In my first few weeks working with my Fulbright affiliate in León, I was shocked to learn that one of my most culto (educated, enlightened, learned) colleagues viewed cooperativism as a form of Anarchism. My general views on Anarchism were shaped by a period as (let’s be honest) a “poser” in middle school: a round-cheeked, cutesy “punk” type who dawned spikey bracelets and suspenders and pretended to enjoy listening to the Sex Pistols with my self-destructive boyfriend. I had closed the case on Anarchy a few years later in freshman year of college, when a particularly politically charged geography professor of mine made a statement that stuck with me: “If you want to know what Anarchy is, just look at the Democratic Republic of the Congo.” Needless to say, it was never a philosophy I had taken seriously.
My friend’s interest in the theory, however, caught my
attention. He explained that cooperativism is Anarchic because it rejects the
idea of a “natural”, central authority figure like a republican government. It
is essentially a means for people to organize organically in relatively small
groups to control their economic and social lives in a civil, democratic
manner. In short, Anarchy didn’t mean spiking your Mohawk and running rampant
in the streets; it was a social critique that called for an intelligent
rejection of authority and proposed enlightened self-governance at the
micro-scale.
A few months later, I was perusing the “banned books”
section of Project Gutenberg, looking for some light reading, and had the
pleasure of coming across Emma
Goldman’s Anarchism and Other Essays.
Yesterday I finally decided to take a rest from trying to plow my way through some
Marx and cracked it open; inside I found a host of unexpectedly inspiring
ideas.
 |
| Goldman was the subject of relentless harassment and slander, and spent a year as a political prisoner |
Goldman was a Russian Jew who immigrated to the US in the late 1800s and became an outspoken member of the American labor movement and figurehead of American Anarchism. In the introduction, she reflects that many of her public speaking campaigns admittedly fell on deaf ears of an audience looking mainly for a spectacle, and in writing she hoped to find a more dedicated audience. Fortuitously, she found me.
 |
| And a Sid mugshot, too, just for fun |
Unlike the grating banter of Sid Vicious (no offence Sex Pistols fans, it’s just not my thing), I found her words logical, compassionate, and thought-provoking. That is not to say that I unquestioningly accept her every word, but it was rather like a breath of fresh air in the stagnant afternoon heat of Matagalpa proper. Rather than giving a re-cap, here are a number of choice passages (see more at the bottom if you wish):
“Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free
grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an
order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and
full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires,
tastes, and inclinations.”
“Real wealth consists in things of utility and beauty, in
things that help to create strong, beautiful bodies and surroundings inspiring
to live in… economic arrangements must consist of voluntary productive and
distributive associations, gradually developing into free communism, as the
best means of producing with the least waste of human energy. Anarchism,
however, also recognizes the right of the individual, or numbers of
individuals, to arrange at all times for other forms of work, in harmony with
their tastes and desires.”
“Order derived
through submission and maintained by terror is not much of a safe guarantee;
yet that is the only “order” that governments have ever maintained. True social
harmony grows naturally out of solidarity of interests. In a society where
those who always work never have anything, while those who never work enjoy
everything, solidarity of interests is non-existent; hence social harmony is
but a myth.”
And finally… probably my favorite
“Every fool, from king to policeman, from the flat-headed parson
to the visionless dabbler in science, presumes to speak authoritatively of
human nature. The greater the mental charlatan, the more definite his
insistence on the wickedness and weakness of human nature. Yet, how can anyone speak
of it today, with every soul a prison, with every heart fettered, wounded, and
maimed?”
Despite this post’s catchy title, I cannot actually claim to
have found my calling as a rabble-rousing Anarchist. It is with great satisfaction,
however, that I have decided to give some attention to a “new” theory that has
already shed new light on my research and thinking about cooperativism in
Nicaragua. While I haven’t fully developed my thoughts on the subject, I'm going to share a few.
At
first read, I am finding that Anarchism is useful in my work because it points
to the paradox of state-led cooperative development. If one thinks of a
cooperative as an anarchist socio-economic structure, the notion of state
involvement is entirely counter-intuitive. The very involvement of the state can
undermine the democratic elements of the cooperative project, especially in a country
like Nicaragua with a weak democratic tradition. On a practical level, this is
not a condition that can be changed. It is worth considering, however, that it is
a challenge that anyone interested in working with a more "radical" notion of
cooperativism in Nicaragua will face.
Of course there are other valuable elements of cooperativism that may still remain intact for a time, such as the emphasis on investing in education for members and concern for community, but without a strong democratic
framework these benefits will be tenuous. In fact, some would characterize at
least the well-established cooperative sector of the North as an avenue for
securing Sandinista political support and social programs little more than patronage, though I am not yet
quite that cynical.
A final point is that since most of the people I have talked with about cooperativism define it in terms of the national coop law, there is little attention given to the cooperative ideals defined by international coop networks and farm more on the mechanics of legally administering their business. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that the cooperative law allows for cooperatives to effectively develop into capitalist firms because it does not place any kind of hard checks on revenue generation and distribution between members. Nor does it establish requirements for integrating new members. Together, this means that a cooperative members can functionally act as shareholders in a company with employees that have no legal right to demand membership.
Much like Marxism, Anarchism is a useful (though perhaps less
comprehensive) tool for deconstructing and analyzing systems of power and
highlighting the mechanics behind the problematic elements of those systems,
like the dehumanization of human labor by means of capital distribution. Sadly
neither presents a satisfactory solution. That is our job.
This reading has led me to neither an ultimate truth nor a
solution to the problems I see with capitalism, Nicaraguan cooperativism, and development
work in general; indeed, as Goldman herself states, “Our most vivid
imaginations cannot foresee the potentialities of a race set free from external
restraints. How, then, can anyone assume to map out a line of conduct for those
to come?” Anarchism is highly idealistic, Goldman’s writing somewhat outdated, and
it calls for actions that I am unwilling to take (namely, thwarting law and
authority at every turn). It has, however, added one more mechanism to my
proverbial intellectual toolbox, and for that I am grateful to have shed my
presumptuous rejection of this rich body of thought.
More nice quotes…
“It is the harmony of organic growth which produces variety
of color and form, the complete whole we admire in the flower. Analogously will
the organized activity of free human beings, imbued with the spirit of
solidarity, result in the perfection of social harmony, which we call
Anarchism.”
“My lack of faith in the majority is dictated by my faith in
the potentialities of the individual. Only when the latter becomes free to
choose his associates for a common purpose, can we hope for order and harmony
out of this world of chaos and inequality.”
“… the most violent element in society is ignorance… its
power of destruction is the very thing Anarchism is combating… it requires less
mental effort to condemn than to think.”
“The only demand that property recognizes is its own
gluttonous appetite for greater wealth, because wealth means power; the power
to subdue, to crush, to exploit, the power to enslave, to outrage and degrade.”
“Just as the animal cells, by mutual co-operation, express
their latent powers in formation of the complete organism, so does the
individual, by co-operative effort with other individuals, attain his highest
form of development.”
No comments:
Post a Comment