11. THE VIOLENCE QUESTION
Anarchism is opposed to any interference with your liberty, be it
by force and violence or by any other means ... But if someone
attacks you, then it is he who is invading you, he who is employing
violence against you. You have a right [and a duty] to defend
yourself ...
To achieve its purpose, the revolution must be imbued
with and directed by the anarchist spirit and ideas. The end shapes
the means, just as the tool you use must be fit to do the work you
want to accomplish ... Revolutionary defence excludes all acts of
coercion, of persecution and revenge. It is concerned only with
repelling attack and depriving the enemy of the opportunity to invade
you ...
[The strength of the revolution] consists in the
support of the people, in the devotion of the agricultural and rural
masses ... Let them believe in the revolution and they will defend it
to the death ... The armed workers and peasants are the only
effective defence of the revolution. By means of their unions and
syndicates they must always be on guard against counter-revolutionary
attack ... the active interest of the masses, their autonomy and
self-determination are the best guarantee of success ...
Let them [counter-revolutionaries] talk as they like ..
To suppress speech and press is ... a theoretic blow offence against
liberty [and] a direct blow at the very foundations of the revolution
... [While forcible attack will be actively resisted] the revolution
must be big enough to welcome even the severest criticism, and profit
by it if it is justified...
Alexander Berkman, "Defence of the Revolution", in
his ABC of Anarchism, various editions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION
1. There are three basic positions which can be adopted on the
"violence question"-pacifism, terrorism or defensive violence
<1> .
1. PACIFISM
2. With regret we have to dismiss pacifism as being hopelessly
unrealistic.
2.1. Restricting a struggle to pacifism or non-violent direct
action in a campaign or strike can in some circumstances seriously
undermine that struggle. We are against the adoption of such tactics
as an absolute principle, although obviously it may be tactically
wise to rely on peaceful methods of protest in certain situations.
2.2. Violence will also be an inevitable part of a revolution as
the ruling class will not give up its power or wealth without a
bloody struggle. To refuse to prepare to meet this contingency with
counter-violence, or to rely on pricking the conscience of the
oppressor to prevent bloodshed in such a situation, is a recipe for
the massacre of the working-class and poor.
2. ARMED STRUGGLE AND "TERRORISM"
3. We reject the tactics of armed struggle and "terrorism".
3.1. This approach relies on the military actions of an armed
vanguard to free the working class and poor (or other oppressed
groups, e.g. national minorities). It is thus substitutionist to the
core in that it substitutes the activity of a small group for the
actions of the toiling masses as a whole. It is clearly therefore
elitist and sows the seeds for a new elite to take power over the
heads of the workers and the poor in the event of the armed struggle
succeeding. In fact, this tactic readily degenerates into
authoritarianism even prior to the actual seizure of power as the
armed vanguard is not accountable to the working people and is
instead controlled by a typically unelected central circle of
leaders. In this model the masses are reduced to a passive role ,
acting at most as the providers of logistical support to the
guerrillas. Even if sizeable popular support can be won for the armed
struggle, this fact remains. Such a tactic is clearly at odds with
Anarchism which involves the masses in self-managed action to
establish an anti-authoritarian socialist society.
3.2. Generally speaking, the tactic of armed struggle is a
relatively ineffective one. This is particularly true where the armed
struggle is urban based (and thus almost never unable to consolidate
"liberated" territories) , but it also holds in the case of rural
ly-focussed struggles. The murder of individuals in no way weakens
the system. Bosses, police and so on are all easily replaceable. So
are powerlines and other facilities. The military power which
clandestine guerrilla forces can mobilise is typically minimal
compared to the full power of the State. As Anarchists we realise
that under capitalism and the State the strength of the masses lies
primarily in their economic power - their ability to struggle at the
point of production- yet the tactic of armed struggle relegates the
workplace struggle to a secondary role (if any at all). Even in
conditions of harsh political repression, underground activity should
prioritise workplace organising over the formation of a guerrilla
army.
3.3. Although the intention of those engaging in armed struggle is
often to secure freedom for the oppressed, the actual effect may be
quite different. Typically, armed struggle puts the lives of working
people at risk which provides the State with an excuse (and, often,
the popular support) needed to introduce more repressive measures. We
also do not support the tactic of small groups provoking a violent
response from the State in order to "radicalise" the majority. In
fact, this is often used by the State to victimise activists and
intimidate those involved.
4. This is not to say that we deny the sincerity of those who take
up the gun in an attempt to change society, merely that their method
is a wrong one. However, while we do not advocate armed struggle, we
defend those who participate in it from repression, reactionary
attacks and criticism. we never side with the State against such
groups. The real problem is not the gunmen, the primary
responsibility lies with the system which leads people to resist in
such a manner.
3. OUR POSITION: SELF-DEFENSIVE VIOLENCE
5. Our position is to accept the need for self-defensive violence.
5.1. Short of revolution, there are many occasions on which the
State uses violence to break the collective power of the working
class and poor. For example, attacking picket lines and
demonstrations, victimising, arresting and even murdering activists.
We always support those who are victimised and defend them against
State repression.
5.2. On occasions, demonstrations or strikes can turn to violence.
We recognise that this is an inevitable feature of large-scale
resistance to the bosses and rulers. In such cases where violence is
inevitable, we argue for the creation of self-managed defence squads
under democratic mass control.
5.3. Violence sometimes also takes place in smaller situations due
to the necessity of intimidating scabs or due to frustration. In such
cases, we defend those involved from State repression. Where such
manifestations can only damage the struggle, we argue against the use
of violent tactics. In cases where their use is correct we argue for
the greatest possible democratic control of their use and
implementation.
5.4. We do not glorify or encourage random attacks in members of
the ruling class. Attacks on individuals and their property may well
demonstrate an ineffective expression of legitimate anger but the
function of Anarchists is to argue for collective action by the
working class. These tactics may make individuals in the ruling class
uncomfortable but they do not undermine the ability of this class to
rule. Obviously we defend those who show their anger in this way, but
we also argue that such energy is better directed at mobilising and
politicising the working class.
5.5. Revolution should be as bloodless as possible. As we
mentioned above, violence becomes inevitable as the ruling class will
not give up its power and wealth without a bloody struggle. Our
violence will be in defence of the gains of the revolution. We will
work to minimise the violence by winning the State armed forces to
the side of the workers and the peasants. The defence of the
revolution will be organised through an internally democratic workers
militia under the control of the trade unions and other working class
and working peasant structures of self-management. The need for such
violence will be almost universally understood.
NOTES
<1>. Some of these issues are dealt with in greater depth in
the pamphlet You Can't Blow Up a Social relationship: the Anarchist
Case Against Terrorism. anonymous Australian comrades. Jura books.
This page hosted by 
Get your own
Free Home Page
Go to the
CapitolHill GeoPage