#Black Anarchism and Abolition

[nando161mando]

’I ultimately want to encourage others to take abolition and apply it to borders, nations, and states. I see the “nation on no map” as a group of people using skills others may struggle to recognize to develop new thinking, new language, and new societies.

I envision a nation that doesn’t need to be a nation and that doesn’t need to be on a map, because it knows borders, states, and boundaries cannot accommodate the complexity of our struggles.’

– William C Anderson, The Nation on No Map, Black Anarchism and Abolition

[pumpacti0n]

"...The Anarchist case against the State is pretty simple to put in Marxist terms. You have your dictatorship of the proletariat. But immediately there's a problem. The state is not, and cannot be the entire class. In order to have a state, you have to put a subset of the class in charge. Call it a vanguard, a party, what have you. Let's assume for a moment that the new party really is comprised of the proletariat and isn't composed of nominally allied intellectuals. Even in this best case scenario what you have is representation, not actual rule by the proletariat as a class.

"Well ok," says the Marxist, "that's not a problem, the representatives will just represent the interests of the class as a whole." But instantly you have a problem, your dictatorship of the proletariat is no longer a dictatorship of the proletariat, it's a dictatorship of the representatives of the class. For the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie this doesn't matter, because the incentives of the state align with theirs and you can be a member of the bourgeoisie while simultaneously holding office, in fact almost all representatives are.

But for the proletariat this is not true at all, the moment a proletarian take(s) control (...) they are no longer part of the class with no property, they have at their command the property of the state. This problem is exacerbated by any attempt to use the state to socialize the economy, the larger the share of the economy administered by the State, the more property the representatives now command.

Those representatives of the proletariat in the State now have their own interests: that of the management of the property of the state, that of the nation state itself, formerly alien to the proletariat as a class.

Furthermore, each passing day isolates the representatives from the proletariat itself. It isolates them physically, it isolates them psychologically, it isolates them in terms of mannerism and expectation.

And so every day the interests of the representatives of the proletariat drift further apart from their representatives until one day the dictatorship of the proletariat vanishes entirely and you're left with the dictatorship of an entirely new class produced by the State.

And this is the BEST case scenario, the one in which the representatives of the class are genuinely attempting to do their job. And then still the form of the state devours the dictatorship of the proletariat, that which was once its content. The state will not wither away because its existence produces new classes with their own functions and interests.

Lenin's State and Revolution demonstrates this problem: it calls for the state to become the landlord of the proletariat. Immediately, in a single instant, the pretense of the State as a special armed body of the class disappears. In its place is a new class of rent connectors whose interests have nothing in common with the proletariat.

This is just how the State works. The proletariat has nothing in common with the tax collector, the landlord, the manager, the planner. All of the functions of the old world absorbed and preserved by the State coalesce into new classes and socialists are left spinning their wheels, trying to abolish two systems, the State and the class system, with an institution (the State) that reproduces both of them.

Even on a theoretical level, even in the world of State and Revolution, where every state employee is paid a worker's salary and nothing more, the State would still produce classes and with it reproduce itself. The only solution to this is to destroy the State entirely and let the class as a whole form the dictatorship of the proletariat.

This is Anarchism. The propertiless masses rule themselves directly and destroy the property relations and the State institutions that comprise the conditions of their own existence as a class, thus ending at long last the nightmare of the class system with the new and radiant dawn of the classless society of communism."

[source]

[embodiedfutures]

both very long but informative, especially if you like more conversational style videos!

[sciencefordragons]

if you want to be involved with prison and police abolition, I think it's absolutely essential that you stretch your imagination to what you're going to build, then think of what has to be destroyed in order for you to do that. Like if I'm reaching out my hand to form a bond with someone and weave them into my life and myself into theirs, I want to break down everything that gets in the way of that. In order to be good comrades to prisoners, to Black people, to disabled people, to indigenous people, to queer and trans people, to poor people, we must figure out how to live in a world without police and prisons. You'll never get rid of these things if you aren't first striving to be a good (and honestly loving!) comrade. The love has to come first!

[prayersforpigeons]

News from Malik Muhammad after being held in solitary confinement for over 250 days!

Malik Muhammad, a black/Palestinian Muslim & pansexual anarchist, has been held in solitary for over 250 days, nearly three times as long as Oregon law is supposed to allow, and had all his property taken away. After a phone & letter writing campaign by those outside and a hunger strike, his property has been returned & he's been moved out of the bare cell he was being kept in. But he is still in prison after receiving a 10 year sentence for taking part in the George Floyd uprising. & he is using his time in prison to continue the struggle, speaking the truth about prison from the inside:

"We see it time and time again: the effects of state repression and abuse, warehousing people under the guise of rehabilitation and public safety. We also know that during your “punishment” for your crime as a prisoner, you’re further punished routinely, one of which is segregation, a tool and tactic used by the state to further repress societies “undesirables”. We see it in institutions like California and Texas where people do 40+ years in segregation on grounds of “institutional” safety. The fact is that’s a barbaric harmful practice within the prison industry — really ANY prolonged time in “the hole”, “the shoe”, “box”, “bucket” — whatever name we choose to give it, it harms people, and not just in here but our families.

This idea of “segstitutionalization” isn’t a new one, but perhaps a new way of looking at it, perhaps a way to spread more awareness about the harmful affects of prolonged isolation and the conditions people suffer under. My objective isn’t to “coin” a new term or make an idea my own but to personalize the experience for you out there. To bring you stories of men who’ve lived and experienced those long term affects and how they deal and how they adjust. To offer the opportunity for them to speak to a harmful practice abused throughout the country to further harm and oppress us. In some cases, as we have seen, you can be stuck in the hole for decades just for who you are, what you say, or not renouncing your gang or agreeing to inform on others."

he has contact info on his blog, and is looking to publish a book of his writing. please get in touch if you can, & check out his work either way 🖤💜💚

[mrsblackruby]

Highly Recommend for my homies fed tf up with how everything is. ✨

[memphisfoodnotbombs]

Join us in a moment of silence as we remember Paul Young:

Decided to retain Cerelyn “CJ” Davis who:

- Trained with the “Israeli Defense Forces”

- Is responsible for the MPD killing of Tyre Nichols

“I feel good about CJ and her ability to lead… I feel comfortable with her” - Paul Young

#JusticeForTyreNichols #TyreNichols #JusticeForTyre #MemphisPoliceDepartment #MemphisPolice #CJDavis #PaulYoung #BlackLivesMatter #Memphis #MemphisTennessee #MemphisTN #CeaseFire #CeaseFireNow #FoodNotBombs

[rotenotes]

Reading "Anarchist communism" @wikipedia (20131015)

Reading Anarchist communism ((accessdate=20131015)) {{Anarcho-communism sidebar|expanded=all}} Part of a series on Anarcho-communism Concepts Anarchy Anti-authoritarianism Anti-capitalism Anti-statism Proletarian internationalism Class consciousness Class struggle Classless society Common ownership Commons Commune Consensus democracy Co-operative economics Direct democracy Egalitarian…

[opstandelse]

Reading "Anarchist communism" @wikipedia (20131015)

Reading Anarchist communism ((accessdate=20131015)) {{Anarcho-communism sidebar|expanded=all}} Part of a series on Anarcho-communism Concepts Anarchy Anti-authoritarianism Anti-capitalism Anti-statism Proletarian internationalism Class consciousness Class struggle Classless society Common ownership Commons Commune Consensus democracy Co-operative economics Direct democracy Egalitarian…

[bookofshitposts]

The shared commitments in abolitionism and anarchism are often cast as unrealistic, too radical, or pipe-dreamy, but the castigations of realism and reform and measure are in actuality rhetorical gestures to preserve hegemony. Indeed, "Abolitionist politics is not about what is possible, but about making the impossible a reality," as Abolition writes in their manifesto. Of course, it is assumed by those proponents of "realism" that we must have at least some people who are incarcerated. Of course we must punish people who do egregious things, a world without punishment as the operative measure being a ridiculous one. Abolitionism and anarchism reject that "of course."

Marquis Bey, Anarcho-Blackness: Notes Toward a Black Anarchism

[all-things-are-nothing-to-me]

I run a DIY anarchist zine distro. I recently started selling zines. 10 for 5$. No more than 20 per order. US only (that international shipping isn't worth paying trust me). I'm probably gonna end up losing money in the long run, but whatever. It's just me doing it too, so I'm moving through orders as fast as I can...aka whenever my gf isn't using the computer. I'm not Amazon so it might take a few days before I even start printing your zines but I toss in free stuff in every order. Shipping will always be different since it's by weight. But on average it's about 6$. Anyways if you want to buy some I made a noblogs.

These are the categories you can choose from.

1. RANDOM

2. New Releases *if anything new has recently come out*

3. Anarchy 101 & Social Anarchy

4. Anti-Colonial & Indigenous Resistance

5. Anti-Civilization & Green Anarchy

6. Anti-Fascist & Anti-Racist

7. Animal Liberation & Vegan/Straight Edge

8. Black Liberation & Black Anarchism

9. Community, Accountability & Relationship Anarchy

10. Communization & Communism

11. CCF, FAI, New Anarchy & The Black International

12. DIY & How-To

13. Gender, Patriarchy & Queer Anarchy

14. Harm Reduction

15. History & Intergenerational Memory

16. Insurrection

17. Individualist & Illegalist

18. Nihilism

19. Organizing & Mutual Aid

20. OPSEC, Security Culture & Counter-Repression

21. Post-Left & Anti-Left

22. Prison Abolition/Prisoner Writings

23. Theory & Strategy

24. Poetry & Stories

25. Palestine

26. Spanish (topic will be random)

27. Youth Liberation & Education

28. Attack!

[forbidden-sorcery]

…like many religious organizations, the authoritarian left often works under the influence of messianic modes of leadership. Its doctrine and beliefs work in favor of the notion that leadership shouldn't be challenged. Revolutionary heroes and leaders of the past are revered like gods, no matter their failures, shortcomings, or abuses of power. However much they condemned religion, dead and martyred revolutionaries become holy icons with followers who take on the names of the dead they venerate. Just as followers of Christ can label themselves Christians, the authoritarian leftist followers of diverging sects like those of Stalin and Trotsky become Stalinists and Trotskyists. These followers proselytize oppressed people, offering salvation, deliverance, and liberation, if only those they see as in need of their politics will fall into faithful practice. Challenging this sort of orthodoxy is one of the most important tasks we face.

William C. Anderson - The Nation on No Map: Black Anarchism and Abolition

[sophie-frm-mars]

Hi Sophie. I enjoy reading your longer Tumblr posts. It's been a while since I've read a leftwing essayist whose work has really grabbed me. Any recommendations for modern leftwing essayists whose work is worth reading? (articles, columns, editorials, online magazines, etc.)

Honestly most of my work (and long tumblr posts, which I suppose are still work kind of lmao patreon dot com slash sophie from mars) is informed by books and those tend to be older, like I wanted to say bell hooks for a second now and then I remembered that she died in 2021 (rip). Maybe it's just that there's so much good theory to get through that's already stood the test of time, but I appreciate the question so as much as I'm currently enjoying Kierkegaard's the Sickness Unto Death i know it's not what you're asking for in like 6 diffferent ways.

The problem with recommending contemporary stuff is that you can never recommend anything in gestalt and i wouldn't expect people to recommend me as always totally good either but I hope that's understood. I'm subscribed to Organise! magazine and I think they regularly publish really sound political analysis. If you are interested in books, I had Half-Earth Socialism on preorder and I've been enjoying that since it came out. Not writing, but I think the Seriously Wrong Podcast boys are the best ones doing it right now, their stuff is very well researched, written and argued and delivered in a fun and humorous style as well.

