IJ@
International Journal of Anarchism
ifa-Solidaritet - folkebladet - © ISSN 0800-0220 no 3 (38) editor H. Fagerhus
Bulletin of the Anarchist International
The southern IFA-IAF-federations are marxist
"
*) The stars indicate the position of the Norwegian economical-political system after the revolutionary change in 1994/95.
Fig. 1. Picture of the Anarchist Economic-Political Map
1. A BASIC HYPOTHESIS ABOUT THE SOUTHERN IFA-IAF FEDERATIONS' PLACE ON THE ECONOMIC-POLITICAL MAP
IFA is l'Internationale des Fédérations Anarchistes, i.e. the International of Anarchist Federations, IAF, and AI is the Anarchist International. The southern IFA-IAF federations are the southern section(s) of l'Internationale des Fédérations Anarchistes, i.e.of the International of Anarchist Federations.
It is the International Institute of Organization Research's and the Anarchist International's basic hypothesis that the southern IFA-federations, The French, Italian and Iberian, in 1985/86 turned leftwards from anarchism on the economic -political map, to leftist/collectivist/communism in the marxist quadrant of the map, and with a significant authoritarian tendency, i.e. more than 50% authoritarian degree (se map above). And that this tendency has been significant all of the time since then. The southern IFA-IAF federations place on the map is in the collectivist sector of the marxist quadrant, with more than 50% athoritarian degree. Thus their policy and strategy are in reality closer to left marxism - left socialism, than real anarchism, despite of their anarchist rethoric. In the following we will document facts that prove this hypothesis.
AI - IFA- IAF is rooted back to the 1st International's (i.e. the International Workingmen's Association) conference at Saint-Imier, in The Swiss Confederation, 15-16.09.1872. At this conference it was decided an anarchist resolution denouncing all forms of political power, i.e. political/administrative and economically broadly defined. Also a solidarity and fellowship pact was decided upon by the delegates. The anarchist international had meetings several times during the years passing by.
The Anarchist International (IFA-IAF) was reorganized at a congress in Carrara (Italy) 31.08-05.09.1968. The purpose of the congress was, among other things, to create a world wide anarchist organization as an alternative to "Cohn Bendit et autres gauchistes", also called "the children of Marx". Anarchists were tired of people presenting basically marxist ideas as anarchism. In the following years, several congresses were organized. At the second IFA-IAF congress 31th October 1971 the following was stated: "La base ideologique de l'IFA sera essentialement anarchiste". This is stated in the document with the resolutions from the third congress of IFA, "3eme Congres de l'IFA" edited by CRIFA, p. 14.
The southern IFA-IAF federations turned out to be similar to "Cohn Bendit et autres gauchistes", i.e. "the children of Marx" in 1985/86 and later. They have a wrong, authoritarian, marxist interpretation of the IFA-IAF principles, especially the principles of negation of hierarchy, antimilitarism, and autonomy, as we will document in the following. Their basic ideology is no longer essentially anarchist. First we will present the IFA-IAF principles, with an anarchist - non-authoritarian interpretation. Then we will present documents that prove that the southern IFA-IAF-federations' strategy and policy is close to the marxist Socialist Left parties in Norway and elsewhere in Europe
II. THE IFA-IAF PRINCIPLES
A. The principles for the anarchist ideal
1. A degree of anarchy = 100%, i.e. 100% socialism and autonomy, is mainly a theoretical concept, which probably practically never can be reached fully. The complete anarchist ideal is in a way similar to the horizon. When getting closer, another horizon appears. All things may be improved, also plans for the anarchist ideal. These new interpretations must however probably always be based on the IFA principles, i.e. the basic principles of the anarchist social ideal! The IFA principles, rooted back to the 1872 Conference of Saint-Imier in the Swiss Confederation and the decisions made at the Congress of Carrara in Italy, 1968, and adopted at the Congresses of IFA in Carrara 1978 and Oslo in Norway 1982, and later confirmed at the constitutional congress of the Anarchist International (AI), the International Anarchist Congress, i.e. the 5th Anarchist Biennial, arranged by the NAC/IFA/AI in Oslo medio December 1998 (the AI is a broader organization and network than the IFA anarchist federations of some countries in the South and North), are the following, 1-5:
2. French version: Ce sont les principes suivants: Negation de l'authorite et de tout pouvoir; Negation de la hierarchie; Negation des lois juridiques; Liberte, Egalite, Solidarite, Justice sociale, Contrat libre, Libre initiative, Atheisme, Antimilitarisme, Internationalisme, Decentralisme, Autonomie et federalisme, Autogestione et communisme libertaire. La negation de l'autorite et de tout pouvoir est le principe essentiel et le signe distinctif de l'anarchisme et du mouvement anarchiste. Tous les autres principes libertaires decoulent de cette negation de l'autorite et du pouvoir.
L'internationale des Federations Anarchistes (I.F.A.) est constitue par des Federations - une par pays. Ces Federations jouissent de pleine autonomie dans leurs structures et dans leur fonctionnement interieur, mais elles sont solidaires entre elles en vertu du pacte d'association commun, volontairement et librement accepte, qui constitue partie integrante de cette declaration de principe de l'anarchisme social. From the document "3eme Congres de l'IFA" edited by CRIFA, pp. 63-65.
3. English version: The basic principles of anarchism are: The negation of authority and all of its power, hierarchies and juridical laws. Freedom, equality, solidarity, social justice, free contract, free initiative, atheism, antimilitarism, internationalism, decentralism, autonomy and federalism, self management and 'comunismo libertario', i.e. not communism, but libertarian communalism - from each according to ability - to each according to needs. These concepts and principles should be considered all in all, not partially. In general the IFA principles should be interpreted consistent with the axiomatic principles (1) - (10) defining anarchy and anarchism see point B. below.
Thus: Freedom, i.e. free people, freedom without damaging the freedom of other people. Federalism without autonomy is not anarchist. Social justice means a) anarchist law and court systems, compatible with the negation of hierarchy, etc., i.e. alternatives to authoritarian juridical laws; and b) antimilitarist corps broadly defined, sufficiently strong to keep order and keep up the balances of strength, as well as stop militarism, intra- and internationally. Generally speaking, antimilitarism is not pacifism...
4. Norwegian version: Det anarkistiske idealet - anarkistenes langsiktige økonomisk-politiske mål: Det anarkistiske idealet er generelt et samfunn såvidt mulig innrettet etter anarkistiske prinsipper, som en ledestjerne for den økonomisk-politiske styringen m.v.. Prinsippene for det anarkistiske idealsamfunnet er: 100% sosialisme og autonomi i vid forstand, effektivitet (Pareto-optimalitet, også med hensyn på miljøfaktorer) og rettferdighet (ombyttekriteriet, at ingen vil bytte posisjon med noen annen, når alt kommer til alt), minimale rangs- og lønnsforskjeller - politisk/administrativt og økonomisk hierarki, herunder frihet (uten andres frihets berøvelse, slaveri og tyranni), likhet, solidaritet; sosial justis inklusive libertær (frihetlig) lov (vedtatt direkte av folket selv eller via delegater) og optimal orden, rettssikkerhet og menneskerettigheter, frie kontrakter (ikke slavekontrakter), frie initiativer, ateisme (anarkismen er et sekulært prosjekt, men innebærer full religionsfrihet), antimilitarisme (basert på gjensidig nedrustning og styrkebalanse), internasjonalisme (ikke overnasjonalisme, eller nasjonalisme), desentralisme, selvstyre og føderalisme (ikke hierarkisk, EU-aktig), selvforvaltning (autogestion) og frihetlig kommunalisme, dvs beslutninger tas i hovedsak lokalt av de vesentlig og konkret berørte - fra enhver etter evne - til enhver i følge behov. Et slikt samfunn er negasjonen av autoritet/regjering og all dens makt, hierarkier og juridiske lover. (The English and Norwegian versions were made by IIFOR in 1985 (preliminary versions), and used as study material, and later published on www.anarchy.no).
5. These principles of social ideal anarchism constitute a leading star for anarchism in general, i.e. commune/communist, collectivist and individualist anarchism, as well as social individualist anarchism, practical social anarchy, anarchism and federalism included. To get a correct interpretation of the IFA-principles, the following should be taken into account: The Oslo-Convention, efficiency and fairness , anarchistically interpreted human rights and ethics and the economical political map, and anarchy vs other -archies. The anarchist ideal is defined by 100% socialism and autonomy, minimal income and rank differences, efficiency and fairness, consistent with the IFA- principles. When we sometimes use the words "no hierarchies" when describing the anarchist ideal, it is an approximation. The exact, practical, term is minimal hierarchies, economical and political/administrative, i.e. income- and rank-hierarchies, in an asymptotic approximation to zero hierarchies, when the society developes towards the 100% ideal, remember 1. The French, the English and the Norwegian versions complement one another and reflect some basic autonomy, and they should be interpreted consistently.
Other anarchist tendencies, eco-anarchism, anarcha-feminism, anarcho-syndicalism, etc., may bee seen as taking care of special forms of co-operations vs coercions, within the four general sectors of the anarchist quadrant on the economical political map. Say, anarchism without feminism, is only patriarchical half-anarchism, etc. However these special tendencies of anarchism should not be expanded towards general systems, because then they may be of a somewhat totalitarian nature, and thus not anarchist. As an example, if the workers' federations shall run the whole economy and politics, as a public sector monopoly , the system will probably end up very similar to the Soviet Union, and will never achieve, say, efficiency and fairness. Say, when the union is "the boss", where shall a person in conflict with this management seek support. Another workers' federation against the anarcho-syndicalist perhaps? Thus "anarcho-syndicalism" interpreted as a totalitarian system, is not anarchist. However workers' federations managing several factories in private and public sectors, in an anarcho-syndicalist way, may well be anarchist. But not if they run all , or practically all, of the enterprises. If feminism is expanded too much, the system will be matriarchy, i.e. not anarchy. Too much green/eco-anarchism will probably end up in primitivism, archie-society, which is not anarchist. Thus, these anarchist tendencies should just be tendencies, and no more.
B. An axiomatic approach to the principles of anarchy, anarchism and social sciences in general.
( 1 ) Anarchies vs archies. Societal, political-economical systems, including organizations and political tendencies; economical, political or politological, sociological and anthropological systems, may be anarchies or the negation of anarchy = archies. Thus the total amount of societal systems S = anarchy + archy <=> S = anarchies + archies. Anarchy = anarchism,with respect to societal systems broadly defined.
( 2 ) Archies may be expressed as x-archy, where x is one of a set of systems characteristics of archs, say, ( mon, olig, poly, plut, ochl, matri, patri, hier, etc; but not an) or a logical union of several x-es reflecting different forms of archy/archies as opposed to anarchy/anarchies, i.e. the negation of x-archy = archies.
( 3 ) Possibility of anarchy. It is assumed that these terms reflect concepts that may be defined in a way that anarchy is not impossible in reality, i.e. the amount of anarchies in real terms is greater than the empty set, zero. Anarchy is matter of degree = tendency. Anarchy, i.e. an anarchist social system, may have 100% or a significant degree of anarchy, i.e. less than 100%, but above a given significant level.
( 4 ) Significant anarchist tendency = anarchy. As anarchy is the negation of x-archy it may not have any amount, i.e. significant tendency towards or of x-archy. Thus anarchy may have zero or insignificant tendency towards or of archies. The significant level is defined on aggregated dimensions.
( 5 ) Dimensions: a) There are an economic dimension and a non-economical dimension in societal, political-economical, system context: One aggregated economical, and one aggregated non-economical dimension, i.e. political/administrative rank broadly defined. Empirically this reflect economic remuneration and political/administrative rank of organizational social systems' maps broadly defined. b) The economical dimension measures socialism vs capitalism, where the degree of capitalism is the tendency towards or of economical archies (x-archy) and the non-economical dimension is autonomy vs statism, where the degree of statism is the tendency towards or of political/administrative archies. c) Along these two dimensions different forms of anarchy and archies (x-archy), are measured and mapped. The degree of socialism = 100% - degree of capitalism. The degree of autonomy = 100% - degree of statism. Socialism and autonomy are defined as insignificant degree of capitalism and statism respectively, and capitalism and statism is defined as significant degree of statism and capitalism respectively. Thus, socialism and autonomy are defined as significant degree of socialism and autonomy, and capitalism and statism are defined as insignificant degree of socialism and autonomy respectively .
( 6 ) Anarchism and other -isms. Anarchy is the negation of archies related to the economical and political/administrative dimensions, i.e. socialism and autonomy. Capitalism is economical plutarchy, including hierarchy and may be other x-archies broadly defined in an economical context. Statism is political/administrative monarchy, oligarchy, polyarchy, ochlarchy (mob rule), the archies of rivaling states within the state, i.e. chaos; and the tyranny of structurelessness i.e. disorganization, and/or political plutarchy, and it may also include other archies, say, being matriarchy, if the main rulers are women. Furthermore
1. Statism without (economical) plutarchy/capitalism = marxism ((state-) communism, state-socialism);
2. statism plus (economical) plutarchy/capitalism = fascism (populism included);
3. socialism without statism = anarchy = anarchism;
4. (economical) plutarchy/capitalism without statism = liberalism.
