Some documents presented at the Federation's last congress last January,
and published on these pages, addressed the issues raised by the
transfeminist and queer movements. With these notes, I would like to
reflect on how anarchism addresses these movements and the theoretical
and strategic issues they raise. As the Germinal Group of Trieste
writes: "In recent years, the issues raised by the feminist,
transfeminist, and queer movements have finally placed patriarchy at the
center of political and social critique and the movements' struggles. Patriarchy is one of the main instruments
of power, oppression, and discipline of the social, political, and economic structure that is imposed on us as unique, natural, just, and
inherent to human existence itself."
For its part, the Turin Anarchist Federation maintains: "Conceiving
identity, every identity, as a social construction, a shifting boundary
between inclusion and exclusion, is a theoretical approach that feeds on
the rupture brought about by feminism and the LGBTQIA+ movements. The
challenge is multifaceted: a challenge to the (ethical) state, to
reactive patriarchy, and to capitalism. A challenge that is not mere
abstraction or philosophical suggestion, but is realized through the
convergence of struggles, perspectives, and imaginaries capable of
giving rise to a new perspective. The accumulation of diverse identity
ruptures, which often coincide with various forms of exclusion, allows
for a permanent contestation of privilege vis-à-vis hierarchies of
power." These are some excerpts from the documents presented.
We are faced with mass movements that anarchism cannot ignore, both
because they aim to destroy social relations of domination that take the
form of patriarchy and to critique the ideology that derives from it,
and because these movements attempt to build relationships of solidarity
and inclusion and to practice direct action and self-organization,
despite many difficulties and contradictions. But we must obviously not
assume that transfeminist and queer movements develop spontaneously in a
libertarian direction, much less that they spontaneously challenge the
institutions of political domination. As in any other movement, the
conscious action of anarchist minorities is necessary, organized action
aimed at giving these movements a revolutionary meaning.
In this regard, the Anarchist Program provides us with simple and clear
guidelines: the task of libertarian minorities is to ensure that the
popular masses, or sections of them, such as the movements in question,
demand, impose, and take for themselves all the improvements and all the
freedoms they desire; Furthermore, libertarian minorities must support
all struggles for partial freedoms, convinced that through struggle one
learns to fight, and that once one begins to savor a little freedom, one
ends up wanting it all. Anarchism will always be with movements, and
when we can't get them to demand much, we must at least try to get them
to demand something: urging them to learn, however little or much they
want, to want to achieve it themselves, and holding in hatred and
contempt anyone who is or wants to govern by exploiting their problems
and goals.
The Anarchist Program therefore provides the analytical and strategic
tools appropriate for intervention within the movements that are shaking
up the patriarchal structure of society. However, this Program suffers
from having been drafted at the end of the 19th century and having
received only marginal additions in subsequent years. From this
perspective, the terms used, for example, suffer from the lack of
contributions made by movements to the critique of language in
subsequent years. To be clear: this isn't about subjecting our Program
to pinkwashing, but rather taking a stand, as a Federation, against the
disciplinary and conservative effects that language also exerts.
Regarding the issue of patriarchy as a structural element of the society
of domination and the role of transfeminist and queer movements in the
communist and libertarian transformation of society: neither of these
topics are explicitly addressed in the Program; however, there are some
elements that could stimulate further debate on these issues as well.
The Anarchist Program is alien to any assumption of economic determinism
in the formation of current society. In the Anarchist Program's
description of the evolution that led to today's society, two elements
are fundamental: first, the surplus of human production over immediate
needs, which allows part of society to live off the productive majority;
the other is the relationship between winners and losers, that is, the
relationship of domination. This is a basis for developing the
reflections of today's anarchism, highlighting that the social divisions
of labor-that is, between manual labor and material labor, between city
and countryside, and gender-are all relationships of domination. The
people at opposite ends of these relationships of domination constitute
the classes, which capitalism gives form to value, but which
nevertheless precede it. In other words, gender relations are also a
form of relationships of domination, that is, class relations. Such a
development, appropriately structured, would have the merit of
highlighting, as stated in the opening lines of the Program, that poor
social organization is the cause of most human suffering, of which
gender issues are one aspect.
It is also very important to highlight how gender issues can only be
aggravated by any government policy. What distinguishes anarchism from
other reformist and revolutionary political tendencies is the belief
that "privilege can only be abolished and freedom and social equality
firmly and definitively established except by abolishing government-not
this or that government, but the institution of government itself." This
concept must be affirmed, but it must also be demonstrated with respect
to every issue raised by mass movements, and therefore also with respect
to transfeminist and queer movements, to prevent it from being exploited
by those forces that seek to govern. This issue obviously must be
addressed in practice within the context of ongoing engagement with
social reality; however, I believe that a general reflection on the
anarchist movement is more than timely.
