"another World Is Possible"

Interesting article in the current issue of AdBusters magazine that uses the anarchist inspired Spanish Revolution of the thirties to support its case that an alternative to capitalism is possible.

https://www.adbusters.org/magazine/1...-possible.html

With the upcoming release of Paul Mason's book "Post-Capitalism", do you agree with the article's thesis? Do you agree that there is an alternative to the dominant system? Or do you subscribe to Margaret Thatcher's TINA (There Is No Alternative)? Anyway, here's the AdBusters article in its entirety:

"The Spanish Civil War that occurred between 1936-1939 is always remembered as the fight between the Republicans and Franco’s nationalist semi-fascist forces. However, the war was marked by another, extraordinary event; in 1936, the year of the outbreak of the civil war, the world witnessed the first glimpses of an anarchist revolution. Sam Dolgoff, an American anarcho-syndicalist, stated that the Spanish Revolution “came closer to realizing the ideal of the free stateless society on a vast scale than any other revolution in history.”

The revolution was led by the CNT (Confederación Nacional del Trabajo), a confederation of anarchist and anarcho-syndicalist trade unions. A significant part of Spain’s economy was collectivized and put under direct worker’s control. In Catalonia, workers controlled more than 75% of the economy. We should not imagine Soviet-style forced collectivization, but, as Sam Dogloff said, “a genuine grass roots functional libertarian democracy, where each individual participated directly in the revolutionary reorganization of social life”. George Orwell, who has served as a combatant for the CNT, was able to document the revolution as a first-hand observer. Two short passages from his Homage to Catalonia, published in 1938, illustrate superbly the spirit of the revolution: “here was a belief in the revolution and the future, a feeling of having suddenly emerged into an era of equality and freedom. Human beings were trying to behave as human beings and not as cogs in the capitalist machine,” and “many of the normal motives of civilized life—snobbishness, money-grubbing, fear of the boss, etc.—had simply ceased to exist. The ordinary class-division of society had disappeared to an extent that is almost unthinkable in the money-tainted air of England; there was no one there except the peasants and ourselves and no one owned anyone else as his master.”

Unfortunately, the Spanish anarchist utopia did not last long. The anarchists were crushed by a temporary alliance between all other political parties (including the Communists and the Socialists) and the brief—but real—experience of an anarchist society faded away.

However, an important lesson can be drawn from the anarchist utopia of 1936: another world is possible (which is also the slogan of the World Social Forum). Before discussing anarchism’s possible role in the resistance to the capitalist world order, let’s shortly retrace last century’s main stages of the capitalist system’s consolidation: elites have won the long-lasting struggle against the working class; this was achieved firstly by granting workers some benefits after World War II, notably through the implementation of welfare systems in the West, then by fragmenting them with the increase in specialization of labor and the growth of the service industry during the post-Fordist period and finally by assessing the knockout blow through neoliberal policies, which erased hard-fought social and economic rights, diminished trade unions’ bargaining power and weakened their influence.

The libertarian revolutions of 1968 have also ended up in disappointment. Hopes brought by the “New Left” political movement that emerged from the demands of students, activists and workers, came to a close when economic powers and politics colluded in the 80s, removing the last glimmers of hope that change could happen from within the current political system. The 1980s also marked the beginning of the neoliberal era (deregulation of the financial system, erosion of welfare states, privatization programs, financial crises, cuts to public spending).

Finally, the fall of the Berlin Wall represented the end of the last bastion of ideological resistance against capitalism: communism. Fukuyama’s The End of History and the Last Man main thesis was emblematic in the representation of the world we faced and still face today: the triumph of liberal democracy and capitalism marked the end point of mankind’s ideological and political evolution.

We live in a historically specific cultural paradigm, shaped during the course of the last century through mass media, popular culture and advertising, which converged together and formed our consumer culture and in an economic and political system structured to serve the interests of a small elite. In this scenario, anarchist thought has a dual function of resistance: as a challenge to the neoliberal ideology, and as a possible concrete utopia that can guide us in the construction of a valid alternative social order.

The most accessible ground for us, “the 99%,” through which a radical change can be achieved, is that of ideas. No economic or political revolution can bring genuine change without, stated Serge Latouche, an advocator of the degrowth movement, “the decolonization of our minds” from the ideological framework we find ourselves in. Anarchism challenges the ideas, the dehistoricized and naturalized assumptions, and the taken-for-granted norms of today’s society. In an anarchist society, solidarity would replace individualism; mutual aid would prevail on competition; altruism on egoism; spirituality on materialism; the local on the global. Changing the current global framework of rules first necessitates an individual ideological liberation that can only come through self-awareness. To free our body we must first free our mind." -- — Tommaso Segantini, Brussels, Belgium

Interestingly enough, in that same issue of AdBusters a different article mentions that purportedly in Rojava today a similar anarchist inspired social experiment is being implemented by the PKK and others and is supposedly inspired by the ideas of the late anarchist Murray Bookchin:

"Rojava, in northern Syria, a Kurdish region straddling the southern Turkish border, is now a remarkable experiment of Bookchin inspired autonomous democratic confederalism. In the area's major urban areas-Aleppo, Kobane and Qamishli-popular assemblies and secular grassroots councils call the shots.....Put into practice, Kurdish self-government today has three central planks: the establishment of communes, the assurance of equal participation in all areas of decision-making for all faith and ethnic groups, and the strengthening of the position of women. Communes sort out everyday administration, provide electricity provision and infrastructure, advise on nutrition and liaise around ecological concerns. There are communal cooperatives, too, like bakeries and sewing workshops, like agricultural projects. Delegates from village and neighborhood communes form the basis of bigger city councils, and city councils are made up of representatives from all communes. There aren't any law courts either, but 'peace and consensus committees,' which try to resolve legal issues in novel, consensus-finding ways." Out of Shadows by Andy Merrifield

If we are heading into a post-capitalist society, or if at least progress is an on-going factor in the world, could this form of democratic self-organizing be a possible vision of future society? Or do you accept Fukuyama's premise that we are already at the "end of history" and the most we'll likely ever see is some reformation to an ongoing system?

