Organizing a problem as it stands in our community

It's been more than a century since Proudhon cast into hideous face of the bourgeoisie, its famous charge: property is theft. With this he put the birthday of social anarchism.

To clarify:

What is social anarchism and is it necessary to make a distinction, which clearly identify a problem?

Anarchism as a negation of authority, oppression and enslavement of man is naturally anti - as old as humanity itself. At all times, the counter is raising people individually and collectively against any oppression, be it family, social, political or religious. This anarchism has always manifested a struggle, pure and wild rebellion, whose roots are deeply embedded in instinct rather than reason.

Anarchism, however, as the doctrine of the new line, and certainly expressed a desire to transform social structures, changing relations between members of the human community - this type of anarchism dates from the last century.

Anarchism after long centuries of incubation yields its scientific justification. Under the pen of talented thinkers who did not cast any of the original and fitted it created a social ideology that pure criticism by providing answers to many questions.

Now, after more than a century of existence, anarchism has a past - a past both glorious and dreams. Glorious because of his great wealth he formulated ideological and launch and progressive thinking among scientists and workers table ideas, many of which became a reality. Glorious because many people with passionate conviction threw the fight with pen, speech or action on public bastions and even testing of all adversity, often at the cost of his life, failed to oppose them. From Tokyo to Barcelona from Chicago to Moscow from London to Rome with his brave anarchists struggle contributed to the equality of people around the world.

But also dream, because even simple ideology - a clear, logical and reasonable - even faith - almost religious, which pushed his characters all over the world scaffold, where they showed how with courage those who know to die for a noble cause are persuaded to serve her with his sacrifice - however, anarchism and failed to be implemented in any country. The explanations are as numerous as they are insufficient. And today there are people who tend to see only negation of anarchism. Denial is justified only in that measure that it is a prelude to creation. The credit for this is the thinkers and propagandists who made the last century social anarchism, and took him by the bare denial and it nadariha with constructive face of revolution. This lesson, unfortunately, many anarchists could not or would not understand.

I remain convinced that only when anarchists are organized in a manner consistent, strong and united, they will eventually penetrate the world and will no longer be satisfied with the role of witnesses will be companions for human use - every day to build .

A moment ago I mentioned that anarchism never failed to be realized. Spain showed one exception - the Spanish Revolution remains a great historical experience to which we are constantly obliged to pay and we have to contemplate.

The organization

In our community, it's important to agree with that organizational problems are always woke up most lively controversy. I think the reason for this is that there are two completely different manner to the conception of anarchism and you must specify if you want to highlight the problem. Because it is clear that an anarchist belonging to the philosophical school does not necessarily need organization. Or rather - it is an individualist. Back - anarchist revolutionary, because it seeks to transform society here and now considered necessarily a need to create a stable organizational structure that provides all members of the close ties and constant assistance. To reach this result, he voluntarily gives part of his freedom and subject to some discipline - freely taken, not necessarily needed to ensure cohesion and effectiveness of all of the joint venture.

In short, the two choices facing those who claim to belong to anarchism. One choice is to believe anarchism content to the social factor content that brings its own testimony, which is not mixed in any need of organizing. This selection extends the framework of a purely individual activity. The other choice is to adopt anarchism as a social doctrine - immediately feasible, which requires collective action and commitment to implementation, which in turn arises from the need for a stable organization. The choice is necessary because the grouping of people is a valuable right to exist only if people adapt to the grounds and purpose of this grouping. If not - the kingdom is of some confusion and lack of will.

In this perspective we can say: the organization can produce only those who accept its principles and the necessary discipline required by it, only they can be grouped in an organization, anarchist revolutionary who find such a transformation possible in the times that live.

Everything contained in this: organization, because it must act now, because it gives this view of social organization, reorganization because funds are required for this transformation (conversion). Organization, because any movement requires organized structure - anarchist, because the goal is the construction of a free society, revolutionary because it is called a radical change in the established order.

These stories, which you do, seek to limit and clearly define

organizational problems such as he stays in our community

The purpose for which the anarchists - the building of a society of free people - can not be achieved by means which are a negation of this.

A. Nakov