Libertarian (in the meaning of 'libertaire' (french) or 'libertær' (nordic)), and real democracy (realdemocracy) are synonyms for anarchist, anarchy and anarchism. Anarchy and anarchism are sometimes called the third alternative, social form, or way. (This must not be mixed up with Tony Blair's non-anarchist "third way = neue mitte" of Gerard Schröder, or Adolf Hitler's "dritte reich".)
Archies (x-archy) are defined equal to authority and State/government in societal context. Thus authority and State/government in societal context are liberalism, fascism and marxism broadly defined. And thus anarchy and anarchism are systems without any authority and State/government, in societal context, i.e. economical and political/administrative, also called political broadly defined. These societal, political concepts of state/government and authority, must not be mixed up with statism and the authoritarian degree, as defined related to economical-political mapping. Furthermore insignificant tendency towards or of State/government is not State/government, and insignificant tendency towards or of authority is not authority, but anarchy and anarchism.
( 7 ) Significant level at 50%. Anarchy has less than 50% tendencies towards or of archies, x-archy, aggregated on the two relevant dimensions, on a scale from 0 => 100%. Thus more than 50 % tendencies towards or of archies, x-archy of relevant x-es, aggregated on the economic and/or the non-economic dimension, are not anarchist, not anarchy. Thus anarchy has 100-50% degree of socialism and 100-50% degree of autonomy, and archies have less of one or both, i.e. more than 50% degree of capitalism and/or statism.
( 8 ) Anarchy defined: Anarchy and anarchism mean system, coordination and management without ruling and rulers (not without rules). i.e. co-operation without repression, tyranny and slavery, and archies mean system, management and coordination with ruling and rulers, i.e. the negation of anarchy and anarchism. From greek 'an', as in anaerobe vs aerobe, i.e. keeping what is essential of the object, (in this case system, management, coordination) but without the special characteristic mentioned in the suffix, i.e. 'arch', ruling and ruler(s), from archos (ruler) and archein (ruling, being first).
( 9 ) Not totalitarian: The question of anarchism and anarchy vs archies is limited to the societal political-economical systems' management and coordination. What is interesting in anarchist perspective is whether or not the economical-political system has authority, i.e. ruling and rulers - or not, with respect to the societal managent and coordination. Other uses of the words anarchy vs x-archy and anarchies vs archies are principally irrelevant to anarchism, and should in general be avoided.
(10) Not valid concepts. Concepts as anarcho-archy = anarchy-x-archy in any form, meaning system, coordination and management "both with and without ruling and rulers" at the same time and place, are not allowed for, because such concepts are contradictive, and thus are nonsens and not logical and scientifical, because this is in reality not possible, and anarchism and anarchy is about realities. Thus anarcho-marxism, anarcho-capitalism = anarchy-plutarchy, anarcho-ochlarchy, anarcho-chaos, anarchy = chaos, anarchism = anarchy = minimal state or libertarian state, state in general, anarcho-statism, anarcho-authority, etc, are nonsens and not valid concepts, but confused Orwellian "1984" "newspeak" that is not anarchist, but authoritarian, i.e. chaotic, and should be avoided.
In addition to these axioms and most basic principles of social sciences, anarchy and anarchism and other -isms, other principles of policy defining authority more precise and concrete in a societal context, structural and functional included, must be introduced, and the significant level of anarchy degree vs archies must be calibrated for applied and practical research and analysis. This is discussed at http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html, search in this file for 'calibration' and 'principles'.
III. AN ANARCHIST INTERPRETATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF ANTIMILITARISM
This chapter is a partly summary of "Antimiliarism - an anarchist approach" IJA 2(38) at http://www.anarchy.no/ija238.html. For a better understanding, and to avoid misinterpretations, it is recommended to read the whole of this issue of IJA.
A. Conceptual framework and the antimilitarist corps
Generally, all societies need organized security and defense for mutual protection and safety of the people, both intrasocietal as well as intersocietal security and defense matters, i.e. within a country and between different societies.
The degree of antimilitarism, i.e. 100% - the degree of militarism, is mainly a question of balance and stability of strength, both in inter and intrasocietal perspective. Unbalance means domination and power of some people or societies over others. But antimilitarism is also a question of reducing the immense arms budgets all over the world. Thus, antimilitarism means to work and fight for balance and stability of strength and mutual disarmament in an inter as well as intrasocietal perspective.
