“The specific anarchist organization is the grouping of anarchist individuals who, through their own will and free agreement, work together with well-defined objectives. Its function is to coordinate, converge, and permanently increase the social force of anarchist militant activities, providing a tool for solid and consistent struggle, which is a fundamental means for the pursuit of the final objectives. In relation to ideology, strategy is much more flexible since it varies according to the social context, the current situation. It is natural that in each context and conjuncture you apply different tactics to the political practice of anarchism.”
While these words originally come from Parts 8-14 of Social Anarchism and Organisation by the FARJ, this edited and abridged version represents our organizational understanding of this text which has been essential to the development of the Center for Especifismo Studies and the continuation of Militant Kindergarten. We have composed, numbered, and subtitled the following paragraphs by adapting our “Reading Guide” without page numbers or ellipsis to make for a smoother reading:
- THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SPECIFIC ANARCHIST ORGANIZATION
The specific anarchist organization is the grouping of anarchist individuals who, through their own will and free agreement, work together with well-defined objectives. Its function is to coordinate, converge, and permanently increase the social force of anarchist militant activities, providing a tool for solid and consistent struggle, which is a fundamental means for the pursuit of the final objectives. This organization is founded on fraternal agreements, both for its internal functioning as for its external action – without having relations of domination, exploitation, or alienation in its midst – ensuring that it is libertarian. This organization of well-defined lines joins the anarchists at the political and ideological level and develops their political practice at the social level – which characterizes an organization of active minority, seeing as though the social level is always much larger than the political level. To constitute this tool of solid and consistent combat, it is essential that the anarchist organization has well-determined strategic-tactical and political lines – which occur through theoretical and ideological unity, and the unity of strategy and tactics. So, we can say that the activities of the specific anarchist organization are:
- Social Work and Insertion
- Production and Reproduction of Theory
- Anarchist Propaganda
- Political Education
- Conception and Implementation of Strategy
- Social and Political Relations
- Resource Management
These activities can be performed in a more or less public way, always taking into account the social context in which the organization operates.
- INTERESTS OF THE EXPLOITED CLASSES
In this political practice of placing itself at the service of the exploited classes, the anarchist organization is guided by a Charter of Principles. The principles are the ethical propositions and notions, both non-negotiable, that guide all political practice, providing models for anarchist action. The specific anarchist organization does not replace the organization of the exploited classes but gives anarchists the chance to put themselves at their service.
- 2003 CHARTER OF PRINCIPLES
The 2003 Charter of Principles defines nine principles: freedom, ethics and values, federalism, self-management, internationalism, direct action, class struggle, political practice and social insertion, and mutual aid. The anarchist organization should seek to relate to all forms of popular struggle, regardless of where they may be taking place. We recognize and give precedence to the class struggle. Through ethics, among other things, we advocate the consistency between means and ends as well as mutual respect. That’s why we reject the individualist proposals of anarchism. The pursuit of libertarian socialism is the incessant struggle for freedom. And we assert federalism and self-management as principles of non-hierarchical and decentralized organization, sustained by mutual aid and free association, assuming the premise of the IWA that everyone has rights and duties. Internationalism is opposed to nationalism and the exaltation of the state, as they represent a sense of superiority over other countries and peoples and reinforce ethnocentrism and prejudice – the first steps towards xenophobia. By asserting internationalism, we highlight the international character of struggles and the need for us to associate ourselves by class affinities and not those of nationality. Direct action is posited as a principle founded on horizontalism and encourages the protagonism of workers, opposing representative democracy which, as we have already stated, alienates politically. Mutual aid encourages solidarity in struggle, encouraging the maintenance of fraternal relations with all who truly work for a just and egalitarian world. It encourages effective solidarity among the exploited.
- NO POLITICAL VACUUM
We believe that there is never a political vacuum, anywhere. Among the various forces present in these spaces anarchists should stand out and bring to fruition their positions. In addressing the permanent dispute over political space, we are not saying that anarchists should fight for the leadership, supervision, or any position of privilege in the social movements. We talk, on the contrary, of the internal struggle that takes place when we want to influence social movements to use libertarian practices. The authoritarians seek to establish a relationship of domination over the social movements. We know that politicians, parties, unions, and also other authoritarian organizations and individuals – like the churches, drug trafficking, etc. – constitute obstacles to the construction of the popular organization since they penetrate social movements. In the vast majority of cases, they seek to take advantage of the number of people present there to: find support in elections, constitute the base for authoritarian power projects, get money, conquer faiths, open new markets, and so on. Authoritarian organizations and individuals do not want to support social movements but use them to achieve their (the authoritarian organizations’ and individuals’) own objectives, which are not consistent with the objectives of the militants of the social movements. The anarchists, by not constituting the necessary social force, offer two possibilities: either they will be used by the authoritarians as workhorses (aka “sleeves”) in carrying out their authoritarian power projects, or they will simply be removed. When they are not organized, they do not exert the necessary influence to have even a little social force. Without the necessary organization they cannot maintain themselves in the social movements and much less exert the desired influence. For example, on seeing that some anarchists are struggling for a movement to use direct action and direct democracy, politicians and party devices will be against it, and unless there is a strong organization of anarchists, with social insertion and the ability to fight for these positions, the authoritarian positions will have greater chances to prosper. When we are properly organized as anarchists, we will not lag behind events but manage to mark our positions and exert our influence in the social movements, going on to have true insertion. So, from the moment we cause our positions to prevail, it necessarily means a decrease in the influence of the authoritarians and vice versa.
- THE FRONTS
This political practice in different camps requires that the anarchist organization divides itself into fronts, which are the internal groups that carry out social work. The fronts are responsible, in their respective area of work, for the creation and development of social movements as well as for ensuring that anarchists occupy political space – space that is in permanent dispute – and to exercise due influence in these movements. Generally, organizations that work with this methodology suggest that three basic fronts are developed: trade union, community, and student. We believe that the fronts should be divided, not according to these pre-stipulated spaces of insertion, but based on the practical work of the organization. In our understanding there should not be an obligation to develop work in these three fronts and, in addition, there may be other interesting spaces that demand dedicated fronts. Each organization should seek spaces more conducive to the development of its social work, and from this practical necessity form its fronts. In this sense, we support a model of dynamic fronts that account for the internal division of the specific anarchist organization for the practical realization of social work in the best way possible.
- AN IMPORTANT PARADOX
The anarchist organization needs to preserve different instances of action. These different instances should strengthen its work while at the same time allowing it to bring together prepared militants with a high level of commitment and approximating people sympathetic to the theory or practice of the organization – who could be more or less prepared and more or less committed. The concentric circles are intended to provide a clear place for each of the militants and sympathizers of the organization. In addition, they seek to facilitate and strengthen the social work of the anarchist organization, and finally, establish a channel for the capture of new militants. In short, the concentric circles seek to resolve an important paradox: the anarchist organization needs to be closed enough to have prepared, committed and politically aligned militants, and open enough to draw in new militants. The specific anarchist organization is divided internally into the fronts which act, each one, in a determined social movement or social movement sector. In this case, assuming that the specific anarchist organization works with three social movements, or with three social movement sectors, it divides itself for the work into three fronts. In our case, our specific anarchist organization is today divided into three fronts: (A) urban social movements, (B) community, and (C) agro-ecology (Anarchism and Nature). Each one of these works in one or more social movements. Front A in the homeless movement and in the MTD, front B in the community movement and front C in the rural movements of ecology and agriculture.
- MILITANTS INSIDE
There is not a hierarchy between the circles, but the idea is that the more “inside”, or the closer the militant, the better are they able to formulate, understand, reproduce, and apply the lines of the organization. The more “inside” the militant, the greater is their level of commitment and activity. The more a militant offers the organization, the more is demanded of them by it. It is the militants who decide on their level of commitment, and they do or do not participate in the instances of deliberation based on this choice. So, the militants decide how much they want to commit and the more they commit, the more they will decide. The less they commit, the less they will decide. So, inside the specific anarchist organization you may have one or more circles, which should always be defined by the level of commitment of the militants. In the case of more than one level this must be clear to everyone, and the criteria to change a level must be available to all militants. In this way, it’s the militant who chooses where they want to be. Inside the specific anarchist organization there are only anarchists that, to a greater or lesser extent, are able to elaborate, reproduce, and apply the political line of the organization internally, in the fronts, and in public activity. Also, to a greater or lesser extent, militants should be able to assist in the elaboration of the strategic-tactical line of the organization, as well as having full capacity to reproduce and apply it. Moreover, the functions should be rotated in order to empower everyone and avoid crystallized positions or functions. The functions assumed by the militants within the organization adhere to self-management and federalism, or to horizontal decisions where all the militants have the same power of voice and of vote and where, in specific cases, there is delegation with imperative mandates.
- SUPPORTERS
The next circle, more external and distant from the core of the anarchist organization, is no longer part of the organization but has a fundamental importance: the level of supporters. This body, for instance, seeks to group together all people who have ideological affinities with the anarchist organization. Supporters are responsible for assisting the organization in its practical work, such as the publishing of pamphlets, periodicals, or books; the dissemination of propaganda material; helping in the work of producing theory or of contextual analysis; in the organization of practical activities for social work: community activities, help in training work, logistical activities, help in organizing work, etc. An instance of support is where people who have affinities with the anarchist organization and its work have contact with other militants, are able to deepen their knowledge of the political line of the organization, better get to know its activities and deepen their vision of anarchism, etc. The specific anarchist organization draws in the greatest possible number of supporters and, through practical work, identifies those interested in joining the organization and who have an appropriate profile for membership. Although each militant chooses their level of commitment to the organization and where they want to be, the objective of the anarchist organization is always to have the greatest number of militants in the more internal circles, with a greater level of commitment. The proposal for entry into the organization may be made by the militants of the organization to the supporter and vice versa.
- COMMITMENT AND DECISION-MAKING
The logic of concentric circles requires that each militant and the organization itself have very well-defined rights and duties for each level of commitment. In the model of concentric circles, we seek a system of rights and duties in which everyone makes decisions about that which they could and should be committed to afterwards. In this way it is normal for supporters to decide only on that in which they will be involved. In the same way it is normal for militants of the organization to decide on that which they will carry out. It is very easy for a militant who appears from time to time to want to set the political line of the organization since it is not they who will have to follow this line most of the time. For example, supporter who frequents activities once a month and makes sporadic contributions cannot decide on rules or activities that must be met or carried out daily, as they would be deciding something much more for the other militants than for themselves. For this reason, we make decisions and their commitments proportionally and this implies that the organization has clear criteria for entry, clearly defining who does and does not take part in it, and at what level of commitment the militants are. In any event, the anarchist organization always has to concern itself with the training and guidance of the supporters and militants so that this may allow them to change their level of commitment, if they so desire. As a supporter, knowing the political line in a little more depth and having an affinity for the practical work of the organization, the person may show interest in joining the organization or the organization can express its interest in the supporter becoming a militant. As we have seen, the anarchist organization is divided internally into fronts for the performance of practical work. For this there are organizations that prefer to establish direct relations with the social movements, and there are others that prefer to present themselves through an intermediary social organization, which we could call a grouping of tendency. The grouping of tendency puts itself between the social movements and the specific anarchist organization, bringing together militants of distinct ideologies that have affinity in relation to certain practical questions. The idea is that the specific anarchist organization seeks insertion in this intermediate level (grouping of tendency) and through it presents itself, conducting its work in social movements in search of social insertion. Since the views that we advocate in the social movements are much more practical than theoretical, it may be interesting to work with a grouping of tendency, incorporating people who agree with some or all of the positions that we advocate in the social movements (force, class struggle, autonomy, combativeness, direct action, direct democracy, and revolutionary perspective) and that will help us to augment the social force in defense of these positions.
- WORKING WITH ACTIVISTS
The objective of the anarchist organization is not to turn all activists into anarchists, but to learn to work with each of these activists in the most appropriate way. This form of organization aims to solve a very common problem that we find in activism. For example, when we know very dedicated activists; revolutionaries that advocate self-management, autonomy, grassroots democracy, direct democracy, etc. and with whom we do not act because they are not anarchists. These activists could work with the anarchists in the groupings of tendency and defend their positions in the social movements together. A militant who has great practical affinity with the anarchists, but is not an anarchist, should be a member of the grouping of tendency and can be fundamental to the performance of social work. If they have ideological affinities, they may be closer to or even join the organization.
- VOTING
One way or another, all the activities that are deliberated and which are the responsibility of the organization will have to be executed by its members. For this execution, there is the need to divide the activities between militants, always looking for a model that distributes these activities well, avoiding the concentration of tasks on the more active or capable members. When voting occurs, it can be easy for militants not involved in the issue being voted on to determine what others will have to do. Situations like those demand caution, especially when all the members that would carry out what was deliberated on lose the vote and are obliged to apply what was resolved by others. Since this should be avoided, we believe consensus should not be mandatory. To give proper efficiency to the decision-making process and to not give too much power to isolated agents, we chose this model of an attempt at consensus and, when this is not possible, the vote. This decision-making process is used to establish theoretical and ideological unity and also for strategic and tactical unity.
- ORGANIZATIONAL DISCIPLINE
This position introduces a relation of co-responsibility between the militants and the organization. So, anyone that assumes a responsibility must have sufficient discipline to execute it. Likewise, when the organization determines a line to follow or something to accomplish, it is individual discipline that will cause what is collectively resolved to be realized.
- EXPLOITED CLASS PROTAGONISTS
In the class struggle the exploited classes are always in conflict with the ruling class. The fact is that the contradictions of capitalism generate a series of manifestations of the exploited classes, and we consider this to be the best terrain to plant the seeds of anarchism. When we explain this point of view, we are not idolizing these classes or even assuming that everything they do is always right, but we are emphasizing that their participation in the process of social transformation is absolutely central. Social work and insertion are the most important activities of the specific anarchist organization. To this end, this whole process must take place within the exploited classes, which are the true protagonists of the social transformation that we advocate.