 

It's all hogwash.

Most people don't even understand how the system works and is set up, so coming up with a viable alternative to anything is a joke until enough people wake up to reality and realize that all these isms have been given to them. It's never going to happen, though, and is virtually impossible at this point since the system has more control over the people than ever before because of technology.

We are already well into into a neo-feudalist, corporate-fascist type system.

I am all for true anarchy in the purest sense of the world (not the way socialists have hijacked the word), but to think it would ever work as things currently stand is naive at best.

For the record, anarchy means without government. So-called democracy (a sham and illusion) depends on centralized government. You cannot have it both ways. You either believe in anarchy, and that individuals are capable of governing themselves, or you believe in the mob rule of Democracy, which hinges on a governmental structure to maintain its power over the people.

Adbusters is a George Soros funded propaganda rag. A complete joke, much like the above article itself.

 

Karl Marx had a good understanding of institutional control over a population. He said we need to clean our minds of these institutional controls-like religious controls that are intended to keep us in a state of slavery-so we could recognize freedom when it comes to our front door.

 

absolutely another way of life is possible. What has always bothered me regarding the long social evolution that brought us to this point is - all these possibilities and this bullshit is the best we can do?


I believe in possibilities but that doesn't mean I think ill ever live to see it happen. The world is firmly entrenched in its current system.

 

The world can change at any moment people. All you need is one global economic crash to get things crazy, and we're not that far from that possibility. Wealth distribution is becoming more and more corrupt every day, it's only a matter of time until people realize that money isn't actually one of their needs, and that they can fulfill each of their actual needs without a rich group of dictators organizing it all.

With government, you're giving low quality drugs, food, and water. Imagine one of the 2,000 billionaires coming out with his own water and food company with higher quality control. In admist of this "water crisis" which I don't personally believe is real, but fabricated for more wealth down the line, people may be more susceptible to outside organizations lending "aid"

IMO the move from capitalism and government is going into privately funded organizations. More so than it is right now. Right now I believe we have a bit of this hybrid of private enterprise and govermenment.

Most of NASA's budget isn't even from the tax payer anymore.

Most of us are less than pawns to world orders, in fact to them, we're playing checkers

 

Well, I don't trust Marx or "his" alleged manifesto. Marx was in the employ of the Rothschild banking family. Not surprising since socialism and communism are nothing more than an all-powerful centralized state which controls everything (one through overt control, and one under a more subtle scientific control) kind of like what we see today, only they don't call it socialism or communism.

 

In a true capitalist economy the dollar would rule all, meaning the power to buy would regulate the market. In communist and socialist systems the regulating force would be a government commanded economy. What we have now is a corporate command economy which is not a true form of capitalism, not a true free market system. The corporations set the prices of stuff that we consume.

 

Money is an artificial, hierarchical system regardless of who controls it. And it's actually the central banks which set the prices of the stuff we consume since they control interest rates and the value of the currency itself. Corporations, banks and government are all one and the same at the top. There is no separation between power at the top. People believe in this notion of government vs. corporations, but that is all bullshit, since the government is run by the corporations. Most people don't understand this.

 

Although people have been nagging on government, taxes and banks ever since they existed I never heard so much (constructive!) criticism in my life by so many 'average' people. Especially on the banks and money system. No, it is not just in the dark corners on the internet by conspiracy theorists! Also, if you compare it to the 90's and before it seems there is much more awareness about what damages the environment, health and what not and there seem to be more and more people acting slowly on it I am of course not that naive to not be aware it can go a lot of different ways but really, overall I am not that negative if I take notice of how a lot of people are doing and thinking. Certainly not if we compare it to some decades ago. And yeah, we as a western society still have a lot of bullshit going on, and serious bullshit too. But then again we can always keep in mind that we could do a LOT worse too Even when there's always a lot of bullshit (probably will be)

Another way of life is very possible. For a society as a whole it generally just doesn't happen over night. But over time it happens naturally.

 

True in the USA. However, government isn't always run by corporations when you look at the big picture. And, in the field of political science the number of scenarios where a government is run by corporations is limited. I suppose that in the future new forms would emerge out of the multi-national stateless corporations. Them boys gots lots of dinero.

 

Oh right because what you're saying here is so complex! I'm pretty sure that your average 13 year old gets the whole 'corporations run America' thing, and is even capable of throwing in a lot of general statements about how horrible everything is and how evil the government and the rich people are... some of the more depressed teenagers out there would also gladly throw in narratives about how helpless everyone else is as well. That sort of black and white thinking is common all around and it's also what makes people more susceptible to Ron Paul's doomsday populism.

 

I don't think it's a coincidence that most of the examples he uses of functioning 'post-capitalist' states aren't exactly well-known, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can NEVER occur. Human nature isn't something that's set in stone-- we have positive and negative qualities that are suppressed or augmented by the society we're living in.

My guess is that climate change will eventually force a new system of government... I'm not sure what kind of system it will be, however.

On the other hand, while the way things are now makes it seem very unlikely that we'll see an end to the wealth gap or even a reversal of the flow of money into fewer and fewer hands, things can change VERY quickly