Regarding the role of transfeminist and queer movements in social
transformation, I believe anarchism must reiterate the impossibility of
liberating subjectivities within the society of domination. This is not
a given, but a result of the anarchist critique of society, a concept
that anarchism has the task of disseminating, a task that only anarchism
can fulfill. As much as authoritarian societies seek to expand the scope
of personal rights, this expansion is only temporary. Sooner or later,
the push for greater freedom and social justice for the masses-whether
in terms of subjectivities, income, the environment, or war-clash with
the desire of governments and the privileged classes to expand their own
dominion and privileges. In this conflict, governments increasingly
resort to violence, both against the popular masses and against each
other for reasons of international supremacy. This recourse to violence
has an immediate, practical effect, but it also has an ideological one,
revitalizing all those supremacist, macho, and elitist ideologies that
have accompanied the use of violence.
Any expansion of space for free subjectivity in today's society is
therefore transitory unless the relationship of domination is eliminated
at its root, unless the government that guarantees this relationship of
domination, holding a monopoly on social violence, is abolished. "Not
this or that government, but the very idea of government."
The forms taken by the exploited classes in the last century to overcome
capitalism have all failed, either because those attempts were bloodily
stifled by international reaction, as happened with the Spanish
Revolution, or because they degenerated and gradually returned to the
fold of capitalism, as happened in Russia, China, and Cuba.
Anarchism had long foreseen the danger posed by "revolutionary"
governments, which would ultimately stifle the revolution. But an
interesting element for our reflection is the essentially economic
nature of these revolutions, which entrusted the overcoming of
interpersonal relations of domination to a "higher form." Rigidly
applying Karl Marx's formula, these governments shared the conviction
that only the rapid development of productive forces would lead to the
destruction of bourgeois relations of production and the resulting
social and cultural superstructure. From this perspective, even the
resolution of the rudimentary form taken by gender issues in the first
half of the twentieth century was postponed to the later phase of
communism; after all, the development of productive forces entails an
increase in the means of production, but also a growth in the working
class. Questioning the binarism of gender relations poses a threat to
the development of productive forces. Thus, reproductive labor, left in
the back room of "Capital," takes on fundamental importance, and the
disciplining of bodies and subjectivities, from this perspective,
represents an essential aspect of social transformation as conceived by
authoritarian tendencies. In this way, a process begun for collective
liberation transforms into a new oppression, a new slavery, albeit in
the name of the New Man. Man, indeed.
I believe that anarchism can make a fundamental contribution to the
revolutionary maturation of movements. As already mentioned, it's not
about updating the Anarchist Program, but rather integrating it with
reflection and practical action that articulates its demands in light of
the new demands of anarchists' intervention in social struggles.
Tiziano Antonelli
https://umanitanova.org/anarchismo-e-transfemminismo/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
and published on these pages, addressed the issues raised by the
transfeminist and queer movements. With these notes, I would like to
reflect on how anarchism addresses these movements and the theoretical
and strategic issues they raise. As the Germinal Group of Trieste
writes: "In recent years, the issues raised by the feminist,
transfeminist, and queer movements have finally placed patriarchy at the
center of political and social critique and the movements' struggles. Patriarchy is one of the main instruments
of power, oppression, and discipline of the social, political, and economic structure that is imposed on us as unique, natural, just, and
inherent to human existence itself."
For its part, the Turin Anarchist Federation maintains: "Conceiving
identity, every identity, as a social construction, a shifting boundary
between inclusion and exclusion, is a theoretical approach that feeds on
the rupture brought about by feminism and the LGBTQIA+ movements. The
challenge is multifaceted: a challenge to the (ethical) state, to
reactive patriarchy, and to capitalism. A challenge that is not mere
abstraction or philosophical suggestion, but is realized through the
convergence of struggles, perspectives, and imaginaries capable of
giving rise to a new perspective. The accumulation of diverse identity
ruptures, which often coincide with various forms of exclusion, allows
for a permanent contestation of privilege vis-à-vis hierarchies of
power." These are some excerpts from the documents presented.
We are faced with mass movements that anarchism cannot ignore, both
because they aim to destroy social relations of domination that take the
form of patriarchy and to critique the ideology that derives from it,
and because these movements attempt to build relationships of solidarity
and inclusion and to practice direct action and self-organization,
despite many difficulties and contradictions. But we must obviously not
assume that transfeminist and queer movements develop spontaneously in a
libertarian direction, much less that they spontaneously challenge the
institutions of political domination. As in any other movement, the
conscious action of anarchist minorities is necessary, organized action
aimed at giving these movements a revolutionary meaning.
In this regard, the Anarchist Program provides us with simple and clear
guidelines: the task of libertarian minorities is to ensure that the
popular masses, or sections of them, such as the movements in question,
demand, impose, and take for themselves all the improvements and all the
freedoms they desire; Furthermore, libertarian minorities must support
all struggles for partial freedoms, convinced that through struggle one
learns to fight, and that once one begins to savor a little freedom, one
ends up wanting it all. Anarchism will always be with movements, and
when we can't get them to demand much, we must at least try to get them
to demand something: urging them to learn, however little or much they
want, to want to achieve it themselves, and holding in hatred and
contempt anyone who is or wants to govern by exploiting their problems
and goals.
