Anarchism in our time

thanks for downloading the in our time podcast for more details about in our time and for our Terms of Use please go to Joseph prune or famously declared property is theft and perhaps more surprisingly that anarchy is order speaking in 1840 was the first self-proclaimed anarchist Aniki comes from the Greek word anacost meaning without rulers and the movement draws on the ideas of philosophers like William Godwin and John Locke it's also everything in Taoism Buddhism and in other religions in Christianity for example st. Paul said there's no authority except God the anarchist rejection of a ruling class inspired Peter Kropotkin a Russian Russian prince and leading a NACA communist to utter this rousing cry in 1897 either the state forever crushing individual and local life or the destruction of States a new life starting again on the principles of the lively initiative of the individual groups and that of free agreement the choice lies with you he identified some examples of anarchism in action including the lifeboat association in the Spanish Civil War anarchists embarked on the biggest experiment to date in organizing society along anarchist principles although it automatically failed it wasn't without successes along the way so why is alec ISM become synonymous with chaos and disorder what factors came together to make the 19th century and early 20th century the high point for its ideas joining me a Peter Marshall philosopher and historian John Keane professor of politics at Westminster University and Ruth keener senior lecturer in politics at Loughborough University John Keane when the word anarchy when was the word first used in English to describe someone's political stance and why did it appear then it's it's it's a word that finds its way into English in the middle of the sixteenth century and it's synonymous with the absence of government with lawlessness with disorder Milton for example in Paradise Lost refers to the waist wide anarchy of chaos what's remarkable is that this meaning still survives until today but roughly at the end of the 18th century it undergoes a change of meaning so that become it becomes a wholly positive term anarchy stands for the self-discipline and self-imposed rules among individuals they have no they don't they don't stand for organized government over them that brute engine was the way that Godwin described all government they're hostile to parties the old anarchist slogan that if voting could change anything they'd abolish it is redolent of that the rejection of all false gods for example organized institutionalized religions the opposition to the wages system wage labor markets the strong sense among anarchists all seen as positive as individualism self imposed judgments reason means that anarchy and anarchism came from the end of the 18th century to be associated with cooperation with laughs with for example mutual aid and I would say as well it's important to see that that the tradition of anarchism came to be associated and it has a presence today because of its identification with nature with the simplicity of nature with the closeness to nature so just as societies industrialized societies dominate nature and have destroyed a patronage Erica subject that this is a reason for so to say standing in defense of nature well that's a terrific overview we won't stop the program now and we're now we're still gone for the next forty odd minutes to try to sort of vers spread out a little bit job the can we go back to why it was used you've mentioned milton but what as I understand it might have been used in the Civil War by the Royalists of their opponents can you just give us a note on that yes I I mean the word anarchism have first enters the English language in 1642 at the point at which the royal estate is in collapse and the beginning there is the beginning of rebellion and the word anarchist also appears in this period not surprisingly because it is a term of abuse used principally by Royalists to describe those who are fermenting disorder so basically it is used by people who have the control of society against those who seek to overthrow them in English from the beginning that is its first use yes they will not see them as opposing a different sort of society they see them as merely destructive and therefore to be got rid of yes and it's this chaos this waste wide anarchy of chaos as as Milton calls it which generates enormous fear among the defenders of of the monarchy so in a sense you sort of demonize them instead of explaining them or taking them intellectually seriously by throwing this word at them and sort of fudging spluttering obscuring the issues but at this point in time there are no anarchists in the positive late 18th century comes later and its associated I think with the French Revolution we're sideling towards that then we'll get there in a domotic quarter past 9 Ruth can it generally be no termas as john said of abuse associated with chaos and and even ungodliness can you can we develop that a bit why why that was the case well forming the Anna cases argue that it's it's a prejudice um and if that's so I think it's a it's a fairly deep-seated one I mean in the history of ideas it's I think there are two challenges that anarchists have to face one is the idea that if you don't have law you can't have virtue which is a sort of Machiavellian notion that if you leave people by their own devices then they tend to be lazy and corrupt and so what you need to give them purpose is a strong leader who will bring out the best in them and raise them to virtue so it comes out of the notion of human beings of humankind as being like that inside well that's one that's one part of it I mean the other part of it is a sort of the Hobbesian challenge that the old the anarchists face and that's the idea that where you have self-interested individuals who have different all codes and no one to arbitrate between them what will happen is that they are necessarily drawn into conflict with each other they can't resolve that conflict and so they live a life of constant insecurity and fear and the only way out of that is to create an authority who will literally lay down the law establish you know what is right and wrong and back that those judgments up with physical force through coercion so I mean in a sense what the anarchist faces is you know on one hand Aniki is at best directionless NISS you know you won't have any kind of purpose unless you have law and at worst its civil strife but Danica's didn't actually say that there wouldn't have any law at all but we'll come back to how did how did godliness and under God we're talking about the seventeenth century where the idea of godliness was a great defining political fact how did God in a Cell on God in his play in the case of those who could be called Anika's although the word wasn't commonly used in well I think you know the you know what you were saying earlier is is the key to it anyone who challenges the orthodoxy of the time is someone who is accused of being an accursed I'm not sure that it's tied necessarily to godliness I mean people like Locke who are advocating you know mixed government or constitutional monarchy are denounced as as people who are leading us towards anarchy simply because they're challenging the Orthodox is and I think that's the key to it when later anarchists would say that 19th century anarchists would pick up the point about godliness in terms of saying it's it's godliness and the idea that we have to subordinate ourselves to some high authority that lies at the root of the of the problem of the the the fear that unless you have something outside of your yourself you're going to collapse back into some kind of chaotic life the John Keane indicated in his opening overview really the the semantic shift occurred in the French Revolution that's these are generalizations I hope you think it's reasonably accurate how did that occur what did it mean well as a group of in there's a group of militants in the French Revolution opponents of the jacobins called the on Rajee something is literally the rabbit ones and they attack the Jacobins for the centralization of power and they're taken off to trial in 1793 they don't call themselves anarchists but they're denounced as anarchists and the the sort of the the prosecution focus on the fact that they are seemingly advocating an abandonment of central controls and I think what's important about the French Revolution for the for the later history of Alec ISM in the nineteenth century is that the the term is used for the first time in opposition to a mainstream form of socialism if you like or there's a line of development at least that you could trace from the Jacobean French Revolution through to the later Russian Revolution and the opponents the revolutionary opponents of that tendency are claimed to be and later claimed themselves to be anarchists so you could say the from the French Revolution began to dig itself in as it could almost be called a movement but certainly a strand it's not is that the Australian well Peter Marshall before we did it one step forward let's take two steps back because unlike listeners to show to know you know about but the fact that it's being buried in in various ways so the Western tradition long before this can you tell us I'm sorry to go back to the gray Co and I'm not can you tell us what happened that is I think that that anarchism is actually very ancient or what I would rather call the anarchist sensibility yes I think wherever I mean this the state is quite a recent development in human experience and people have lived outside the state billions hundreds of years none of them no believes inside the sturgeon is angry and and they've governed themselves and they've run their own affairs very peacefully incorporative Lee but I think that you have with the Greeks you have the beginnings of the separation between religion and philosophy and were beginning to question authority and to think for themselves and there is a lively libertarian spirit I think they come through certain Greek philosophers I'm the Sophists who taught for a fee how to argue well and and and and be good at rhetoric they nevertheless sent off barbs of of wit and and they had many challenging ideas of conventional morality and then even even Socrates who was accused of being a sophist he was he was an anti Democrat but he nevertheless believed that ninety examined life twas was not worth living and he was condemned by the Athenian state for corrupting young I think even more important amongst the Greeks are the the cynics and also the Stoics the Stoics believed they made a distinction between nature and custom and and they believed that the one should live according to the laws of nature rather than the laws of man and they Zeno they're one of their main exponents in his Republic very different the total turn one a Plato has a vision of society without property and without government based on universal brotherhood so we have that we also have it in in in religions receipting can you I'm sorry to ask you to be brief it yeah in christianity buddhism taoism briefly it is there isn't it the idea that we he's not yet called anarchism he's around there too it is in it I think come through very strongly in sixth century BC China within Taoism Lao Tzu innocence pointed out that the more rules and regulations there are the poorer people become the sharper men's weapons the more travel in the land and then he was that the Taoist were arguing for a society a decentralized society in harmony with nature again we find in in Buddhism although there's a stress on community there's also believed in autonomy and self disciplined freedom and and one can work out one's own salvation without script outside scriptures and and and masters and then I think in even more so in Christianity you quoted at the beginning st. Paul saying that there is no authority except God the early Christian father Saint Augustine went even further and said love and do what you will and particularly the Middle Ages there was millenarian sex who believed there was a second coming of Christ and they were in a state of grace the unup Aptus that the house cites the Brethren and the free spirits they all believed that they could live it since they were in a state of grace they could live without the government of the state or of the church and and that they could do no evil and this comes