And thus, the optimal antimilitarist polict and tactics must vary depending on the strategical environment, the concrete situation. It should be noticed that pacifism - in the meaning of onesided, unbalanced disarmament - is contradictory to antimilitarism. On the other hand, armed resistance, except in self defense against militarist assault, is also completly inconsistent with antimilitarism. Terrorism is the ultimate form of militarism. Anarchism is antimilitarism, and neither pacifism nor terrorism. Because of this, the Nordic anarchists take part in the defense, mainly the local militia [Home defense - Heimevernet], and demand a balanced mutual disarmament. Some anarchists are draft resisters, a stand which is tolerated, but total resisters have no political support. ANORG have however supported total rejectors for humanitarian reasons via the Anarchist Black Cross, see International Journal of Anarchism 2(35) p. 401 and http://www.anarchy.no/abc.html.
As mentioned freedom, i.e. free people, freedom without damaging the freedom of other people. Federalism without autonomy is not anarchist. Social justice means a) anarchist law and court systems, compatible with the negation of hierarchy, etc., i.e. alternatives to authoritarian juridical laws; and b) antimilitarist corps broadly defined, sufficiently strong to keep order and keep up the balances of strength, as well as stop militarism, intra- and internationally. Generally speaking, antimilitarism is not pacifism...
Militarism means aggresive force, say, to conquer another land, not a defensive corps, an antimiliatarist corps, to stop militarist attacks. Who says there will be a commander and vertical commandlines? - We are talking about a significantly horizontally organized antimilitarist corps - managed by the people really concerned, at least in an anarchy of medium towards high degree of anarchy. To stop a militarist attack, internally from a mafia or externally, from an authoritarian militarist country, an antimilitarist corps is necessary. We don't believe in several competing antimilitarist corps in a society, this means groups against groups, and polyarchical ochlarchy. And we don't think this could be done efficiently by the "free" market. We think a horizontally organized public sector is the way to do it.
Without a significant antimilitarist force that people in general not dare to challenge, there will be endless violent conflicts, the "right" to the strongest, and not anarchism.
B. Practical antimilitarist policy
A little about anarchies of low degree and antimilitarist corps: In anarchies of low degree, as Norway with ca 54% degree of anarchy, Switzerland with ca 53% and Iceland with ca 52% anarchy degree in 2008, there are somewhat different antimilitarist corps. Iceland and Norway are members of NATO, Iceland has a coast guard, but very little regular armed corps, and no conscription. Norway and Switzerland have conscription, Norway has a regular armed corps, and a militia like home defense, Heimevernet, and a special corps with direct action on the program and a relatively horizontally organized structure. Switzerland has a strong militia, with no upper general in peace time. In general, anarchies of low degree, from 50%-60% anarchy degree, have an authoritarian degree of 40% to 50%, but still they are anarchies because systems with = or > 50% anarchy degree are significantly anarchist, i.e. anarchism. In Norway about 90% means an armed defense is necessary, and about 70% means NATO-membership is necessary for the defense. Only about 10% means the NATO-membership makes Norway more insecure, see http://www.folkogforsvar.no/left/7194.
Thus an antimilitarist policy based on mutual disarmament and balance of strength, via alliances (NATO), has very wide support, and is thus not imposed from an authority/government/state/arch, but is a form of selfregulation by the people really concerned, as opposed to the superiors political/administrative and/or economically. This policy is decided by the people themselves, significantly voluntarely accepted. The small minority that is opposed to this policy is the marxist-leninist Rødt (Red), and the Socialist Left marxist party (SV) and groups with similar opinions, including a a few pacifists.
The AFIN has since the founding in 1977 been positive to NATO-membership for Norway, together with a vast majority of the Norwegian people. AFIN has however been very critical to some of NATO's actions, say, cooperation with fascist states. For anarchy of low degree, with authoritarian neighbour countries, AFIN's position is similar to 1. Kropotkin and several other prominent anarchists in the famous "Manifesto of the 16", that supported the allies in the First World War, and 2. Spanish anarchists from the CNT-FAI militia that fought against the nazis in the north of Norway in the Second World War (see IJA 2(35) p 402. However AFIN and AI in general mean, for an anarchy of medium to high degree and without very authoritarian neighbour-states,
However violence in self defense from the people is allowed in Norway, Iceland and Switzerland, so the police has not 100% monopoly on violence. 36% of the Norwegian people in private sector have guns (2006) for hunting, sport and self defense. There is a significant popular organization called Natteravnene in Norway, that keeps peace in the cities by non-violent means. By the way, conscription in Norway, with civil service for the pacifists, is supported by almost 100% of the population , so it is a form of selfregulation by the people , not something imposed from above/authority, and significantly voluntarely accepted. The anarchists, AFIN and AI in general do not support conscription for an anarchy of medium to high degree. But say in Norway, a big country with few inhabitants, and an anarchy of low degree ca 54%, conscription is necessary in the present strategic situation, although it is a part of the ca 46% authoritarian tendency.
The above reasoning is for a a society with low to medium degree of anarchy, with people as we see it today, and authoritarian states in the neighbourhood. In a world of anarchies of a very high degree, where everybody have changed and devoloped to peaceful anarchists, the antimilitarist corps can be reduced to a minimum, ideally zero, i.e. the anarchist ideal with 100% degree of anarchy. That is our aim. This also means to do away with alliances as NATO, etc. This is also the principal standpoint of AFIN & NAC-ANORG a.o.t. decided on the the first IFA-congress in Oslo 1982 and later confirmed on all later congresses of NAC and AI-IFA-IAF. Thus the southern IFA-IAF's postulate that The Anarchist Federation of Norway (AFIN) is supporting NATO [for an anarchy of medium to high degree] is false. AFIN's (and NAC's and AI's) position, that we do not support NATO for an anarchy of medium to high degree, was clearly explained to the southern IFA-federations by a delegate from the IFA-secretariate in Oslo at an IFA-meeting with FAF/UAB, related to the FAF-congress in Paris 1985. FAF is the French Anarchist Federation.
IV. THE SOUTHERN IFA-IAF FEDERATIONS' POSITION ON THE ECONOMIC-POLITICAL MAP
The southern IFA-IAF-federations, especially the French and the Italian, have a quite similar position as the Socialist Left marxist party SV and the marxist-leninist Rødt in Norway and similar authoritarian marxist parties, i.e. a.o.t. in practice a totalitarian pacifism. [PS. SV has in 2011 changed its policy toward a typical social democratic, and mainly not anti-NATO policy.] It must be mentioned that FAF printed the article by Fedération anarchiste scandinavie [The Northern Anarchist Confederation, NAC]: Non au pacifisme totalitaire! in Le Monde Libertaire, no 557 p 9, without comments, indicating somewhat support or at least not clearly against this policy at that time. The authoritarian move happened afterwards. The majority of FAF turned "pacifist, but not non-violent" according to Marc Nagels of FAF, the french IFA-federation, at an IFA-meeting with the delegate from the northern IFA-federations at the FAF congress in 1985. This marxist dialectical statement speaks for itself. The southern IFA-federations are also strongly against NATO at least since 1985/86, clearly pacifisme totalitaire! The Italian IFA federation (FAI) had a lot of total draft rejectors, also clearly pacifisme totalitaire!
At an IFA-meeting related to the FAF-congress in 1985 between the delegate from the northern IFA-federations and the few comrades of the Bulgarian anarchist union (UAB - l'Union des Anarchistes Bulgares) lead by Georges Balkanski, the UAB acted very disrespectfully vis-a-vis the antimilitarist policy of AFIN, i.e. he was authoritarian and threatening [i.e. ochlarchical]. Georgi Grigorov, a.k.a. Georges Balkanski, G. Grigoiev and G. Hadjiev (1906-1996), a so called "anarchist" communist and much more a communist and marxian & statist than anarchist and libertarian, was de facto a charismatic ruler of UAB. The UAB was also de facto very like a marxist Soviet Union in miniature. On this background the International Anarchist Tribunal decided that this union, UAB, was not an IFA-federation, from 1986 and onwards. The very authoritarian, marxist style of Georges Balkanski & Co was also debated and confirmed on the anarchist conference, "TECNOLOGIA E LIBERDADE", in Portugal 1897, by a.o. the Italian delegation.
At an IFA-meeting with a spokeswoman for a real anarchist tendency within the FAF, Patrica Fau, she warned about "trotskyist friends" within FAF. After the Nordic IFA-secretariate had sent the proposals from the 4th Nordic IFA-congress in Oslo 1986 to the IFA-congress in Paris later same year, Patricia Fau phoned the Nordic IFA-secretariate and said the fraction of "trotskyist friends" within the FAF had taken over the organization. No surprise the proposals from the northern IFA-federations were totally suppressed at the 4th IFA-congress in Paris 1986, were the northern IFA-federations' four delegates participated by phone. They were not mentioned at all in the documents of this congress. This suppression also shows the southern IFA-federations' total disrespect for the autonomy of the northern IFA-federations regarding policy. The whole 4th IFA-congress [in Paris] was an authoritarian marxistoid farce. This is the opposite of the negation of hierarchy. This tendency of marxist leftist/collevist/communism of FAF wase also later confirmed in an issue of A-infos, the bulletin of the FAF's external secretariate, that had an article that concluded with "trotskyist friend". The FAF's bulletin A-infos must not be mixed up with the web-news A-infos.
The Iberian IFA-federation (FAI) was a bit less authoritarian than the French and Italian, but all in all in this, and the resolutions from the 4th IFA-congress in Paris 1986, show a clearly marxist leftist/collectivist/communist dominant tendency from 1985/1986. To save the IFA from this marxism, the majority of IFA, the four northern IFA-federations, decided to reorganize the IFA, see next chapter. The marxist tendency has been worse and more authoritarian over the years. In 2007 in an e-mail to "Royce" that was published on a discussion fora on internet, the secretary of the southern IFA-IAF federations - now British, stated " The main problem is some lunatic in Norway who operates under the websites you have mentioned." i.e. www.anarchy.no. Thus the southern IFA-IAF federations state that the people that disagree with them are lunatic, just like in the Soviet Union. This only confirms the marxist leftist/collectivist/communist position of the southern IFA-IAF federations. There have also been weird smearstories on Internet produced by the marxists Jamal Hannah, Peter Bach et. al. that IJA is not a real organ of the Anarchist International and IFA/IAF a.s.o. This is probably rooted back to some intrigues against the northern sections of IFA-IAF from some of the southern IFA- federations (not the Spanish) similar to Marx's intrigues etc. against Bakunin in the First International. See http://www.anarchy.no/mandate.html , http://www.anarchy.no/iwwai.html and http://www.anarchy.no/afid.html. We have rejected and turned these lies and smearstories down about 100% at http://www.anarchy.no/anorgwarning.html .
For these lies and smearstories, i.e. ochlarchical authoritarian behaviour, the IAT has handed out a BROWN CARD TO JAMAL HANNAH, PETER BACH, ROBERT WOGATZE AND THE SOUTHERN IFA-IAF FEDERATIONS 01.08.2008, see http://www.anarchy.no/browncard.html [later updated]. This Brown Card is handed out to all the Southern IFA/IAF-federations except the Spanish FAI and the Argentinian FLA, that are considered less authoritarian. Also the semi-southern British and Anglophone Anarchist Federation http://www.anarchy.no/afb.html has not got a Brown Card.
The whole problem with the marxist leftist/collectivist/communist position of the southern IFA-IAF federations started with a coup d'état against the CRIFA-secretary Umberto Marzocchi, that was forced to leave CRIFA involentarely, and replaced with Giorgio Sacchetti in 1983. While Marzocchi was a man with a real anarchist interpretation of the IFA-principles, and respected the northern IFA-Federations autonomy regarding policy and strategy, Sacchetti had a wrong interpretation. This situation only worsened when the FAF took over the CRIFA in 1986. Marzocchi died in 1986, and most of the anarchism in the southern Europe, and the fight against "Cohn Bendit et autres gauchistes", i.e. the children of Marx, died with him.
The Southern IFA-IAF federations are very much anti-capitalist, in a marxist way. Quoted from one of their Websites, they aim "to abolish Capitalism and all oppression to create a free and equal society. This is Anarchist Communism." This is communism, but not really anarchism. Real anarchists are not for Communism, but Communist/Commune Anarchism, as an ideal. The above quote clearly shows the communist marxist tendency of the southern IFA-IAF federations, as most marxists can agree to it. Anarchy and anarchism mean "system and managemen without ruler(s), i.e. co-operation without repression, tyranny and slavery". In short an-arch-y = (an = without - arch = ruler(s)) - y = system and management, as, say, in monarch-y. One of the main tasks of anarchists is the fight against ochlarchy (mob rule broadly defined). The southern IFA-IAF federations do not have this on the program, and are ochlarchists, i.e. authoritarian socialists.
Authoritarian anti-capitalists are authoritarian socialists, i.e. marxists on the economic-political map. Real anarchists are not only against ochlarchy, but also monarchy, oligarchy, polyarchy, plutarchy, matriarchy, patriarchy, hierarchy, etc, i.e. in real terms, economic and/or political/administrative. Including ochlarchy - this is the State - broadly defined. Anarchists mean all forms of archies - the State broadly defined, should be done away with, practically toward ideally. The anti-capitalist, marxistoid, program of the southern IFA-IAF federations, is something else. They don't mention "Against the State" as defined by anarchists at all. They put too much weight on "anti-capitalism", and too little on the fight against the State, ochlarchy included.