I like a lot of feminist authors at the moment. It was feminism that brought me to the left in the first place and I've basically always said that marxism (or equally anarchism) without a feminist lens is essentially useless. I think that feminists have been leading the charge in properly analysing and understanding systematic and structural violence and oppression for a long time, especially trans feminists like Julia Serano or black feminists like, again, bell hooks. but since your question is about contemporary writers who write articles / essays etc, I really like Amia Srinivasan (her essay collection The Right To Sex is utterly astonishing), Catherine Angel (Tomorrow Sex Will Be Good Again is a book that changed my life), Kai Cheng Thom (her substack is great and her book I Hope We Choose Love is fantastic too). I also quite like Clementine Morrigan, her articles explore quite uncomfortable conversations about anti-carceral approaches to social justice and trauma, and her podcast is actually where I heard an interview with Catherine Angel which is why I ended up buying her book.

I know you didn't ask for books but I can't let a recommendations post go by at the moment without talking about Abolition Revolution by Shanice Octavia McBean and Aviah Sarah Day because it is simply occupying SO much of my brain at the moment

thanks for the question

[fullyarmoredbattlesturgeon]

Do you have any links to how crime would would be managed under anarchism and how dangerous people such as murderers and rapists would be handled? /g

here's an all-round source, with sections on crime and justice, among many other things.

and here's a link to 'Are Prisons Obsolete?', by Angela Davis, since your question more generally relates to prison abolition in general.

i would also personally recommend a short (8 episode) podcast called The Women's War, which deals with this topic extensively - not in theory, but through observing the literal (ongoing) practice of anarchistic justice alternatives in Rojava.

thanks for asking!

[dailyanarchistposts]

I.4.2 Why do anarchists desire to abolish work?

Anarchists desire to see humanity liberate itself from work. This may come as a shock for many people and will do much to “prove” that anarchism is essentially utopian. However, we think that such an abolition is not only necessary, it is possible. This is because work as we know it today is one of the major dangers to freedom we face.

If by freedom we mean self-government, then it is clear that being subjected to hierarchy in the workplace subverts our abilities to think and judge for ourselves. Like any skill, critical analysis and independent thought have to be practised continually in order to remain at their full potential. So a workplace environment with power structures undermines these abilities. This was recognised by Adam Smith who argued that the “understandings of the greater part of men are necessarily formed by their ordinary employments.” That being so, “the man whose life is spent in performing a few simple operations, of which the effects too are, perhaps, always the same, or nearly the same, has no occasion to extend his understanding … and generally becomes as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to be … But in every improved and civilised society this is the state into which the labouring poor, that is the great body of the people, must necessarily fall, unless government takes pains to prevent it.” [quoted by Noam Chomsky, Year 501, p. 18]

Smith’s argument (usually ignored by those who claim to follow his ideas) is backed up by extensive evidence. Different types of authority structures and different technologies have different effects on those who work within them. Carole Pateman notes that the evidence suggests that ”[o]nly certain work situations were found to be conducive to the development of the psychological characteristics” suitable for freedom, such as “the feelings of personal confidence and efficacy that underlay the sense of political efficacy.” [Participation and Democratic Theory, p. 51] She quotes one expert who argues that within capitalist companies based upon a highly rationalised work environment and extensive division of labour, the worker has no control over the pace or technique of his work, no room to exercise skill or leadership and so they “have practically no opportunity to solve problems and contribute their own ideas.” The worker, according to a psychological study, is “resigned to his lot … more dependent than independent … he lacks confidence in himself … he is humble … the most prevalent feeling states … seem to be fear and anxiety.” [quoted by Pateman, Op. Cit., p. 51 and p. 52]