through actually during the the English Civil War with the ranters and the diggers when Stanley Vincent's jeredy when Stanley said that all men stand for freedom for freedom is the man who would turn the world upside down and they they wanted to form a common Treasury and God forbid there even lastly swimming joining in with free loud and and rejection of law and governments so that brought us right up to where we left off before that which is served how do we know the Enlightenment isn't very much we usually banish the age of reason John keen how need reason did reason enable anarchism we don't need the ages actually begin 19th century now still not named widely as to precede it did give it did it give it intellectual strength and uncertain respectability though yes not it slightly in contrast to to Peter I think that all that he said is about the antecedents of modern anarchism but I think it's rather anachronistic to talk in that way as such I mean the language of anarchism only appears under modern conditions around the time of the French Revolution and there's in this sense I think anarchism is much more born of the pathologies of the modern world excessive state power the emphasis on the market the wrecking of nature and yet it feeds upon some of the central elements of what we call modern life and one of them is reason you can see this commitment to reason among the early anarchists in the work of William Godwin said in the English tradition to be probably the first explicit defender of something like an anarchist vision and for him son of a parson born in wisbech in Cambridgeshire of there a man a wonderfully ascetic self-disciplined an embodiment of reason he thought that all individuals men and women he married Mary Wollstonecraft all men and women are endowed with reason probably in the end its god-given and it should not be abused taken away by anybody else all individuals had the capacity to learn to come closer to truth and this commitment to sincerity no Butler said Godwin should ever lie if his master is in this commitment to sincerity to reason to truth is is is ultimately for Godwin the justification of the abolition of government why should politicians parties ministers determine for us how we should live this instead should be done by means of self-reflection a commitment to truth sincerity listening to public opinion and applying above all rules to ourselves which we ourselves have made can we talk a little bit about Ruth Rousseau Ruth canna who was enormous Lee in influential at the end of the 18th century and his ideas did he did it here as it were give more feed this notion as much as Godwin because he's more influential than God indeed I think in terms of the attraction of the anarchist is very start and I think what the artists like about Rousseau stems from Russo's notion of natural freedom and this is the freedom that Rousseau says we enjoy in the state of nature the condition he imagines that we lived in prior to the formation of government and natural freedom is your freedom to secure things in nature and it's something that you initially enjoy in isolation ok but gradually Rousseau says what happens is that you come into contact with others and for a brief period at least you can enjoy your your natural freedom and have sociability now in the long run Rousseau says in fact you can't hang on to natural freedom and once you've lost it you can't recover it and so in the ideal form of government Rousseau recommends that you exchange your natural freedom for what he calls civic freedom which is the freedom to participate in lawmaking and moral freedom which is that the freedom you enjoy is part of your your membership of the community now the anarchists don't like that part of Rousseau and they're very critical of this this ideal form of government what they do like is the notion that there's no necessary trade-off if you like between freedom on one hand sociability on the other even if you have to have you know certain conditions for that to work and the other thing they like about Rousseau is the story that he tells about the formation of non-ideal government and this story is is one which points out that government doesn't just happen it's not a spontaneous sort of evolution and it's not necessary either in a kind of a Hobbesian sense because we're not all living at each other's throats in Rousseau state of nature the government that that develops that people first enter into according to Rousseau is an imposition and it's imposed by those people who in the state of nature have managed to secure certain advantages for themselves and what they want to do in government is to maintain those advantages at the cost of everybody else so the anarchist takes from that I suppose the idea that the government is basically exploitative it's basically oppressive and it deprives us as something which is extremely valuable which is our natural freedom now we we could talk about Tom Paine we could talk about Blake we talked about various people feeding him and let's get on to the first person who called himself public and Annika's Peter Marshall Joseph Prudhoe and he's best known for his declaration property is theft can you explain why property was it seems to be at the center of his philosophy attack and why he was influential and gripped this idea of anarchism and from him from the time ago held it is where he has been in our polity yes well in the middle of the 19th century it was Pradhan who did deliberately called himself an anarchists and he said I'm a a strong supporter of order but I am in the fullest sense an anarchist and that he linked a rejection of government with the rejection of exclusive property so when he asked in his in his book what his property he said property is theft it's theft because it's though the large property owners are taking the surplus from the workers themselves and they are not receiving the full fruits of their labor and as such it is an unjust institution and in its place he recommended a form of what he called mutualism which is in which people set set up banks with free credit with trade unions where they would share nothing like cooperative movement not very similar to the converted movement you know and not