The Anarchist Program therefore provides the analytical and strategic
tools appropriate for intervention within the movements that are shaking
up the patriarchal structure of society. However, this Program suffers
from having been drafted at the end of the 19th century and having
received only marginal additions in subsequent years. From this
perspective, the terms used, for example, suffer from the lack of
contributions made by movements to the critique of language in
subsequent years. To be clear: this isn't about subjecting our Program
to pinkwashing, but rather taking a stand, as a Federation, against the
disciplinary and conservative effects that language also exerts.
Regarding the issue of patriarchy as a structural element of the society
of domination and the role of transfeminist and queer movements in the
communist and libertarian transformation of society: neither of these
topics are explicitly addressed in the Program; however, there are some
elements that could stimulate further debate on these issues as well.
The Anarchist Program is alien to any assumption of economic determinism
in the formation of current society. In the Anarchist Program's
description of the evolution that led to today's society, two elements
are fundamental: first, the surplus of human production over immediate
needs, which allows part of society to live off the productive majority;
the other is the relationship between winners and losers, that is, the
relationship of domination. This is a basis for developing the
reflections of today's anarchism, highlighting that the social divisions
of labor-that is, between manual labor and material labor, between city
and countryside, and gender-are all relationships of domination. The
people at opposite ends of these relationships of domination constitute
the classes, which capitalism gives form to value, but which
nevertheless precede it. In other words, gender relations are also a
form of relationships of domination, that is, class relations. Such a
development, appropriately structured, would have the merit of
highlighting, as stated in the opening lines of the Program, that poor
social organization is the cause of most human suffering, of which
gender issues are one aspect.
It is also very important to highlight how gender issues can only be
aggravated by any government policy. What distinguishes anarchism from
other reformist and revolutionary political tendencies is the belief
that "privilege can only be abolished and freedom and social equality
firmly and definitively established except by abolishing government-not
this or that government, but the institution of government itself." This
concept must be affirmed, but it must also be demonstrated with respect
to every issue raised by mass movements, and therefore also with respect
to transfeminist and queer movements, to prevent it from being exploited
by those forces that seek to govern. This issue obviously must be
addressed in practice within the context of ongoing engagement with
social reality; however, I believe that a general reflection on the
anarchist movement is more than timely.
Regarding the role of transfeminist and queer movements in social
transformation, I believe anarchism must reiterate the impossibility of
liberating subjectivities within the society of domination. This is not
a given, but a result of the anarchist critique of society, a concept
that anarchism has the task of disseminating, a task that only anarchism
can fulfill. As much as authoritarian societies seek to expand the scope
of personal rights, this expansion is only temporary. Sooner or later,
the push for greater freedom and social justice for the masses-whether
in terms of subjectivities, income, the environment, or war-clash with
the desire of governments and the privileged classes to expand their own
dominion and privileges. In this conflict, governments increasingly
resort to violence, both against the popular masses and against each
other for reasons of international supremacy. This recourse to violence
has an immediate, practical effect, but it also has an ideological one,
revitalizing all those supremacist, macho, and elitist ideologies that
have accompanied the use of violence.
Any expansion of space for free subjectivity in today's society is
therefore transitory unless the relationship of domination is eliminated
at its root, unless the government that guarantees this relationship of
domination, holding a monopoly on social violence, is abolished. "Not
this or that government, but the very idea of government."
The forms taken by the exploited classes in the last century to overcome
capitalism have all failed, either because those attempts were bloodily
stifled by international reaction, as happened with the Spanish
Revolution, or because they degenerated and gradually returned to the
fold of capitalism, as happened in Russia, China, and Cuba.
Anarchism had long foreseen the danger posed by "revolutionary"
governments, which would ultimately stifle the revolution. But an
interesting element for our reflection is the essentially economic
nature of these revolutions, which entrusted the overcoming of
interpersonal relations of domination to a "higher form." Rigidly
applying Karl Marx's formula, these governments shared the conviction
that only the rapid development of productive forces would lead to the
destruction of bourgeois relations of production and the resulting
social and cultural superstructure. From this perspective, even the
resolution of the rudimentary form taken by gender issues in the first
half of the twentieth century was postponed to the later phase of
communism; after all, the development of productive forces entails an
increase in the means of production, but also a growth in the working
class. Questioning the binarism of gender relations poses a threat to
the development of productive forces. Thus, reproductive labor, left in
the back room of "Capital," takes on fundamental importance, and the
disciplining of bodies and subjectivities, from this perspective,
represents an essential aspect of social transformation as conceived by
authoritarian tendencies. In this way, a process begun for collective
liberation transforms into a new oppression, a new slavery, albeit in
the name of the New Man. Man, indeed.
I believe that anarchism can make a fundamental contribution to the
revolutionary maturation of movements. As already mentioned, it's not
about updating the Anarchist Program, but rather integrating it with
reflection and practical action that articulates its demands in light of
the new demands of anarchists' intervention in social struggles.
Tiziano Antonelli
https://umanitanova.org/anarchismo-e-transfemminismo/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten