Fwd: (en) current crisis

seyedjavad

From: "Susan Brown"

To: ra-len@univ-montp3.fr

Subject: (en) current crisis

Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 07:52:36 -0400

From: takver

John,

I think your analysis is correct. We need to criticize the State as

the major proponent of violence and terrorism in society, but also

criticise acts of terrorism by individuals and groups as being

vanguadist acts of violence. Groups which practice terrorism are,

with very few exceptions, states-in-waiting, and their violence is

always counterproductive to achieving social justice.

A quite good argument, but slightly dated (late 70's) is the pamphlet

produced in Australia: 'You Can't Blow up a Social Relationship - The

Anarchist case against Terrorism' which can be found at:

http://www.anarres.org.au/essays/terorism.htm

with solidarity

Takver

Takver's Initiatives - http://www.takver.com

----- Original Message -----

From: Research on Anarchism List

Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 12:24 pm

Subject: (en) current crisis

From: John Rapp

Dear RA-L colleagues,

I was just on a panel discussion last Friday on the current

crisis, and over the weekend have been reconsidering some of my

comments. On Friday I gave the typical knee-jerk leftist response

about the causes of anti-Americanism in the Middle East and

elsewhere, and the roots of support for terrorism in American's lack

of a foreign policy that truly supports democracy, human rights and

economic justice. It occurred to me over the weekend that those of

us influenced by and drawn to the anarchist critique should have a

message that goes beyond that standard progressive line, and I'd like

to try a quick version of it here for your criticism and comments.

The anarchist critique focuses above all on the interests of the

state itself as the explanation for state actions, not just the

demands of individuals, interest groups, classes, and/or society as a

whole (i.e., versus classic liberal, liberal/pluralist, Marxist, and

organic conservative paradigms of the state respectively). So first,

of course we should point out that with other progressives that state

leaders in America will undoubtedly use the current crisis to justify

increased repression and limits on civil liberties, not to mention

increased budgets for military and "intelligence" activities that

will help build up the garrison state. But second, we should not let

the terrorist groups off the hook either. Oh yes, many of us will

talk about how these groups originated with U.S. help in the proxy

war vs. the Soviets in Afghanistan, and how these groups get

continued support from people because of continuing unjust and

murderous U.S. policies, but even that is not enough.

Many of us influenced by the anarchist critique claim that most

states have their origins in violence and expanded over time to add

other functions that only mask or help justify those continuing

violent activities. If the state is defined as the monopoly on the

legitimate use of coercion within a given territory, then a terrorist

group is only a would-be state that does not yet have that monopoly.

Thus, even if possessing a social base, terrorist groups themselves

also go beyond the interests of their followers to carry out acts

that quickly take on a life of their own.

If there were suddenly overnight a just and humane U.S. foreign

policy, and economic justice throughout the world, terrorist groups

would not disappear. Leaders of such groups as the one that carried

out such atrocities and crimes against humanity as occurred in New

York and Washington last Tuesday do not really have as their prime

goal the increase of autonomy and economic justice of their

followers, but only the continued and if possible increased autonomy

of their own terrorist groups and the possibility that their use of

violence can eventually grow to become new monopolies. To the extent

that they succeed in using violence, such groups can at best only

succeed in recreating the state, never in destroying it.

One casualty of the current crisis might be that anarchism will

lose its very small revival of appeal for young people opposed to the

WTO. This would in fact not be a casualty at all if what lost its

appeal were petty acts of violence justified in the name of a

perverted form of anarchism descended from Bakunin and others,

leaving room for less blatantly self-contradictory forms of anarchism

to stand out and gain appeal. This latter point will doubtless

infuriate many of you who find the ideology of anarchism more useful

as an identity-reinforcing mechanism than as a cogent critique of the

state, but I hope that will not keep you from condemning terrorism as

much as you condemn militaristic state responses to it.

In any case, those of us who find the anarchist critique of the

state a powerful tool to help explain the roots of the current crisis

and the developing state response to it would do well to criticize

terrorist groups as harshly as we do established states for their

inherently murderous behavior.

--John Rapp

John A. Rapp tel: (608) 363-2335

Professor, fax: (608) 363-2718

Department of Political Science email: rappja@beloit.edu

Beloit College

700 College St.

Beloit, WI 53511

---------------------------------------------

The Research on Anarchism List (RA-L) is an international forum which

was started on January 1, 1996, and is devoted to book reviews,

research and discussion of the theories, histories and cultures of

world anarchist movements and to other topics related to anarchism.

---------------------------------------------

Our site: http://melior.univ-montp3.fr/ra_forum/

MODERATORS/MODERADORS/MODERATEURS:

Antoine Barral

L. Susan Brown

John P. Clark

Ronald Creagh

Annick Stevens

---------------------------------------------

TO SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERYONE write to ra-len@univ-montp3.fr

TO UNSUBSCRIBE, WRITE TO: sympa@univ-montp3.fr

with the text: SIGnoff RA-L (no subject nor signature).