not but with without any government obviously to to organize it and this had a huge influence on the 19th century working-class movement particularly in France and also in in Spain and Italy Robert Dornan of course has more influence in Britain but it was he also took a very very strong dislike of parliamentary politics he was actually a Republican candidate in 1848 revolution and the very experiences of being lost as he called it in into this parliamentary sign I meant thereafter he declared that the universal suffrage was the counter-revolution and and he wanted to work with peasants and with the workers to create a more just and equal society without government and without the exclusive property he eventually he didn't actually reject property in the in the sense of a possession on a limited basis in fact in some ways he saw it as a bulwark of freedom but he rejected a large-scale ownership can we then move to bakunin with you John Keane in sense of what did he bring an ad to was talking about the middle of the 19th century still well I think of all the 19th century anarchists Mikhail Bakunin I think lived and looked at part copious brandy drinker a huge appetite for reading and food great cigar smoker apparently in prison in a month in Saxony he went through 1600 cigars wild-looking and the great enemy of Karl Marx in the first international this International workingmen's association that tried to develop across borders in Europe and beyond solidarity among the emerging working classes bar Coonans objection to marks and the marked is the best way to define his ideas with the objection demands I think this is what bakunin today is remembered for it is the point at which I think the the the black splits from the red that anarchism becomes hostile to what they take as bakunin insists on the authoritarianism of of Marxian socialism the the central dispute that Bakunin has with Marx has to do with this dictatorship of the proletariat idea so marks and other socialists and communists have this idea that there will be a transition to socialism and then communism and it will require self-discipline and administration and government as a transitional device for Bob Coonan that is if you like trying to cast out Devils with Beelzebub its it's the recipe for a dictatorship over the proletariat and of course bakunin proved to be right about this that lurking within Marxian socialism was the possibility of a new kind of political authoritarianism and this I think was a restatement by about croonin of this classic modern anarchist idea that government is the principal enemy of autonomy of freedom an asura Kuna that hierarchy somehow almost embedded in any social organization because both prudent and McCune spotted that Marx was could be authoritarian dictator in dictatorial authoritarian and they fell out with him both them fell out with him could you just the John's given us again and good overview of that but could we elaborate that a little these happen after with Pecunia at the first international where Marx expelled him and so it's the fight is coming very much into the ideas which are which have beginning to shape the modern world up there we just elaborate that a bit yeah certainly the I think that the the essential difference between procuring and Marx comes in the conception of the state and bakunin accepts quite a lot of what mark says he accepts the idea that the state is an instrument of class rules so which means basically that whoever happens to have political power and decisions are always made in the interests of those who have the economic power so the property owners and the shareholders and so forth Bakunin thinks that's right but that you can't explain all forms of domination or oppression by exploitation or by class so that there are other things like patriarchy or racism for example that aren't reducible to economic exploitation or religion demean or religion he certainly he talks about religion and religious intolerance and this sort of thing and Marx's system is too narrow in that sense because he's only looking at class exploitation the other problem that the pubic Union has with Marx is that the Kuna believes that there's an organizational element or dimension to the state which Marx entirely misses and that organizational element is tied to what the Kuna calls Authority the idea that we must subordinate ourselves to others that we must obey commands that we must do as we're told pretty much and so in a practical sense the problem that Bakunin has is that Marx's strategy for the transition from capitalism socialism relies on the working-class coming in and seizing political power and using the machinery of the state so government and the army and so forth to force through the economic changes that will form the basis for socialism so collectivizing the land and abolishing the market whatever happens to be and bakunin says well that's that's all very well as far as it goes but what you're not addressing is all those other forms of exploitation or oppression that might exist so you might still have a sexist society or a patriarchal society and even worse what you're doing although you only have one class now which is the the working class you've got a division between those who are in a position to make decisions and everybody else who has to do as they're told so you might have an equal society but you don't have a free one in a sense what bakunin is saying is it's the Animal Farm scenario that everyone's equal but some people are more equal than others can we just pause for one second before we move on to on to Kropotkin because I want to keep him for a minute too but can you just give us some idea pretty much we're talking about these in bakunin Pruden Marx middle of the 19th century ferments revolutions and so how is he spreading out into what is happening in the politics and organization of let us say West European society at them can you just give us some view on that before we move on well I think I think you haven't mentioned the Paris Commune yeah of 1871 where the many prude Ernests involved and was a Coonan and but that that cast a shadow over if you like the bourgeoisie of Europe and that they saw that tremendous threat of Nick ISM and