- NEED-BASED SOCIAL WORK
The social work of the anarchist organization occurs in two ways:
1.) With the ongoing work with existing social movements
2.) With the creation of new social movements.
As we have discussed, we understand the social movements as a result of a tripod made up by necessity, will and organization. This means that organized anarchists must seek to stimulate the desire and organization for a movement that is based primarily on the needs of the exploited classes. Few are those who are willing to fight for an idea that will only bring long-term results. So, to mobilize the people we must, before anything else, deal with the concrete issues and problems that afflict and are close to them. The role of anarchist organization is to explain necessities and to mobilize around them. Be it in the creation of social movements or working with existing movements, the central idea is always to mobilize around necessity.
- MOVEMENTS CAUSE PRACTICE
Social movements are the instances in which mobilization of the exploited classes takes place. It is these movements that cause them to have a political practice. Political practice seeks to put the people in combat against the forces of the system that oppresses them, inciting the facing-off of these forces. As they feel it necessary, the people themselves must demand, enforce, and realize all the improvements, conquests, and freedoms they want. This is done by means of organization and will. These demands must be permanent and increase progressively, each time demanding more and seeking the full emancipation of the exploited classes.
- IDEOLOGY AND POLITICS OF MOVEMENTS
The political practice of social movements translated into the struggle for short-term gains brings the pedagogical sense of increased consciousness to the militants, in the event of victories or even defeats. We call the process of influencing social movements through anarchist practice social insertion. So, the anarchist organization has social work when it creates or develops work with social movements, and social insertion when it manages to influence movements with anarchist practices. It is ideology that should be within social movements, and not social movements that should be within ideology. Social insertion is not intended to “ideologize” social movements, turning them into anarchist social movements. By contrast, it seeks to give them certain determined characteristics so that they can proceed towards the construction and development of the popular organization and point towards the social revolution and libertarian socialism. It seeks to make social movements go as far as possible. When we talk about social insertion, we are dealing with the influence of anarchism within social movements. In this respect, despite sustaining a separation between the political (the anarchist organization) and social (social movements) levels, we do not believe that there should be hierarchy or domination of the political level over the social level. We also do not believe that the political level struggles for the social level or in front of it, but with it – this being an ethical relationship. In its activity as an active minority the specific anarchist organization struggles with the exploited classes and not for or in front of them. This complementary and dialectic relationship causes anarchism to influence social movements, and social movements to influence anarchism.
- INFLUENCING
We will point out, once more and briefly, what the characteristics that we must sustain in the social movements are. They are: force, class struggle, combativeness, autonomy, direct action, direct democracy, and revolutionary perspective. Social Movements should be class struggle in orientation and have a class line, which means to seek broad participation of the exploited classes and support the class struggle. They should be combative, establishing their conquests through the imposition of their social force. They should be autonomous in relation to the state, political parties, bureaucratic trade unions, the church, among other bureaucratic and/or authoritarian bodies, taking their decisions and acting on their own. In addition, they must use direct action as a form of political action, in opposition to representative democracy. Social movements must also use direct democracy as a method of decision-making, which takes place in horizontal assemblies in which all the militants decide effectively, in an egalitarian way. To influence, for us, means to cause changes in a person or a group of people through persuasion, advice, examples, guidelines, insights, and practices. We believe that in society itself there are, at any given time, a multiplicity of influences between the different agents who influence and are influenced. Even from an anti-authoritarian perspective, this influence is inevitable and healthy.
- MOBILIZATION
It is very relevant for us to consider that the process of mobilization and influence passes, beyond the objective aspects of the struggle, through the subjective aspects. In this process of mobilization, the specific anarchist organization should always, no matter what, act ethically, trying not to want to establish relations of hierarchy or domination with the social movements; to tell the truth and never deceive the people, and always support solidarity and mutual aid in relation to other militants. Much more than talking, we must teach by doing, by example. The militants of the specific anarchist organization must be very familiar with the environment in which they are working. Even when the positions of the anarchist organization are not the majority, they must be shown, making clear the views it advocates. Likewise, it should have a pro/positive posture, seeking to build movements and cause them to march forward and not just be presenting critical positions. Inciting and encouraging the people, we must seek social insertion and ensure that the social movements work in the most libertarian and egalitarian ways possible. Constant presence is important in order for the anarchist militants to be fully integrated with other activists from the social movements, such that they have recognition, legitimacy, are listened to, are wanted, are welcome people. So, for any type of work, the organization should always approach not the leaders and those who hold the power structures of social movements, but the rank-and file activists, who are generally oppressed by the leadership and form the periphery and not the centre of the movements. It is also important to identify people in the neighborhoods, communities, movements, trade unions, etc. that have influence over others (local leaders oriented to the grassroots and legitimized by them) and focus efforts on them. These people are very important to assist in grassroots mobilization, to give potential to anarchist influence, or even to integrate into the groupings of tendency. Done in this way, the mobilization ends up functioning as a kind of “conversion”. We can say, then, that the function of the specific anarchist organization in its social work and insertion is to be the “engine of social struggle, an engine that neither replaces nor represents them”. We think it possible to construct this motor “participating militantly in the day-to-day of the struggles of popular movements in activity, at first, in Brazil, in Latin America and especially in Rio de Janeiro”.
- THEORY ORGANIZES AND DEFINES
The conception of libertarian socialism and the revolutionary process of transformation can only be thought of, today, from a theoretical perspective since, in practice, we are not living in a revolutionary time. So, theory organizes the concepts that define the transformation to the future society as well as that society itself, which are the final objectives of the specific anarchist organization. Theory also defines how the anarchist organization should act within the reality in which it finds itself in order to reach its final objectives. Other steps are reserved for the future and, today, can also only be thought of in a theoretical way. Theory is fundamental both for the conception of strategy as well as for the propaganda that the organization performs. Strategy seeks to increase the efficiency of work of the anarchist organization while propaganda is very important in the sense of promoting anarchist ideas. In seeking to understand the reality in which one operates, theory arranges information and data. It formalizes the understanding of the historical moment in which we operate and the definition of the social, political, and economic characteristics. It also performs a complete diagnosis of the reality in which the specific anarchist organization operates. Theory is important in order to think regionally where one acts, since if this is not done, you run the risk of applying methodology that is incorrect for the process of social transformation (the “importing” of ready-made theories from other times and other contexts).
- THEORY IN PROPAGANDA
It is also important that the production of theory aims to update obsolete ideological aspects or seeks to adapt ideology to specific and particular realities. Theory is also very important in the process of propaganda since it is necessary to articulate concepts coherently in order to promote anarchist ideas. The more theory is produced and distributed, the easier will be the penetration of anarchism throughout society. When theory is used for propaganda, it formalizes the past with the study and reproduction of anarchist theories, which have as an objective to deepen the ideological level and make anarchist ideology more known. It can also take place in relation to the present and the future with the theoretical spread of materials that explain our critiques of the present society, as well as our conception of the future society and of the process of social transformation.
- THEORY AND PRACTICE
Not everything that was produced or is produced theoretically within anarchism serves the practice we want. The theory promoted by intellectuals removed from struggle or with little social work – intellectuals who think they have understood theory more than anyone else and have found definitive answers to the theoretical questions – is of little use, since it is in practice that we verify whether the theory serves for anything; practice that necessarily contributes to the theory. Besides this, we do not believe that in order to act the anarchist organization needs, before anything else, to have a deep and developed theory. For us, although we defend with emphasis that theory is very important for an efficient practice, we do not believe that theory produced without concrete and prolonged contact with practice can bear any promising fruit. For this reason, social work and insertion enables one to perform all the theoretical production of the anarchist organization with better precision. Practice puts anarchist ideology to the test, allowing the anarchist organization to better think of its possibilities and horizons, to be much more programmatic, to act with its feet on the ground, and to get on with life as it is, and not how we would like it to be. From this relation of theory and practice we understand the theoretical way of the specific anarchist organization as a constant way to theorize, practice, evaluate the theory, and if necessary reformulate it, theorize, practice, and so on.
- THEORY AND IDEOLOGY
Theory necessarily carries ideological aspects, and ideology necessarily carries theoretical aspects. So, there is a direct link between one another. Many anarchist organizations define theory only as comprehension of the reality in which they are acting. In this way, they separate theory from ideology, the first being this “set of concepts coherently articulated between themselves” that would serve only for the elaboration of answers to what we call “the first question of strategy”, that is, “where we are”. However, theory also serves to answer the second and third questions of strategy, that is, “where we want to reach”; and “how do we think we can leave where we are and arrive at where we want to be”.
- UNITY
This unity occurs through the decision-making process of the anarchist organization and has as an objective to determine a clear political line (theoretical and ideological) that must, necessarily, guide all the activities and actions of the organization which, both as a whole as well as in the details, should be in exact and constant agreement with the line defined by the organization. With this well-defined political line everyone knows how to act and, in case of having practical problems, it is well known that the line should be revised. When the theoretical and ideological line is not well defined and there is a problem, there are difficulties in knowing what needs to be revised. So, it is the clarity of this line that allows the organization to develop theoretically. The absence of this theoretical and ideological political line leads to a lack of articulation or even to conflicting articulation in the set of concepts, the result of which is incorrect, confusing, and/or inefficient practice.
- CONSISTENTLY IN AN ORGANIZED WAY
As we have seen, organization – understood as the coordination of forces for the realization of an objective – multiplies the results of individual work, and this also applies to propaganda. We understand propaganda as the dissemination of the ideas of anarchism and as a fundamental activity of the anarchist organization. Its objective is to make anarchism known and to attract people to our cause. Propaganda is one of the activities of the anarchist organization and not the only activity. It should be performed constantly and in an organized manner.
- STIMULATING CONSCIOUSNESS
We understand that any process of social transformation with final objectives like those that we propose will depend on acceptance, or at least on “non-rejection” of large sectors of the population. And propaganda, in this sense theoretical, educational, and/or cultural will contribute significantly to this. This massive propaganda work slowly turns the people’s consciousness and causes the ideology of capitalism, which is already transmitted in the form of culture, to be more questioned and less reproduced. We argue that the specific anarchist organization utilizes any means that are at its disposal for the realization of this constant and organized propaganda. Firstly, with respect to the theoretical, educational and/or cultural sphere with the realization of courses, talks, debates, conferences, study groups, websites, e-mail, theatre, bulletins, newspapers, magazines, books, videos, music, libraries, public events, radio programs, television programs, libertarian schools, etc. This type of propaganda, when performed on a large scale is fundamental since it functions as a social “lubricant” that slowly changes the culture in which we live and makes the introduction of anarchist ideas and practices into society easier.
- LIMITS OF PROPAGANDA
Propaganda aims to transform people’s ideas. And this is the reason why we see serious limits in this model of propaganda. This gain in consciousness does not mean in any way that the exploitation and domination of capitalist society will tend to decrease. It also does not necessarily mean that people will go on to organize themselves in order to struggle. We could say that, in a hypothetical situation in which everyone is conscious, we would still continue to be exploited and dominated.
- PROPAGANDA BY EXAMPLE
This reflection on “where and for whom to perform propaganda” must always be made. We hold that, besides the propaganda that takes place in the theoretical, educational, and/or cultural sphere we must also maintain, principally, propaganda that takes place in struggle and organization, that is, propaganda in social work, aimed at social insertion. We understand the entire process of social work and insertion that we dealt with earlier as the main propaganda work that the anarchist organization should develop. By taking place in the ambit of the class struggle and of social movements, the work of anarchist propaganda aims to mobilize, organize, and influence social movements with anarchist practice. The influence of movements by anarchism means seeking for them to have the characteristics that we stand for: force, class struggle perspective, combativeness, autonomy, direct action, direct democracy, and revolutionary perspective. In struggle, as active minority, the anarchists create social movements, join already existing movements, and seek to influence them as much as possible – always by example – to function in the most libertarian and egalitarian way possible. In this way, anarchist propaganda serves the whole work process of the anarchists as active minority within social movements and in the actual creation of the popular organization.
- POLITICAL-LEVEL EDUCATION
The political education of the political level deepens historical, current, and future questions in the same way that knowledge about other ideological currents and social movements does. It is promoted in various ways: by courses and training books for militants, by education seminars, by the self-education that militants do by themselves, among others. Education gives support to new militants so that the differences in the level of education between the less and more educated should be as small as possible, and so that the high level of discussion within the organization is not adversely affected by these differences. For the supporter militants of the specific anarchist organization, political education provides the theoretical and ideological basis for its political line to be understood.
- SOCIAL-LEVEL EDUCATION
Political education seeks to develop the militants that act in the grouping of tendency and, having ideological affinities, integrate them into the anarchist organization. For the social movements to have the desired characteristics and for them to point to the construction of the popular organization, it is fundamental that the militants are politicized as much as possible, and in this, political education plays a significant role. This political education at the social level is fundamental to politicizing militants.
- RELATIONS AND FUNDS
Relations may be more or less organic, more or less formal. At the political level, the anarchist organization seeks to relate to organizations, groups, and individuals from all locations, such that this can contribute to its practice. At the social level, the anarchist organization seeks to know and relate to social movements, linking itself more or less to them, or even to have contact with other organisms such as universities, councils, foundations, NGOs, human rights, ecological organizations, etc. Although being against the logic of capitalism, while we live within it, we will have to raise and manage funds for the realization of our activities. These funds are important: for the realization of social works (transport of militants, etc.); for the purchase of books; for the printing of propaganda material (pamphlets, newspapers, books, videos, etc.); for structures for the organization (maintenance of spaces, etc.); for travel and other activities.
- PROTAGONIST OF TRANSFORMATION
At this level, when we deal with social movements, we emphasize that they should not fit within an ideology but should be formed around need, a common and concrete cause. We understand that it is only with the convergence of the various social movements in the construction of the popular organization that we will be able to overcome capitalism and the state and build libertarian socialism through the social revolution. The social level is the main protagonist in the process of social transformation. Social movements must be organized around concrete and pragmatic questions that seek, in case of victories, to improve the living conditions of the exploited classes. Within these movements must be all those interested in the struggle around these issues and who would benefit if the struggle was victorious.
- SOCIAL MOVEMENT LIMITATIONS
Social movements are still subject to variations in situation, and they are sometimes responsible for demobilization. These processes of ebb are also often responsible for them to lose the accumulation and learning in struggles. Many social movements become reformist movements – that is, movements whose aim is an adjustment or achievement within the capitalist system. Certain characteristics are inherent to the social level and end up complicating this process of social transformation (social movements –> popular organization –> social revolution –> libertarian socialism). There are organizations that seek to ideologize the movements, causing them to be weak; there are organizations that try to harness them, causing them to function for their own purposes (that are different to the purposes of the movements); there are movements that do not seek the involvement of the exploited classes and end up becoming a “vanguard” detached from the grassroots; there are movements that function only with the help of governments and capitalists; there are movements completely tied to politicians, parties, and other authoritarian groupings; there are movements that want to elect candidates and only participate politically through representative democracy; there are movements that support hierarchical relations in which the leadership decides and the grassroots only obeys; there are reformist movements; there are isolated movements that do not want to connect with others; there are movements that do not produce theory and situational analysis, among many others.
- THE POLITICAL LEVEL IS IDEOLOGICAL
Unlike the social level, the political level is an ideological level, an anarchist level. This political level must necessarily interact with the social level since we understand that without the social level, the political level is incapable of realizing the desired social transformation. It is only through this social insertion that we understand it to be possible to build the popular organization and, increasing its social force, reach the final objectives. We understand that this transformation will be the result of an addition to this social level, made by the political level. The specific anarchist organization aims to put into practice a revolutionary politics that conceives the means of reaching the final objectives (social revolution and libertarian socialism) with action always based on strategy. For this, it organizes as active minority, coordinating the ideological militant activities that work as yeast for the struggles of the social level. The main activity undertaken by this political level is the social work that occurs when the political level interacts with the social level. In this context the political level seeks to influence the social level as much as possible, causing it to function in the most libertarian and egalitarian way possible. We have seen that this can happen directly between the anarchist organization and the social movements or through groupings of tendency. From the moment that the political level obtains this – even partially – we say that it has social insertion. The social level is characterized by strong ebbs and flows as it varies more than the political level in relation to the conjuncture. In times of the flow of social movements, the role of the specific anarchist organization is to propel them. In times of ebbs, its role is “to keep the flame alight”, or to wait and prepare for new opportunities to act. So, an important political level function is to ensure the continuity of ideology and the accumulation of struggles in times of ebbs (or even of flows) of the social level.
- THE VANGUARD AS A BEAM OF LIGHT
When we define the political level as the specific anarchist organization of active minority, we are seeking a meaning opposed to that of the authoritarian vanguard organization. So, the process of the political level influencing the social level seeks to ensure that it possesses the desired characteristics. If they already exist, then the political level only accompanies; if they do not exist, it struggles to make them exist. Authoritarians, while also proposing a distinction between the social and political levels, believe that the political level has a relationship of hierarchy and domination in relation to the social level. So, the hierarchy and domination from within the political level (of the authoritarian parties) is reproduced in its relations with the social level. Similarly do the authoritarians understand the reproduction of consciousness, which works with hierarchy and domination within the political level, and that in their understanding must be brought from the political level to the social level, from the “conscious” to the “unconscious”. The relationship is not two-way, from the political to the social and vice versa, but rather a one-way relationship, only from the political to the social – that ends up being a transmission belt of the ideas of the political.
- THE QUESTION OF ETHICS
It is through ethics, and only through these, that the anarchist organization does not act as an authoritarian (even if revolutionary) party. Unlike the vanguard organization, the political level organized as active minority that acts with ethics doesn’t have a relationship of hierarchy nor of domination in relation to the social level. The objective of the active minority is, with ethics, to stimulate, to be shoulder-to-shoulder, giving solidarity when it is needed and requested. When in contact with the social level the specific anarchist organization acts with ethics and does not seek positions of privilege, it does not impose its will, does not dominate, does not deceive, does not alienate, it does not judge itself superior, it does not fight for social movements or in front of them. The specific anarchist organization struggles with social movements, not advancing even one step beyond what they intend to.
