The Difference Between Anarchism and White Anarchism
Beginning the quest to properly understand anarchism and build the reading list that will help us grow the movement.
As we move forward in this project it’s going to be absolutely essential that we recognize there is more to anarchism than what Kropotkin, Malatesta, Goldman, and others wrote. The focus on Anarchy as a primarily European school of thought that was launched into the mainstream around the time of the Hay-market Affair1 not only ignores centuries of effective anarchism to learn from, it erases in all honesty, 90% of the good ideas. Primarily, that the beauty of Anarchism lies in its simplicity. The modern mantra of “No Gods, No Masters” coined in the 1880s by Socialist Louis Auguste Blanqui, often directs the conversations around Anarchism as both an atheist and a more post-modern movement; however it’s vital to recognize that anarchism can absolutely have gods, and even a master or two (if you’re all consenting adults, and into that sort of thing, of course). As we’ll discuss later, a great number of anarchist societies throughout history have strong religious ties including (but not limited too) groupings that range from pre-roman Celtic druids, to Native American pueblos of the 3rd-15th century, and most of the pre-colonial communities across Africa and Asia.
Often, you’ll be met either online, or inside your local organization, with a multitude of gross misrepresentations of the Anarchist position, since, as Noam Chomsky correctly states it is the most misunderstood political theory of the modern era. Chomsky’ s “definition” if we want to use the term, is that “anarchism isn't a doctrine. It's at most a historical tendency, a tendency of thought and action, which has many different ways of developing and progressing and which, I would think, will continue as a permanent strand of human history." of which I have come to know as more properly recognizing the fact that the majority of indigenous cultures across North America, Africa, and even East Asian islands are all for all intents and purposes: Anarchism.
For this particular article, let’s dip our toes in the waters of anarchism by way of indigenous cultures of North America and their social organizations, so as to not get so far into the weeds2. This is a marathon - not a sprint afterall, so first, let’s talk a little bit about timelines shall we?
Just How Far Back does Anarchism Go, Really?
If you lean in enough to the idea that people are naturally pretty good and don’t require someone telling them what to do in order to not roam the countryside pillaging and murdering everything, then the short answer is: “All the way.” However, if we’re being honest with ourselves, life has not just been a series of utopian hamlets that ran from 16,000 B.C.E until Adam Smith wrote the Invisible Hand argument.
However, loose familial groupings (and multi-familial groupings) which were organized horizontally with limited leadership for tie-breakers and disputes date back (at least in N. America anyways) to the Clovis period3. In this particular case however, we will most directly point to what is called in Archeology circles as the “Woodland Period” which runs from about 3,000 B.C.E to 1,000 CE. Under this timeline you have a multitude of Native American groups/tribes/clans/families/etc who all operate under what any well meaning white European thinker would consider “Anarchism”. The primary characteristics being that of free association, no centralized governance, and mutual Aid. From the journal Walking Together, First Nations, Metis and Inuit perspectives in Curriculum:
“Traditional First Nations and Inuit social organizations revealed a high degree of cooperation and mutual support because individuals relied on the people around them for all of their needs. Kinship was the glue that maintained the bonds between people. Communities were held together through trust and the closeness of family relationships. A large extended family was necessary in order to perform all the work necessary for day-to-day life, including taking care of shelter, food, transportation, and defense needs. Each branch in a kinship system, such as the bond between an aunt and niece, carried with it particular roles and obligations. These involved responsibilities to share resources, to educate, and to offer mutual support in times of hardship. Such responsibilities ensured that everyone was cared for, because everyone had family. Family ties extended to adopted individuals and their relations. The Blackfoot expression nitohkoikso’kowaiksi, which means “my newly acquired relatives” included such adoptions. Adopted individuals became part of their new family with their own set of roles and responsibilities. Some adoptions did not mean a person would necessarily live with their adopted family. A woman might, for example, adopt a young man who reminded her of a lost son. Other adoptions might occur between important individuals in different First Nations. These kinds of adoptions forged bonds between different groups. Because of these ties and their obligations, kinship bonds helped make political and trading alliances between nations. The primary living group of most First Nations varied with the season. People living in the area now called Alberta, for example, usually lived in extended family groups during the winter and larger groups at certain points during the summer. Group size was not based on a specific number or family size limit, but instead on the practical requirements of the people. Groups had to be big enough to provide for themselves, but not so big that they had to struggle…
…Among nations of the Blackfoot Confederacy, the basic social unit was traditionally the clan. The Blackfoot clan was similar in size and function to the Cree extended family. A clan was generally made up of a chief, his brothers and parents, and others who were not necessarily related. Clan memberships were flexible and individuals were free to join other clans. During hard times, a clan could split up and join with other clans. Among the Piikani, such living groups could include 80 to 240 people, depending on the season.”
The idea that anarchist communes exist only in the utopian minds of people like Kropotkin or Berkman, blatantly ignores that those basic principles have been the default state for people since the beginning of agrarian society. For additional insights (if you can work past the dated language) Check out the article by A.A Goldenweiser4 in which he goes on to explain in great detail the organizational structures of multiple first nations peoples including those of the southwest who derived from the Chaco Canyon groupings. Groups like those of the Tanoan language speakers5 are well known in central New Mexico for the various ruins left behind along the mountain ranges here. Current archeological data suggests each of these “tribes” was a loose affiliated organization which only coalesced once the Spanish came through and conquered much of the area in the 16th and 17th centuries (Google: Salinas Pueblo Missions).
So What? What Does All That Mean?
Well first and foremost, if you’re the type of person who logs into twitter to yell “read theory” under every mildly inaccurate hot take, you may want to reconsider whether the theory you’re reading is giving you a robust enough picture to do more than simply armchair quarterback an anarchist movement. What it also means is there is A LOT more you could be reading besides the 19th century equivalent of a crust-punk. What you ask? Well, here’s a few things:
The World Until Yesterday - Jared Diamond
An observation of societies that have avoided modernization in Papua New Guinea with some comparative thoughts on the benefits of modern society vs older ones. — A good read if you keep your mind towards a critical analysis of how things can be synthesized.
Black Flags and Windmills - Scott Crow
Scott Crow grew up in Chicago and benefited from the BPP/YPO breakfast programs, as such it built a lifelong connection to anarchism. When Katrina hit New Orleans and the government abandoned the people there, he and a few others went to help how they could. The book covers the lessons learned from a spontaneous multi-racial anarchist movement that was born out of the need to survive. — While Scott also is a white guy, and the focus of this post has thus far been to read non-white guys, this and the following text are good because they don’t necessarily center around him, but rather the minority voices he speaks too and learns from.
Emergency Hearts, Molotov Dreams - Scott Crow
The book is a number of musings and conversations about anarchism. The true value coming in a section towards the end with about 10 or so pages worth of recommendations on books, websites, and other utilities a lot of which focus on the Black Panther Party, Women, and non-white Anarchists and their writings.
Every Cook Can Govern - C.L.R James
In this short piece on a Study of Athenian Democracy and it’s application to the modern world, James does an excellent job in breaking down the good and the bad of Greek society and making note of the types of bad faith attacks you should expect to find from people who don’t want a horizontally organized community.
What About That ONE Anarchist website?
Personally, I find the Anarchist Library6 a minefield of garbage to be waded through on your way to the few pearls of wisdom you may find. I am fully aware that my work is likely no different, but rather because I am but a man who can’t help but crave a small modicum of worthless internet fame, I too must write unyielding drivel onto the web. That being said, my primary problem with it is actually related to the initial points of this article. It’s heavily focused on European Anarchists, and everything “original” is simply a derivation of those ideologies. There just isn’t a whole lot of non-white, non-armchair-QBing, to be had. Anarchism after-all, is an action, not a theory. It isn’t something you debate the merits of, but rather something you live and do. Think of it like the Tao, but with less “meditation” and more “throwing rocks at cop cars from your front yard micro farm”.
Remember, theory is the thing you do AFTER the revolution, when you have have free time and you’re sitting around sipping fresh brewed tea from your herb garden and not slaving away in a Walmart somewhere. Theory while it has the potential to be a driving force towards radical change, only does so if those who do the readings, act on their new-found information. As the great Chairman Fred Hampton said: “Theory is cool, but theory with no practice ain’t shit.”
So, my hope in you reading this piece is that as you read through the others, you’ll consider not jumping out to complain about how unrealistic of a pipe-dream my proposition is, but rather realize that it’s already been done. And not just once, but many, many, times. All we need to do is get back to basics and build from the already existing foundations.
-EQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair
While I recognize Anarchism has “had some legs” prior to this moment, it has largely existed outside of a few cases a fringe theory amongst white academics and writers. So understanding that it pops up in popularity whenever a large working class struggle is being violently stamped out by the system, is important to the discussion we’ll have later about how to take the movement forward.
If I am being entirely transparent, I know only a small bit about Pan-African Anarchism which I learned about while living in Alabama from a couple of local anarchists and community organizers. If you want to support black anarchism please head to FB and send some money to the Dynamite Hill Land Trust. Majadi is magnificent human and absolutely deserving of your money. https://www.facebook.com/dynamitehillclt/
Named after the spear points found near Clovis, NM archeology data suggests a lifestyle not that much different than your typical mid-16th century plains indigenous tribal organization. The main shift being the hunting of Bison over Mammoths. Googling “Clovis Man” can net you a ton of information.
The Social Organization of the Indians of North America Author(s): A. A. Goldenweiser Source: The Journal of American Folklore , Oct. - Dec., 1914, Vol. 27, No. 106 (Oct. - Dec., 1914), pp. 411-436 Published by: American Folklore Society
Tanoan/təˈnoʊ.ən/, also Kiowa–Tanoan or Tanoan–Kiowa, is a family of languages spoken by indigenous peoples in present-day New Mexico, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.
Most of the languages – Tiwa (Taos, Picuris, Southern Tiwa), Tewa, and Towa – are spoken in the Native American Pueblos of New Mexico (with one outlier in Arizona). These were the first languages collectively given the name of Tanoan. Kiowa, which is a related language, is now spoken mostly in southwestern Oklahoma. The Kiowa historically inhabited areas of modern-day Texas and Oklahoma.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/listing