Seen all in all the southern IFA-IAF federations have clear a marxist leftist/collectivist/communist position, and are not really anarchistic and anarchists.
V. THE NORTHERN IFA-IAF FEDERATIONS' POSITION VIS-A-VIS THE SOUTHERN FEDERATIONS
The Anarchist Federation of Norway - Anarkistføderasjonen i Norge (AFIN) - Anarkistenes organisasjon (i Norge) ANORG, was affiliated to IFA/IAF, the International of Anarchist Federations 15.01 1979. This is confirmed in Bulletin C.R.I.F.A no 39 avril-mai 1982, and no 42 novembre-février 1982, also with the report from the first Nordic IFA-congress in Oslo, with the foundation of the Nordic IFA-IAF-secretariate. These documents also imply that the IFA-secretariate in Oslo was not considered as a sub-secretariate to C.R.I.F.A, but on equal footing, i.e. as commissions for the northern and southern sections respectively. The Danish, the Swedish and the Finnish anarchist federations became members of IFA/IAF in 1983. In 1983 there were 4 northern, the Norwegian, Swedish, Danish and Finnish and 3 southern federations, the French, Italian and Iberian in IFA/IAF plus the UAB, Bulgarian Anarchist Union. See http://www.anarchy.no/mandate.html, http://www.anarchy.no/ifadok.html and http://www.anarchy.no/ifa.html.
In 1986, at the fourth IFA-congresses in the north, and in the south where NAC, The Northern Anarchist Confederation's four federations participated by phone, the southern IFA-federations, the French, Spanish and Italian turned leftwards at the economical political map due to leftist-marxist tendencies. They thus left the anarchist quadrant on the economical-political map. The three southern IFA-federationas turned out to be "the children of Marx". (The Bulgarian Anarchist Union, UAB, was as mentioned not a federation, but an authoritarian group, and thus not recognized by the International Anarchist Tribunal as a member of IAF-IFA.) This leftist-authoritarian position of the southern IFA federations made it necessary to reorganize the IFA to save it from the marxist- leftist positions. Thus, the majority of the IFA federations, the four northern, decided to reorganize the IFA, and started the Anarchist Biennials, a series of international anarchist congresses, the first one in 1990. The three southern IFA-federations and their secretariate were suspended by the majority of the federations, the four northern, and the International Anarchist Tribunal, see http://www.anarchy.no/aptm.html, and the resolutions of their later congresses were disallowed. This was unanimously decided by the four delegates of the northern sections of IFA-IAF and IAT that participated by phone at the IFA-IAF congress in Paris 31 october to 3 november 1986, and confirmed at later congresses in Oslo. More documentation of the leftist/collectivist/communist tendency of the southern IFA-IAF federations will be publish in IJA later.
The suspension and the disallowance of their congresses will remain until the marxist-authoritarian tendency of the southern IFA-IAF-federations is removed. So far this has not happened. Thus the resolutions from their congresses from the fifth in 1990 and later are disallowed, due to significant marxist authoritarian tendencies, and the Nordic IFA/IAF-secretariate has been the world secretariate, since 1986, see http://www.anarchy.no/wscifa.html. The secretariate and federations stand firm on the IFA/IAF-principles, see above. More about the conflict between the southern IFA/IAF-federations and the northern sections, see http://www.anarchy.no/southern.html.
The Anarchist International is a broader network than the IFA/IAF-sections in the north and south. At the founding congress of the broader network in 1988,
confirmed at the International Anarchist Congress, i.e. the 5th Anarchist Biennial, arranged by the NAC/IFA/AI in Oslo medio December 1998,
the following was stated: "The Anarchist International is a global, undogmatic, free thinking, nonsectarian modern anarchist international, with sections for anarchoindividualist, anarchocollectivist, social individualist and mutualist anarchist and anarchocommunist as well as green/ecoanarchist, anarchosyndicalist and anarchafeminist anarchists. The southern IFA/IAF is a dogmatic, sectarian communist "anarchist", leftist marxistoid organization with little interest for the Anarchist International. The southern IFA/IAF is more communist than anarchist, i.e. collectivist on the economical political map. Outside the anarchist quadrant on the map, far left in the marxist quadrant."
Back to homepage