. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 AnarchismandEndsandMeans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 DirectAction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 TwoImportantDistinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Someconsequences 10 Anarchistsandthepolice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 AnarchistsandtheMedia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Afinalnote. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2 ThispaperdiscussesDirectAction—thepropermethodofanarchistactivistaction.InitItry to consider some theoretical issues that we don’t usually get a chance to discuss in the midst ofpoliticalcampaigns.Someoftheissuesraisedwillbe,theroleofanarchistsinotherpolitical movements, the difference between direct action and symbolic action, the various traditional typesofdirectactionandtheproperattitudeofactiviststowardsthepoliceandthemedia. 3 “Direct Action” is the distinctive contribution of anarchists in the realm of political method. While reformists advocate the ballot box, liberals have their lobbying and their letter writing, bureaucrats have their work through “the proper channels” and socialists have their vanguard parties, we anarchists have direct action. Political tendencies other than anarchism may adopt directactionasamethodbutitshistoricaloriginsanditsmostvigorousproponentsareanarchist. Becausedirectactionisapoliticalmethod,beforewecanproperlyunderstanditanditsplacein anarchistpracticewemustfirstexaminethenatureofanarchistpoliticalactivity. Ideally,anarchistpoliticalactivitypromotesanarchismandattemptstocreateanarchy.Itseeks to establish a society without capitalism,patriarchy or State, where people govern themselves democraticallywithoutdominationorhierarchy.AsIhavearguedelsewhere,thisisanactivity which is inescapably revolutionary in nature and which is best carried out collectively in an organisationdedicatedtothatpurpose.Whileanarchistsremainwithoutapoliticalorganisation of their own, the main avenue for promoting anarchism is to participate in, contribute to and provideleadershipinotherpoliticalmovements.Ourobjectiveinparticipatinginotherpolitical movements and campaigns should be to show that anarchist methods and ways of organising work.Thebestadvertisementforanarchismistheintelligenceofthecontributionsofouractivists andthesuccessofourmethods.Anarchistsshouldstrivetoprovidelivingexamplesofanarchy inaction.Aswewillsee,directactionisoneofthebestpossiblewaysofdoingthis. Two dangers in Anarchist Political Practice BeforeIgoon,Iwanttohighlightheretwoproblemswhichmayoccurwithanarchistpolitical activity which both stem from a tendency to be utopian in our political demands. Anarchists are often utopian in their rejection of any political activity oriented towards the state and in their failureto establish a realisticconnection between their ends and their means. This sort of utopianismisnotavirtuebutinsteadcontributestoanarchism’scontinuingpoliticalirrelevance tothemajorityofAustralians. Anarchism and the State. Inacapitalisteconomytheactivitiesof“privateenterprise”arerigorouslyexcludedfrompublic scrutinyandcontrol.Wehavenoinputintothedecisionsaboutproductionandinvestmentwhich determinethebasicconditionsofourexistenceandwhicharemadeincorporateboardrooms.In manycases,ifwedon’tlikewhatweseehappeningaroundus,theonlyoptionopentousistotry to change government policy. Thus most forms of politics today are oriented towards the state. Most obviously, electoral politics seeks to determine the identity of those few individuals who supposedly“control”thestate.Mostformsof“politicalprotest”alsohopetoinduce,ortoforce, thestatetotakesomeactiontoaddresstheprotesters’concerns.Yetanarchismislargelydefined by its rejection of the state as a mode of organising to meet social needs and anarchists have traditionally—andrightly—beenextremelysuspiciousofanysuggestionthatwecansucceed inusingthestatetoserveourends.Itmaythereforebetemptingforanarchiststoproffer“social revolution”asthesolutiontoallproblems. Anarchists may argue that the problems that people face are the results of an insane social and economic order and that only a revolution and consequent creation of anarchy will solve 4 them.Butpeoplehaveproblemsandfacedifficultieshereandnowwhichneedtobeaddressed and they cannot wait for the revolution to solve them. Thus in rejecting attempts to force the statetoaddressourneedsorserveourpoliticalendswemustofferrealisticalternativemethods ofachievingourgoals,ifwearetoberelevanttothestrugglesofpeopletoday.Sometimesthis may be possible. Sometimes we can organise together, without relying on the state, to address andsolveourproblemshereandnow.Asweshallseebelow,thisistheessenceof“directaction”. Often,however,itwon’tbepossibletoprovidegenuinesolutionstopeople’sproblems,within theexistingorder,withoutrecoursetothestate.Whetherwelikeitornotcertainsocialneedsare, in current circumstances, only going to be addressed by the state. Access to medical resources, securehousing,educationalqualificationsorincomesupportareformostpeopleonlygoingto beavailableastheresultofstateaction.Relationsbetweenthesexesarealsoanotherareawhere the state seems to be the only plausible existing instrument of social policy. Domestic violence protectionordersandstatefundedrefugesmaynotbemuchofasolutiontotheproblemscreated byviolentorabusivepartnersbutforsomewomentheyareallthereis.Formanywomentheyare anecessarystepontheroadtoescapingacycleofabuse.Thesocietywideeducationcampaigns which are necessary to challenge sexist attitudes likewise can only be carried out with state support. Until anarchists constitute a sizeable portion of the community and are capable of providing these services — or alternatives — themselves, activists concerned about these issues will be justifiedinturningtothestateforhelpinaddressingthem. Furthermore,legislationbythestatecanrepresentarealpoliticalvictory.Thismaybebecause thepassingoflegislationacknowledgesandgivesweighttochangeswhichhavealreadyoccurred in the political consciousness of society at large or it may be because the legislation actually makes a real difference to the living conditions of ordinary people. Legislation guaranteeing a minimumwage,publichealth-care,healthandsafetystandardsatworkoradecentstandardof livingforthoseexcludedfromworkrepresentsagenuinepoliticalvictoryforthemajorityover the ruling class. Not only do such state provided services make a vast difference in the quality oflifeofthosewhootherwisewouldhavenoorlittleaccesstothembuttheyalsodramatically increasethepossibilityofpoliticalaction.Thelesstimepeoplehavetospendstrugglingtomeet theirbasicneeds,themoretimetheyhavetocriticiseandchallengetheexistingorder. Thetraditionalanarchisthostilitytowardsthestatethenshouldbetemperedbytherecognition that,whileitcontinuestoexist,itisanimportantsiteofclassstruggle.Ifwerejectattemptsto exertpressureonthestatewemayrenderourselvesirrelevanttotherealneedsoflargeelements insociety.Callingonlyforrevolutionisnotgoingtointerestanyonewhoneedsrealchangenow. Anarchistsmustprovideworkablesolutionsforpeoplehereandnow.Sometimesthiswillinvolve recoursetothestate. Anarchism and Ends and Means. Oneofanarchism’shistoricalstrengthshasbeenitsinsistenceontheconnectionbetweenends andmeans.Anarchistshaveinsistedthatlibertarianoutcomeswillnotresultfromauthoritarian meansand,moregenerally,havebeensensitivetowardsthewaysinwhichcompromisesmade in the realm of political methods may corrupt us or infect our goals. Sometimes, however, this has lead to an over simplistic equation betweens our means and our ends. Anarchistsoften fail 5 to address properly the political question of how our methods relate to our goals. An example of this is the pacifist claim “If everyone refused to fight there would be no wars” Now this is clearly true, in fact tautologically so. But pacifism does not follow from this truism. It does not followthatthebestwaytopreventwarsistomakeanindividualcommitmenttorefusetofight inthem.Theconnectionbetweenouractionsandthegoalofpeacefulworldisapolitical one.It is political because it involves the workings of the whole set of power and economic relations whichstructureoursocialandpersonaldecisionmaking.Forouractivitiestohavetheirintended effect they must be taken up by others and whether or not this will take place will depend on a whole set of political and economic factors. It is not at all clear that our refusing to fight will causesufficientnumbersofotherstodosoandthusmakewarimpossible(infact,thisjustseems wildlyimplausible).Thebestwaytopreventwarsmaybetoaddressthesocialsystemsandthe injusticeswhichcausethem.Itmayeveninvolvefighting. Moregenerallythen,forourmeanstobesuitabletotheendsweseekwemustbeabletotella realisticstoryaboutexactlyhowouractivitieswillbringourendsabout.Thisstorywillhaveto takeaccountoftheeconomicandpoliticalrealitieswhichaffectourlives.Itisoftennotrealistic tobelievethateveryoneelsearounduswillimmediatelyfollowourexample. Thebestformsofanarchistpoliticsavoidthesetwoformsofdangerousutopianismandoffer peoplegenuinehopeandoccasionalsuccessintheirstruggleforabetterworld.Directactionis acrucialcomponentofsuchapolitics. Direct Action. Thedistinguishingfeatureofdirectactionisthatitaimstoachieveourgoalsthroughourown activityratherthanthroughtheactionsofothers.Directactionseekstoexertpowerdirectlyover affairs and situations which concern us. Thus it is about people taking power for themselves. In this it is distinguished from most other forms of political action such as voting, lobbying, attemptingtoexertpoliticalpressurethoughindustrialactionorthroughthemedia.Allofthese activities aim to get others to achieve our goals for us. Such forms of actions operate on a tacit acceptance of our own powerlessness. They concede that we ourselves have neither the right northepowertoaffectchange.Suchformsofactionarethereforeimplicitlyconservative.They concede the authority of existing institutions and work to prevent us from acting ourselves to changethestatusquo. Directactionrepudiatessuchacceptanceoftheexistingorderandsuggeststhatwehaveboth therightandthepowertochangetheworld.Itdemonstratesthisbydoingit.Examplesofdirect actionincludeblockades,pickets,sabotage,squatting,treespiking,lockouts,occupations,rolling strikes, slow downs, the revolutionary general strike. In the community it involves, amongst other things, establishing our own organisations such as food co-ops and community access radioandtvtoprovideforoursocialneeds,blockingthefreewaydevelopmentswhichdivideand poisonourcommunitiesandtakingandsquattingthehousesthatweneedtolivein.Intheforests, directactioninterposesourbodies,ourwillandouringenuitybetweenwildernessandthosewho woulddestroyitandactsagainsttheprofitsoftheorganisationswhichdirecttheexploitationof natureandagainstthoseorganisationsthemselves.Inindustryandintheworkplacedirectaction aimseithertoextendworkerscontrolortodirectlyattacktheprofitsoftheemployers.Sabotage and “go slows” are time-honoured and popular techniques to deny employers the profits from 6 theirexploitationoftheirwage-slaves.Rollingand“wildcat”strikesareformsofopenindustrial struggle which strike directly at the profitsof the employers.However,industrial action which is undertaken merely as a tactic as part of negotiations to win wage or other concessions from anemployerisnotanexampleofdirectaction. As the examples of direct action in the community above suggest, there is more to direct action than responding to injustices or threats by the state. Direct action is not only a method of protest but also a way of “building the future now”. Any situation where people organise to extend control over their own circumstances without recourse to capital or state constitutes directaction.“Doingitourselves”istheessenceofdirectactionanditdoesnotmatterwhether whatwearedoingisresistinginjusticeorattemptingtocreateabetterworldnowbyorganising tomeetourownsocialneeds.Directactionofthissort,becauseitisself-directedratherthana response to theactivities ofcapital or state,offers far moreopportunities forcontinuing action andalsoforsuccess.Wecandefineourowngoalsandachievethemthroughourownefforts. One of the most important aspects of direct action is the organisation involved in order for it to be successful. By organising to achieve our goals ourselves we learn valuable skills and discoverthatorganisationwithouthierarchyispossible.Whereitsucceeds,directactionshows that people can control their own lives — in effect, that anarchy is possible. We can see here that direct action and anarchist organisation are in fact two sides of the same coin. When we demonstratethesuccessofonewedemonstratetherealityoftheother. Two Important Distinctions Directactionmustbedistinguishedfromsymbolicactions.Directactionisboltingagaterather thantyingayellowribbonaroundit.Itspurposeistoexercisepowerandcontroloverourown livesratherthanmerelyportraythesemblanceofit.Thisdistinguishesitfrommanyformsofac- tion,forexample“bannerdrops”suchasthoseoftenengagedinbyGreenpeace,thatlookmilitant but,inmyopinion,aren’t.Theseactionsdonotdirectlyattacktheinjusticestheyhighlight,but instead seek to influence the public and politicians through the media. Any action directed pri- marilytowardsthemediaconcedesthatothers,ratherthanourselves,havethepowertochange things. Direct action must also be distinguished from moral action. It is not moral protest. By moral protestImeanprotestwhichisjustifiedbyreferencetothemoralrelationtosomeinstitutionor injusticethatitdemonstrates.Moralprotestusuallytakestheformofaboycottofaproductor refusal to participate in some institution. Such actions seek to avoid our complicity in the evils for which existing institutions are responsible. No doubt this is morally admirable. But unless theseactionsthemselveshavesomeperceivableeffectontheinstitutionswhichtheytarget,they do not constitute direct action. Direct action must have some immediate affect to demonstrate that we can exert power. It should not rely entirely on others taking up our example. Our own action should have such an affect that we can point it out to others as an example of how they can change — and not just protest — those things which concern them. Boycotts, for instance, thereforearenot examplesofdirectaction.Ifonlythosewhoorganiseaboycottparticipateinit, itwillalmostinvariablybeineffective. Ofcourse,thesedistinctionsareoverdrawn.Anyactionatallinvolvessomeexerciseofpower. By acting at all, in any way, we overcome our passivity and deny that we are helpless to affect 7 change.Anyactionshortofrevolutionistosomeextentbothmoralandsymbolic.Capital,patri- archy and state have the power to undo all our efforts short of revolution. Any form of protest can be effectively prevented if the state is willing to employ the full range of its resources for authoritarianrepressionandcontrol.Theonlyformof“directaction”whichcannotbecontained by the state is popular revolution. This is the ultimate direct action that anarchists should aim for,whenallpeopleorganisetodestroytheexistingorderandcooperatetorunsocietywithout capitalism,patriarchyorauthority. Implications. Sogiventhatanyactionwillbelessthanideal,howshouldweassesspotentialdirectactions? Iwouldsuggestthatpossibledirectactionsshouldbeassessedbothasexamplesofdirectaction asdescribedhereandagainstthebroadercriteriaforanarchistactionssetoutabove.Thatis,of anyactionweshouldask: 1. towhatextentdoesouractionaffirmourownpowerandrighttouseit? 2. does it advance the theory and practice of anarchy and, in particular, will it build the an- archistmovement? Some further questions we can ask ourselves to help determine the answers to these are as follows.Firstly,willitdrawothersin?Isitthesortofactivitywhichencouragesotherpeopleto become interested and involved? Actions which necessitate a high degree of detailed organisa- tionorsecrecyareunlikelytoscorehighlyagainstthiscriterion.Willitsucceedinachievingits defined objectives? For instance, will a blockade actually stop work on a site for some period? Successful actions are the best advertisement for anarchist methods. Are the politics of the ac- tion obvious or at least clearly conveyed to those who witness it? If the targets of our actions relate only obliquely to the issue which they are intended to address or the goals of our activi- tiesuncleartothosenot“intheknow”thenweareunlikelytoconvinceothersoftherelevancy of anarchism. For this reason we must always be conscious of the messages which our activi- ties convey to other people and try to ensure that this is the most appropriate possible. What consequenceswillresultfromtheactionforthoseinvolvedinit?Actionswhichinvolveahigh riskofpolicebeatingorofarrestwithconsequentheavyfinesorimprisonmentmayreducethe willingness or capacity of those affected to engage in further political activities, if any of these things occur. Very few people are radicalised by being hurt by the police, most are just scared. Oftenthehoursspentdealingwithlegalhasslesformonthsafteranarrestcouldhavebeenmore productively spent in other political activity, if the arrest was not necessary. Finally, how will theactiontransformtheconsciousnessofthoseinvolvedinit?Weshouldaimtoengageinactiv- itieswhichestablishwithinusanincreasedawarenessofradicalsocialandpoliticalpossibilities, broadenourbaseofskillsandleaveusconfidentandempowered.Sometimesactionsmayhave other,lesswelcome,effectsonthepsychologyofthoseinvolved.Unsuccessfulactionsmayleave us feeling disempowered and embittered. Actions which involve a high degree of aggression, confrontation or potential violence may breed hostility and aggression within us which might hamperourabilitytoworkproductivelyinotherpoliticalcircumstances. 8 Byassessingourpoliticalactivitiesagainstthesecriteriaandaskingthesequestionsandothers likethem,Ibelievethatwecanensurethatouractionshavethegreatestchanceofachievingour goalsandthusdemonstratethesuperiorityofanarchistmethodsofpoliticalaction. 9 Some consequences