- GRASSROOTS-ISM
Contrary to the authoritarians, for us the social level does influence and must always influence the political level. That is, by comparing its ideology with the practice of the social level, the political level will also have very important contributions that should be added to the anarchist organization. We only believe it to be possible for the political level to conceive a consistent revolutionary strategy from the moment that it has contact with practice at the social level. This does not mean that we advocate a certain type of “grassroots-ism”, which understands everything that the social movements advocate to be right. We know that the majority of the time these movements possess characteristics different to those we desire, and what’s worse: from time to time make shifts to the right, and defend capitalist or even dictatorial positions, as was the case of fascism. If on the one hand we do not believe that we should be in front of the social movements, we also do not believe that we should be behind them, following all their wishes.
- 3 QUESTIONS OF STRATEGY
We can define strategy from the formulation of answers to three questions:
1.) Where are we?
2.) Where do we want to go?
3.) How do we think we can leave where we are and arrive at where we want to be?
Strategy is, then, the theoretical formulation of a diagnosis of the present situation, the conception of the situation one wants to reach and a set of actions that will aim to transform the present situation, causing it to reach the desired situation. In short everything in the organization, from the most complex to the simplest, can and should be done strategically. Any action that the specific anarchist organization, or even its militants, aims to carry out can be strategically conceived. Behind the conception of all this theoretical material is a strategic rationale. Devising our strategy of social transformation is what we are trying to accomplish in this text. Firstly, reflecting on the first question and mapping capitalism and the state, which give body to the society of domination and exploitation. Then, reflecting on the second question, trying to conceive our final objectives of social revolution and libertarian socialism. Finally, reflecting on the third question and proposing a social transformation that takes place through social movements constituted into the popular organization and in constant interaction with the specific anarchist organization.
- DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT
The specific anarchist organization should seek to perform a diagnosis of the reality within which it operates, set the final long-term objectives and, most importantly, determine the different periods and cycles of struggle, each one with their respective objectives. This “macro” line (of diagnostics, medium- and long-term objectives) is called strategy, and the grand objectives (are called) the strategic objectives. Strategy, then, is detailed in a more “micro” line, or tactics, which determines the short-term objectives and the actions that are put into practice by militants or groups of militants that aim to achieve the short-term tactical objectives. Every militant has a well-defined function and clear objectives to be achieved. Obviously, the achievement of tactical objectives should contribute to the approximation, or even to the achievement, of the strategic objectives. Assessments are done by evaluations of how the activities are proceeding, whether they are heading towards where we had imagined, if we were wrong about something. In sum: we see if we are moving towards the established objectives, or if we are distancing ourselves from them. In the former case, we correct the errors, make adjustments, and proceed in the same way. In the latter, we change tactical actions and eventually the strategy, carrying out the same process again within a certain timeframe. It is this process of moving, evaluating, pursuing, reevaluating, etc. that causes the organization to advance with strategy and to proceed correctly in the struggle.
- THE STRATEGIC LINE
For the strategic line to be established and formalized into the program, contact with practice, which enables theory with knowledge, is essential. This contact will also enable the correct tactical unfolding of the strategy. Through the program the specific anarchist organization makes known its strategic proposal for social transformation. At the same time as it serves to guide the action of the militants of the organization, it serves to mark the organization’s positions for other people who are not part of it, making public this set of analyses and proposals. If the objectives change, for example in a post-revolutionary situation, the strategy can be modified. Hence importance both of the comprehension of the actual situation in which we live, and also of the establishment of clear and precise objectives, essential components in the development of strategy.
- COLLECTIVE DECISIONS, NOT INDIVIDUAL DISPUTES
In relation to ideology, strategy is much more flexible since it varies according to the social context, the current situation. It is natural that in each context and conjuncture you apply different tactics to the political practice of anarchism. The organization decides, by consensus or by vote, the answers to the three questions of strategy. It formulates the tactical-strategic line, and everyone goes in the same direction. The relatively common practice of many anarchist groups and organizations performing different actions, to the left and to the right, while understanding that they are contributing to a common whole is not accepted. The model of the specific anarchist organization implies that the militants have to do things that they do not like very much or stop doing some of the things they like. This is to ensure that the organization progresses with strategy. Progressing with strategy makes the anarchist organization a coherent and effective organization; an organization dedicated to serious, committed militancy in which the militants do that which they have established as priority and work on the tasks that contribute in the most effective way possible to the consolidation of their strategic objectives. We must emphasize that the freedom to join an organization is equal to the freedom to disconnect from one, and in the case of an individual or minority often feeling neglected by the decisions of the majority, they have the freedom to split. It is important to emphasize that the strategic decisions, even if taken by means of a vote, are collective decisions and not individual disputes within the organization.
CES 