The evidence Pateman summarises shows that an individual’s “attitudes will depend to a large degree on the authority structure of his [or her] work environment”, with workplaces which are more autocratic and with a higher division of labour being worse for an individual’s sense of self-esteem, feelings of self-worth and autonomy. In workplaces where “the worker has a high degree of personal control over his [or her] work … and a very large degree of freedom from external control” or is based on the “collective responsibility of a crew of employees” who “had control over the pace and method of getting the work done, and the work crews were largely internally self-disciplining” a different social character is seen. [Pateman, Op. Cit., pp. 52–3] This was characterised by “a strong sense of individualism and autonomy, and a solid acceptance of citizenship in the large society” and “a highly developed feeling of self-esteem and a sense of self-worth and is therefore ready to participate in the social and political institutions of the community.” Thus the “nature of a man’s work affects his social character and personality” and that an “industrial environment tends to breed a distinct social type.” [R. Blauner, quoted by Pateman, Op. Cit., p. 52]

Thus, to quote Bob Black (who notes that Smith’s comments against the division of labour are his “critique of work”), the capitalist workplace turns us into “stultified submissives” and places us “under the sort of surveillance that ensures servility.” For this reason anarchists desire, to use Bob Black’s phrase, “the abolition of work.” [The Abolition of Work and other essays, p. 26, p. 22 and p. 19]

Work, in this context, does not mean any form of productive activity. Far from it. Work (in the sense of doing necessary things or productive activity) will always be with us. There is no getting away from it; crops need to be grown, schools built, homes fixed, and so on. No, work in this context means any form of labour in which the worker does not control his or her own activity. In other words, wage labour in all its many forms.

A society based upon hierarchical relations in production will result in a society within which the typical worker uses few of their abilities, exercise little or no control over their work because they are governed by a boss during working hours. This has been proved to lower the individual’s self-esteem and feelings of self-worth, as would be expected in any social relationship that denied self-government. Capitalism is marked by an extreme division of labour, particularly between mental and physical labour. It reduces the worker to a mere machine operator, following the orders of his or her boss. Therefore, a libertarian that does not support economic liberty (i.e. self-management) is no libertarian at all.

Capitalism bases its rationale for itself on consumption and this results in a viewpoint which minimises the importance of the time we spend in productive activity. Anarchists consider that it is essential for individual’s to use and develop their unique attributes and capacities in all walks of life, to maximise their powers. Therefore, the idea that “work” should be ignored in favour of consumption is totally mad. Productive activity is an important way of developing our inner-powers and express ourselves; in other words, be creative. Capitalism’s emphasis on consumption shows the poverty of that system. As Alexander Berkman argued:

“We do not live by bread alone. True, existence is not possible without opportunity to satisfy our physical needs. But the gratification of these by no means constitutes all of life. Our present system of disinheriting millions, made the belly the centre of the universe, so to speak. But in a sensible society … [t]he feelings of human sympathy, of justice and right would have a chance to develop, to be satisfied, to broaden and grow.” [What is Anarchism?, pp. 152–3]

Therefore, capitalism is based on a constant process of alienated consumption, as workers try to find the happiness associated within productive, creative, self-managed activity in a place it does not exist — on the shop shelves. This can partly explain the rise of both mindless consumerism and the continuation of religions, as individuals try to find meaning for their lives and happiness, a meaning and happiness frustrated in wage labour and other hierarchies.

Capitalism’s impoverishment of the individual’s spirit is hardly surprising. As William Godwin argued, ”[t]he spirit of oppression, the spirit of servility, and the spirit of fraud, these are the immediate growth of the established administration of property. They are alike hostile to intellectual and moral improvement.” [The Anarchist Reader, p. 131] Any system based on hierarchical relationships in work will result in a deadening of the individual and in a willingness to defer to economic masters. Which is why Anarchists desire to change this and create a society based upon freedom in all aspects of life. Hence anarchists desire to abolish work, simply because it restricts the liberty and distorts the individuality of those who have to do it. To quote Emma Goldman:

“Anarchism aims to strip labour of its deadening, dulling aspect, of its gloom and compulsion. It aims to make work an instrument of joy, of strength, of colour, of real harmony, so that the poorest sort of a man should find in work both recreation and hope.” [Anarchism and Other Essays, p. 61]

Anarchists do not think that by getting rid of work we will not have to produce necessary goods. Far from it. An anarchist society “doesn’t mean we have to stop doing things. It does mean creating a new way of life based on play; in other words, a ludic revolution … a collective adventure in generalised joy and freely interdependent exuberance. Play isn’t passive.” The aim is “to abolish work and replace it, insofar as it serves useful purposes, with a multitude of new kinds of free activities. To abolish work requires going at it from two directions, quantitative and qualitative.” In terms of the first, “we need to cut down massively the amount of working being done” (luckily, “most work is useless or worse and we should simply get rid of it”). For the second, “we have to take what useful work remains and transform it into a pleasing variety of game-like and craft-like pastimes, indistinguishable from other pleasurable pastimes, except that the happen to yield useful end-products.” [Bob Black, Op. Cit., p. 17 and p. 28]

This means that in an anarchist society every effort would be made to reduce boring, unpleasant activity to a minimum and ensure that whatever productive activity is required to be done is as pleasant as possible and based upon voluntary labour. However, it is important to remember Cornelius Castoriadis point: “Socialist society will be able to reduce the length of the working day, and will have to do so, but this will not be the fundamental preoccupation. Its first task will be to … transform the very nature of work. The problem is not to leave more and more ‘free’ time to individuals — which might well be empty time — so that they may fill it at will with ‘poetry’ or the carving of wood. The problem is to make all time a time of liberty and to allow concrete freedom to find expression in creative activity.” Essentially, the “problem is to put poetry into work.” [Political and Social Writings, vol. 2, p. 107]

This is why anarchists desire to abolish “work” (i.e., productive activity not under control of the people doing it), to ensure that whatever productive economic activity is required to be done is managed by those who do it. In this way it can be liberated, transformed, and so become a means of self-realisation and not a form of self-negation. In other words, anarchists want to abolish work because ”[l]ife, the art of living, has become a dull formula, flat and inert.” [Berkman, Op. Cit., p. 166] Anarchists want to bring the spontaneity and joy of life back into productive activity and save humanity from the dead hand of capital. Anarchists consider economic activity as an expression of the human spirit, an expression of the innate human need to express ourselves and to create. Capitalism distorts these needs and makes economic activity a deadening experience by the division of labour and hierarchy. We think that “industry is not an end in itself, but should only be a means to ensure to man his material subsistence and to make accessible to him the blessings of a higher intellectual culture. Where industry is everything and man is nothing begins the realm of a ruthless economic despotism whose workings are no less disastrous than those of any political despotism. The two mutually augment one another, and they are fed from the same source.” [Rudolph Rocker, Anarcho-Syndicalism, p. 2]

One last point on the abolition of work. May 1st — International Workers’ Day — was, as we discussed in section A.5.2, created to commemorate the Chicago Anarchist Martyrs. Anarchists then, as now, think that it should be celebrated by strike action and mass demonstrations. In other words, for anarchists, International Workers’ Day should be a non-work day! That sums up the anarchist position to work nicely — that the celebration of workers’ day should be based on the rejection of work.

The collection of articles in Why Work? Arguments for the Leisure Society (edited by Vernon Richards) is a useful starting place for libertarian socialist perspectives on work.

[thinkpink212]

OMG what have you been reading? I need recommendations :)))

Just finished up Vol 3 in the Sookie Stackhouse series (books the show True blood is based on), and am Currently on page 130 of the Hunger games. Reading it now because I never did as a teen! And then I am also reading The Nation on No Map: Black Anarchism and Abolition for some Non-fiction additive! It's been fun and interesting reads so far! Ill share my summer TBR once I acquire all of them :*