Marxism v Anarchism We have been pleased to see that a number of anarchists and others have replied to Phil Hearse's article on Anarchism in our last issue. The issues are important, and discussion will continue in these pages, leading up to a public debate which will take place in London in May - see our website for details. What do YOU think? We welcome readers' letters and comments, which should be no longer than 400 words. Phil Hearse (SRI3), in his article Marxism or Anarchism? promotes the former at the expense of the latter, but unfortunately neglects an important argument against This arose from the events during the First Workingman's International (IWMA 1864-80). Karl Marx had expertly analysed the nature of capitalism, but his alternative was unacceptable - early Anarchists characterised them as authoritarian as opposed to their In the IWMA, Marx had formed a working union leaders and easily saw off the illnated the institution. But Mikhail Bakunin, who accepted Marx's economic analysis, was a different matter and his more libertarian politics were more acceptable to the European workers. Hence, his support grew and from 1869 seriously challenged the Marxist dominance. The response of Marx in 1872 was, as predicted, authoritarian. Firstly, he used a number of unconstitutional measures to restrict Anarchist representation on IWMA central organisation. Next, a manoeuvre of which Stalin would have been proud - Bakunin's ex-associate had, without the Russian's knowledge, sent a threatening letter to a printer, and Marx used this to get the libertarian leader There were also allegations of 'secret organisations" though Marxist and Bakuninist organisations were pret Bakunin firmed up his analysis and predicted that a successful Marxist revolutionary party would quickly become a 'red bureaucracy' as repressive as the overthrown regime - 'such a dictatorship would be enough of itself to kill the revolution and distort all popular His political critique of the Marxist revolutionary party was as perceptive, accurate and relevant as was Marx's economic analysis of capitalism. Nearly all Anarchists do believe in organisation. To avoid the dangers of centralism as evidenced above
they favour a federation of institutions within Federations, in view of the subsequent experirevolutionary parties, would appear to make sense Marx's formulation was authoritarian - the Marxist Leninist parties have inevitably declined to this pattern -socialists should build the working class organisations first and the revolutionary part second - federal structure is a rec ommended defence against over centraliCouncil socialism requires a revolutionary party which complements but does not dominate the labour move ment, guiding, advising, educating and leading by conThe aim would be a society of federated structures of co-operatives run by associations of free labour, and international unity rather than nationalism and war. .. ..