Chomsky on Anarchism.pdf - Zine Library

CHOMSKY ON ANARCHISM
and relations. Stick these young (labor activists] in the business schools and
they'll see "we're all friends" and we're all doing the same things. And it went
on like that fo r years. And then Elaine Bernard came along and took it over.
And, since, it's become a center fo r radical international labor activists. And it's
because all these ideas are just there, barely below the surface and when you
puncture the surface it all just comes out. It's all so natural and obvious that it
takes massive effort to beat it down. By now [the Harvard program] is completely
different and has big effects throughout the world. And that can be
done in all kinds of places, but those are modes of peaceful change. And in just
Elaine's own lifetime they have led to very big changes.
The change has gone in both directions. On the one hand, you can't crush
Homestead the way you could 100 years ago, while, on the mher hand, the
consciousness that led to Homestead is gone. So it's not just progress, but
rebuilding that consciousness is the kind of peaceful activicy that can be carried
our and is in many respects a lor easier than fighting the National Guard.
A final question because I think we're running out of time. I have been
working on Alexander Berkman; book, Now and Then: an ABC of
An;]rchism because A K PreJJ ha.l jmt rf'published it as Wh;][ Is A n;]rch ism?
In reading his letters in the 1920s when he was working on the book and
he was finding it very difficult, one of the things that he was trying to come 231
to grips with in the hook is "Why haven't people come to this idea? This idea,
which to me is just common sense ... this natural instinct to solidarity and
support? I've seen Russia and I've seen totalitarianism in action. Why
haven't anarchist ideas had a greater impact in the world?" Now that was
nearly 80 years ago and the question we're all still focing is we at least
believe, as Emma Goldman says, "Anarchism is the only belief that shows
men and women their true selves and who they can be. " But we see that,
and we know that instinctively, yet it has still had such a miniscule impact.
Is that true?
I do not think it's true that it's had a minuscule impact. A lot of the progressive
social change of the past century isn't anarchist. Progressive taxations,
Social Securicy isn't anarchist, but it's a reflection of attitudes and understandings
which, if they go a little bit further, do reflect anarchist commitments.
They are based on the idea that there really should be solidaricy, community,
mutual support, mutual aid and so forth-opportunities for creative action.
They are all based on these. They are subdued, channeled and modified so they
never take real libertarian forms, bur they are there and they lead to social
change.
Why hasn't it gone fu rther? Well a large part of it is violence. Take for example
Berkman's experience in Russia. He entered into a violent, totalitarian state.
Up until the Bolshevik takeover-coup, revolution, whatever YOll want to call