socialism working-class in because of socialism and the period of great repression followed and it was doing that but during that period the that particularly bakunin had a very strong influence in the working-class they started to organize what was being called anarcho-syndicalism so revolutionary syndicalism which again rejected the marxist or an authoritarian socialist approach the conquest of power and they believe the union itself would form a sell an embryo in the new Society of the new heart wait sorry to press but how wise where is this happening well this influence does it happen well this had this had a very wide influence in in France and particularly in Italy and and also in Spain which of course and in the 20th century became the great it had the great Anika's experimental time so the ideas are going directly through to people as you were let's say on the ground yes the UN and and also in Germany and Switzerland becomes a hotbed of of anarchism where vicuna goes and and and also Republican yes I I agree with that and I I think the traditions of friendly societies of cooperatives that the birth of trade unions have fundamentally bound up with this anarchist sensibility if not outright anarchism but it should also be remembered there's another side another face of anarchism in the 19th century and it's assassination czar alexander ii bumped off in 1881 mckinley 1896 I mean there were great controversies about whether this was the fault of anarchism but the point is there was a tendency with in late 19th century anarchism to pick up the gun to deal directly with political power and in that sense it made it had its presence Ruth I was just gonna say that one of the ways that the anarchists get their message across is by setting up newspapers and from the 1870s onwards you have a range of Anika's press which have a you know quite a wide circulation and so the ideas are getting out to workers through the networks of press which are either sold openly in countries like Britain or a smuggled through to states like Russia and so an accursed ideas do get directly to the people themselves one of those persons who ran a newspapers is the one of the another great figure absent one of the greatest figures in some people's eyes of anarchism is Prince Peter Kropotkin he was widely read across you Oscar Wilde described there's a new christ coming out of Russia he advocated mutual agent and based some of his ideas on a deep reading of Darwin talking about Darwin's corporately a cooperative elements in the later Darwin which a lot of Darwinist don't face up to these days and he was very influential was exiled from Russia or escaped gaining the state a lot of time here run papers can you put him in place and then we can talk about what happens in the 20th century as Peter yes well perhaps insert a key figure he of course was a communist that we proved on was a mutualist we had the coon who was collectivist so Kropotkin did believe in in in in the possessions being in a common pole but he he was a geographer but an asura prince and also one time page the Tsar of Russia but when he left Russia because of his revolutionary interest and went into exile he he as a geographer an early ecologist he was very incident in in Darwinian evolution and an argued that cooperation rather than competition was a key element in in evolution and well you say and and and and and so mutual aid was something which was very very much part of the human experience and human beings by their very nature through evolution had developed a moral sense which meant that the external laws and imposed Authority was not no longer necessary can you develop that because what Kropotkin seems to be saying very clearly and a way that attracted a lot of people is that people left on their own without government can manage not only work which is the opposition to but they can do it in a moral basis they can they can do it successfully in all sorts of ways can you just take that on well the way it works in in the the context of Hopkins theory of Darwin or his interpretation of Darwin is to say that is to try and rescue if you like Darwin from social Darwinists from people like th Huxley who believed that what Darwin has described in the struggle for existence is something that equates to the survival of the fittest where Fitness is defined in terms of the individual's capacity to compete for scarce resources and as Peter said I mean what what Kropotkin says is that there's another way in which you can interpret fitness and that's the ability of species to cooperate to protect themselves against the environment against predators and so forth and Kropotkin is concern is not only to say that you know therefore Darwin is describing a nature which is more Rousseau Ian if you like than it is Hobbesian but that he wants to counter the claim that that th Huxley makes which is that because nature is red in the tooth in the floor you can't find the source of moral reason from within nature what Kropotkin says is that you know once you once you understand that Darwin has a wider understanding of struggle you can look at anthropological evidence and you can look at historical evidence and you can see the way in which humans have come together and developed deliberately ethical codes codes of mutual aid and support and what Kropotkin wants to do then is say well you know if this is what humans do by their own volition then what we should do as anarchists is find ways of structuring society in ways that will allow mutual aid to flourish and that's where the communism comes in that's the best form of society Kropotkin argues to allow mutual aid to develop John Keynes heard that by the beginning of the century anarchism is very much on on the political agenda can you tell us how it worked its way through so the first couple of decades of the 20th century what impact what influenced you now is how its readied its way into the political discourse well a continuation from below of self-organization of workers the labor movement in some areas creating some parts of the world creating tremendous effects I think of the Wobblies in the United States the IWW with their heroes Joe Hill hanged by the neck in the state of Utah in 1915 stood it stood against the struggle for the franchise stood against government and particularly World War I mean the eve of World War one I think is a period of great flourishing of anarchist and anarcho-syndicalist ideas and actions direct action there is as well I think the what's interesting about anarchism is that it could be it could be seen I think as as as the ideas as the language as the style of the losers of the modern world and it partly explains why anarchism took root in the countryside so the Ukraine kathal Catalonia Andalusia so there begins to be this this Bight of anarchism within the the rural areas and I think this resonates for example with the way that Ruth has spoken about Kropotkin and this this this rural so uses that as an excuse to what was a you know can I get to the anarchist movement in Spain in the civil war which a lot of our listeners will know about through all miles homage to Catalonia very closely observed and there you are now it was perhaps the biggest experiment it was in many ways very successful can you briefly tell us how successful it was and how big it was in the context of the Spanish Civil War Peter Marshall well it was extraordinary successful in the greatest experiment so far and that Anika and anarcho-syndicalism is a very strong force in Spain and that at the time of of the when Franco rebelled against elected Popular Front government in 1936 there one and a half million members in in the in the Anika syndicalist movement and as soon as that the revolution the Franco's rebellion took off that he occupied his forces occupied half the country then the the the anarchists in in both in the south and in Catalunya started to organize themselves and over three million people in Andalusia and in the east and in Levant organized agricultural communes they they they Eve even were calling for abolishing money and and there was practicing vegetarianism nudism there was a huge lot of coffee free love as well women and men equal there's this is a three million people engaged in this and then I think slightly didn't disagree with you that it wasn't just merely a rural movement that in catalunya was the most highly advanced industrial part of Spain at the time 70% of industry was there and it was in in the in the factories they set themselves up through workers controlled and self management and even hast art historians who have accepted that they increased production so you both see both in agricultural areas and industrialized areas in Spain an enormous and successful and a kiss' experiment taking place okay we just develop got one more thing I mean Peter said the increased production and it basically in that area it worked would you agree with that and if so why did it get crushed first of all why do well I want to think it increased production in certain areas I don't think it's you know it's not a universal success I think the important thing about Spain and Barcelona is that the the anarchists demonstrate that they can do stuff that everybody said they couldn't which was run certain industries by themselves and that you know syndicalism had worked in that sense I don't think you could say it was a universal success but then you know they are working in a wartime situation and you know the reasons for the for the collapse of the experiment have as much to do with the kind of the international politics of the time as they do about it with the must be to do with Germany must we mean the fact that we didn't go there for well quite and the fact that they were also confronted with the Stalinist sand and all of that so you know there are reasons for the collapse of of the experiment which extend way beyond what the the cooperative venture itself can do well I say we I mean the very individuals when a great number of interviews run but the British government had a chance to intervene and totally change the course of 20th century so have we moved in I think a lot of people more knowledgeable and I think that as well you're trying to get in I agree I mean Germany and Italy since no weapons they sent they sent tanks and an aircraft and men to fight on Franco site France and Britain refused to send out and so support although of course many Britons lost their lives in the Republican brigades but the the the source of weapons was from Russia and although the Communist Party by that time Stalinist was was had a small grouping in Catalunya they controlled the weapons and in the end they were fearful guesses there that Lenin had been fearful of the anarchists during the Russian Revolution they were fearful of their influence and and they ended up as a shootout between between and the anarchists and the Communists where did that leave Vienna kiss where has that left the anarchists as the big experiment it didn't fail was was crushed overcome forced by you John King funny where did it leave them where has it left an occasion well we still see the the a in a circle splashed on wolves I like to think of this Anika's sensibility as Peter has put it as rather like streams that have gone underground since since 25 since this great European civil war war in in Spain which the anarchists lost you can sum up some of this his surprise would be surprising for 19th century anarchists I think the strong commitment to market liberalism is it's a carrier of some of those however perversely of those aleca sentiments art think of one well and Kafka and modernism and post-modernism the spirit of anarchism is strongly there I think the revival of interest in civil society beginning with the civil rights movement in America the the Citians you know sitting in in Woolworths in defense of the right of black people to to be equals with with white and I would say finally this spirit of anarchism is alive and well and increasingly important in the whole revival of ecological politics thank you very much thanks Peter Marshall John King Andrew Skinner and next week we'll be talking about Indian mathematics and the origin of our numerals today thanks for listening we hope you've enjoyed this radio 4 podcast you can find hundreds of other programs about history science and philosophy a BBC code at UK forward slash Radio 4

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *