the fuck

“Suppose a learned academy, composed of the most illustrious representatives of science; suppose this academy charged with legislation for and the organization of society, and that, inspired only by the purest love of truth, it frames none but laws in absolute harmony with the latest discoveries of science. Well, I maintain, for my part, that such legislation and such organization would be a monstrosity, and that for two reasons: first, that human science is always and necessarily imperfect, and that, comparing what it has discovered with what remains to be discovered, we may say that it is still in its cradle. So that were we to try to force the practical life of men, collective as well as individual, into strict and exclusive conformity with the latest data of science, we should condemn society as well as individuals to suffer martyrdom on a bed of Procrustes, which would soon end by dislocating and stifling them, life ever remaining an infinitely greater thing than science.

“The second reason is this: a society which should obey legislation emanating from a scientific academy, not because it understood itself the rational character of this legislation (in which case the existence of the academy would become useless), but because this legislation, emanating from the academy, was imposed in the name of a science which it venerated without comprehending — such a society would be a society, not of men, but of brutes. It would be a second edition of those missions in Paraguay which submitted so long to the government of the Jesuits. It would surely and rapidly descend to the lowest stage of idiocy.

“But there is still a third reason which would render such a government impossible — namely that a scientific academy invested with a sovereignty, so to speak, absolute, even if it were composed of the most illustrious men, would infallibly and soon end in its own moral and intellectual corruption. Even today, with the few privileges allowed them, such is the history of all academies. The greatest scientific genius, from the moment that he becomes an academician, an officially licensed savant, inevitably lapses into sluggishness. He loses his spontaneity, his revolutionary hardihood, and that troublesome and savage energy characteristic of the grandest geniuses, ever called to destroy old tottering worlds and lay the foundations of new. He undoubtedly gains in politeness, in utilitarian and practical wisdom, what he loses in power of thought. In a word, he becomes corrupted.

“It is the characteristic of privilege and of every privileged position to kill the mind and heart of men. The privileged man, whether politically or economically, is a man depraved in mind and heart. That is a social law which admits of no exception, and is as applicable to entire nations as to classes, corporations, and individuals. It is the law of equality, the supreme condition of liberty and humanity. The principal object of this treatise is precisely to demonstrate this truth in all the manifestations of human life.

“A scientific body to which had been confided the government of society would soon end by devoting itself no longer to science at all, but to quite another affair; and that affair, as in the case of all established powers, would be its own eternal perpetuation by rendering the society confided to its care ever more stupid and consequently more in need of its government and direction.

“But that which is true of scientific academies is also true of all constituent and legislative assemblies, even those chosen by universal suffrage. In the latter case they may renew their composition, it is true, but this does not prevent the formation in a few years’ time of a body of politicians, privileged in fact though not in law, who, devoting themselves exclusively to the direction of the public affairs of a country, finally form a sort of political aristocracy or oligarchy. Witness the United States of America and Switzerland.”


— Mikhail Bakunin,
God and the State

'Whether individually or as a countless mass, man finds himself at the mercy of this band of drones going under the name of "governors and masters," when in reality they are nothing but straightforward exploiters and oppressors.'

— Nestor Makhno

Engels—that daddy of Marxists everywhere—once said: “These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves” (On Authority).

Ironically, this anti-anarchist argument is a powerful argument against state socialism.

Just because state socialist states call their party communist and their republic socialist does nothing to change the character of commodity production and wage relations in that country. Socialism means doing away with these things, not its reproduction.

We can detourn Engles like so:

These authoritarians think that when they have changed the names of things to “socialist” they have changed the things themselves! This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.

Thank you comrade Engels! /s Now feel free to detourn Engels as much as you see fit! Let the authoritarians find no safety in Engels!

Source: https://kolektiva.social/@BandilangItimPH/109391749132297339

"Marxist revolutionaries have followed the logic of hegemony in seeking state power, hoping to reverse the relationship between the dominated and the dominators.

Liberal and postmarxist reformism display the same logic, although in a different mode—rather than seeking to take state power, they seek to influence its operation through processes of pluralistic co-operation and conflict.

What is most interesting about contemporary radical activism is that some groups are breaking out of this trap by operating non-hegemonically rather than counter-hegemonically. They seek radical change, but not through taking or influencing state power, and in so doing they challenge the logic of hegemony at its very core."

— Richard JF Day, Gramsci is Dead: Anarchist Currents in the Newest Social Movements, 2005

”Bolshevism, embodying the ideal of a centralising state, has shown itself as the deadly enemy of the free spirit of revolutionary toilers.

Resorting to unprecedented measures, it has sabotaged the development of revolution and besmirched the honor of its finest aspect.

Successfully disguised, it concealed it's real face from the gaze of the toilers, passing itself off as the champion of their interests."

— Nestor Makhno, The Idea of Equality and the Bolsheviks

"Imposed communism would be the most detestable tyranny that the human mind could conceive. And free and voluntary communism is ironical if one has not the right and the possibility to live in a different regime, collectivist, mutualist, individualist—as one wishes, always on condition that there is no oppression or exploitation of others.

Free then is the peasant to cultivate his piece of land, alone if he wishes; free is the shoe maker to remain at his last, or the blacksmith in his small forge. It remains to be seen whether not being able to obtain assistance or people to exploit—and he would find none because nobody, having a right to the means of production and being free to work on his own or as an equal with others in the large organizations of production would want to be exploited by a small employer—I was saying, it remains to be seen whether these isolated workers would not find it more convenient to combine with others and voluntarily join one of the existing communities."

— Errico Malatesta, Property, 1929

"What is the use of government?

The first act of a socialist government on achieving power should be this:

Considering that, being in government, we can achieve nothing good and would instead stymie action by the people by forcing them to wait for laws that we cannot frame without sacrificing the interests of some to the interests of others and everyone’s interests to our own particular interests—We, the government, etc. hereby declare all authority abolished, invite all citizens to organize themselves in associations corresponding to their various needs, submit to the initiative of such associations, and bring the contribution of our personal efforts amid them.

No government has ever done anything of the sort and neither would a socialist government. And so, the day the people have force in their hands, if they are wise, they will prevent the establishment of any government."

— Errico Malatesta, The Socialist State

the last bunch weren't perfect either. we can always do things better than and differently from the people in the past, you don't necessarily have to emulate any one of them.