Confederate Century Nedolog
Today, official America, and not only America, is ready to hang all the dogs for universal dissension precisely on the anarchists. However, the authors are not at all going to give out indulgence to those who are now ready to crush everything and everything. Including the state. However, do not expect any justification, especially moral, regarding the prosecution for ideas, and not for specific crimes.
“We Will Not Let Anarchists Occupy Seattle,” “Anarchists Crave Chaos,” “Anarchists and Trotskyists Beat Again in Greece,” “Michael Pence: We Will Resist Marauders, Rebels and Anarchists,” “Donald Trump: Anarchists were Ultra-Left Maniacs.”
Screaming headlines in the media and harsh statements by politicians do not help to understand why the idea of anarchy is so in demand. Alas, in most cases it is still perceived as permissiveness. But readers will forgive us for the next repetition of the theses from the previous article, the basis of the newly demanded anarchist ideas lies primarily in the priority of lower levels of power in comparison with higher ones.
If this alignment is applied to the highest power level, then a confederal state system should be considered as a legalized form of anarchy. Someone has already managed in connection with recent events to call the United States the country of total anarchism, although here, of course, it was meant completely different.
As you know, in the United States, most laws of individual states have an advantage over federal ones, but fortunately, the founding fathers of the 13 United States did not have enough of this kind of practice to go to the districts. It is by no means possible that then the Civil War, more precisely, many wars in the states at once, could have begun earlier than 80 years after the founding of the state.
Reconciliation with the Confederates, which took nearly a hundred years for supporters of the united United States, can now simply be sent to historical scrap. And the demolition of monuments under the good slogans of the fight against racism still necessarily comes with big problems. And it is unlikely that the United States will at least somehow settle down after the presidential election.
However, already at the time of Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and John Adams, usually the sheriff, and not the mayor, was in his town and the nearest district, as they say, both the king, and god, and the military commander. Even if he himself implicitly obeyed the sheriff and was afraid of a judge or district attorney.
It’s another matter that, on the other side of anarchy, it was most likely not really “false quarantine” that was really demanded, since it was real and very dangerous, it cannot be denied that, in most cases, representatives of the so-called elite, both the power and business, and culturally joined them. We will believe that after a prompt and, hopefully, painless exit from the “anti-crisis seat” in Russia, no new harsh measures will be required.
Of the liberal parties on this occasion, of course, they complain about the law-abiding electorate, competently prepared to sign amendments to the Constitution. But any comparisons of the general Russian public with the inhabitants of countries so dear to the heart of any liberal will clearly not be in their favor. No matter how much they boast of their civilization and tolerance.
However, what else to expect from those who so easily peck at the first bait? A bait that instantly fanned the fire of hatred, and hatred doesn’t matter to whom. In the United States, and after them in Europe, a massive impulse to receive everything without giving anything back, someone very soon took the form of an anti-racist protest.
Western proletariat swallowed the bait right there. And how could it be otherwise with his claims to the status of the middle class and with the complete absence of class consciousness - not anarchist, but Marxist. However, the directors of the color revolution, which unexpectedly happened “not at all there,” seem to be deeply mistaken at the address of their unprincipled electorate. Yes fakenews the truth has long been replaced for him, but he has not completely forgotten how to think.
The Western public now really looks quite manageable, moreover, with completely blurry ideas about social justice and eternal values. Sofa revolutionaries are now unable to perceive even the saint until recently the image of Commander Che. However, they will not be able to stay in a state of "do not know what they are doing."
In his programmatic article of 1906, Anarchism or Socialism, JV Stalin issued an extremely harsh sentence to the ideas of the Marxists ’competitors, who were at that time almost the main ones:
“It’s not a matter of who today the greater or lesser“ mass ”is following, but the essence of the doctrine. If the “doctrine” of the anarchists expresses the truth, then it goes without saying that it will surely pave its way and gather mass around itself. If it is untenable and built on a false basis, it will not last long and will hang in the air. ”
Anarchists, of whom few are known to the general public today, have been trying to refute this Stalinist postulate for more than a hundred years, but it turns out somehow badly. However, in the growing confrontation of “someone against someone”, sooner or later, the contradictions of the “upper and lower classes” will appear, originally indicated by both Marxists and anarchists in party programs.
Is that why an urgent vaccination of anarchy is now needed? And it doesn’t matter in what form, but powerful enough, because it is in demand. The vaccine seems to have already been taken; antidotes have already been launched. By all indications, after the games in the “black redistribution” antagonism can show not only the lower and upper levels, but also the periphery and center. Unless, of course, we consider prosperous Europe and the USA to be the top or center, along with the few that have joined them, or the notorious “golden billion”.
Why the Russian puzzle does not converge
But in fact, Russia now has a rare opportunity to defend, first of all, its moral leadership, which they can call anything from a liberal party. At the moment, the lion's share of our population is frank traditionalists, if you will, even conservatives, which no longer needs confirmation.
The Russian experience of a somewhat anarchist approach to the fight against coronavirus, by all indications, turned out to be very successful, it is possible that due to a combination with extremely harsh concrete measures. In principle, I didn’t even have to fall below the regional levels of power. Moreover, the experience of governor omnipotence, albeit not indisputable, after almost twenty years of scrupulous alignment of the power vertical, is indicative in itself.
Remember that a kind of carte blanche was received in the days of quarantine by many federal departments, and not only by force. It is not entirely clear why the potential of lawmakers of all possible levels was hardly involved. But it cannot be ruled out that the indicative humiliation of Moscow and St. Petersburg liberal city dummies, and through the court, was precisely caused by the need to draw a border where anarchy ends.
Russia, with its electorate slightly more advanced precisely in political terms, has not yet clearly fit into the color (in all senses) protest scenario. She received her vaccination of anarchism, very weak, but she was ready to demand the following. The powerlessness directly related to the lack of money of the local authorities, and the lower the more distinct, it seems, begins to contradict the already elementary common sense. Yes, and the instinct of self-survival, too.
Although it would seem that it was Russia that someone really wanted to prescribe an unscheduled maidan, especially given the tension in a number of peripheral regions. Note - tensions with quite obvious national overtones. But the Russian puzzle somehow does not converge, and it is hoped that it will never converge, because there are still much more unifying values for all the hidden contradictions among the peoples inhabiting our country than there are separating ones.
The bloodless vaccination of anarchism here may also be in demand, already because the situation with the material demarcation and the growing separation of elite clans from the broad masses are fraught with, by all indications, a much greater threat. However, a surprisingly elegant way out of the quarantine deadlock convincingly showed that we also know how to "let off steam" when it is already clearly overbought.
And more about Lenin and “his” cook
In conclusion, let us recall again that true anarchism makes a direct bet precisely on the lower classes — on that very Leninist cook. And Lenin, recalling the cook, hardly relied on the unceremoniously scornful assessments of the common people, which were made by the French enlighteners or German philosophers with their invariable Kinder, Küche, Kirche.
In this sense, the authority for Lenin, along with Marx and Engels, and, perhaps, Plekhanov, was precisely Bakunin and Kropotkin, as well as the founder of Russian populism, Peter Lavrov. And as a real anarchist, Lenin, this leader of the world revolution, was not at all embarrassed and was not afraid of anything in his willingness to rely on the masses.
Bakunin, Kropotkin, Chernyshevsky, Lavrov. Competitors to Marx and Engels?
The great Kropotkin, by the way, met at least twice with Lenin, when he already headed the government of people's commissars. The 75-year-old descendant of the Ruriks, who did not recognize class theory, criticized Lenin. The prince smashed Ilyich not only for the "Red Terror", the Civil War and intolerance of dissidents, but also for the fact that the Bolsheviks are cultivating a new class - the Soviet bureaucracy.
Living in recent years in the provincial Dmitrov, Kropotkin denied Lenin the publication of his collected works, considering the state’s monopoly in the press unacceptable. And this, despite the fee proposed by the leader of the proletariat at that time, for which it was quite possible to move abroad and live there comfortably.
Historians argue that P. Kropotkin was much better in relation to A. Kerensky, at his invitation he even spoke at the State Meeting in August 1917, but categorically refused to join the Provisional Government. The old anarchist told the Minister-Chair that he considered "the craft of the shoe-polisher more honest and useful."
Kropotkin, by the way, was also completely disappointed by many young followers, the very cinema ones whom their "guru" called "rude cheeky young people who took the principle of permissiveness as a basis." Not too inspired by the old man was his acquaintance with the most famous of the anarchist practitioners - Nestor Makhno.
At a meeting with Kropotkin in 1918, the owner of the peasant freemen Gulyai-Polya wanted to ask for advice from someone whom he revered as his teacher, regarding revolutionary activities among Ukrainian peasants. The old prince did not give any advice to Nestor Ivanovich and only lamented that "this issue is associated with great risk ... and only you yourself can solve it."
Nevertheless, there is fairly reliable information that it was Nestor Makhno who kept the Kropotkin family until 1921, when he died, and the "father" escaped from the 1st Horse Army S. Budenny to Romania. It is impossible not to admit that modern anarchism clearly lacks its Kropotkin. But there is a bit too much of a mixed suit there.