Customer Reviews

Anarchism: A Collection of Revolutionary Writings

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Kropotkin writes with the heart of one true to his ideals, with depth that Marx cannot reach, and intelligence that few can exceed. Revolutionary and scientist, this anti-aristocratic man of aristocratic birth explains elegantly and pleasantly the sound empirical foundations of his theory of anarchist philosophy. From the bottom up, he creates his compelling arguments in support of a world where all men and women are equal, where private property is abolished, and all work together, freely and voluntarily for the common and individual good. The libertarian communism of Kropotkin inspires orders of magnitude beyond the authoritarian communism described by Marx. His pamphlets, contained in the book, bring to life this long maligned political philosophy called anarchism. If you read these works and walk away without a sympathetic view towards anarchism, you have either not truly read them or your soul has become poisoned with the dark sufferings of life under capitalism.

Prince Peter Kropotkin was the first thinker since William Godwin to construct a full system of anarcho-collectivism. This collection consists of a bunch of satisfying niblets (yes, niblets) of that system, some better than others.

First, anyone into anarchism has got to read Kropotkins essay of that title for the Encyclopedia Britannica. It has to be the clearest written, most well-stated short intro around. His essay on "The Anarchist Morality (written oddly enough as a retort to some kids who, after stealing some books, justified it with "To each according to his need.")The early essays, which take us through the first hundred-or-so pages are the best, as they get into the underlying theory of anarchism and what "sponteneous order" might look like. Of course "Modern Science and Anarchism" is a complete misnomer because the essay is heavy on philosophical speculation with not much scientific speculation. The latter essays are more-or-less historical propoganda and will be of interest to the history student.

Still, in a world of inarticulate and often unsavory characters, Kropotkin comes off as astute, thoughtful, clear and insightful. Of course, science has (done its best to?)prove Kropotkin wrong on his altruistic evolutionary theories. Even modern "reciprical altruists" in the wake of Dawkins, Wilson and Ridley are looking less altruistic and more reciprical. I guess only time will tell. Hmmmm....

Kropotkin is a class traitor to the bone. Born a prince, he spent the rest of his life trying to destroy the very system which he was blessed to be born in the good side. Kropotkin is not your typical leftist pamphleteer. His language is short and concise, and understandable by anyone. He led a revolutionary life.

This book is a collection of writings by Kropotkin that deal with a wide range of topics that fall under the umbrella of freedom. Kropotkin eloquently puts forth the ideals of Anarchist Communism in simple, non-obtuse language where he lays out what Anarchist Communism, and maybe as importantly, what it isn't. In "The Spirit of Revolt", Kropotkin defends revolution, and notes that only social revolution is what will end the existing capitalist order. This is a response to the reformists and the critics of the anarchists who say that anarchism is too "idealist." Quite the opposite, Kropotkin knew full well to avoid utopian fantasies and believed firmly that the only way the working class can liberate itself is by doing it themselves in revolution. Even though his demeanor from his writings indicates a calm, if not lovable old sage (in contrast to many of the leftists of his day), Kropotkin does not deny the reality that revolution may or even has to be violent. Kropotkin was a full on realist.

Even though I consider myself a solid leftist, I was somewhat reserved on the idea of getting rid of prisons entirely. I definitely oppose the prison system as it exists right now, but I was conflicted on the institution in general. Even though I know full well that prison does not a thing to end crime, there are some people who commit such heinous acts they should be put away. Peter Kropotkin, in short, straight up embarrassed me. In "Prisons and Their Moral Influence on Prisoners", Kropotkin sends the institution of prison to the electric chair. Kropotkin uses common sense to prove why prisons are absolutely futile, self-defeating, cruel, and do nothing to solve the real issues. Prison is a crime.

"An Appeal to the Young" displays both Kropotkin's compassion, revolutionary drive, and his skills as a writer. This will make you want to get up out of your seat and do something, after you recover from Kropotkin playing your emotions like a fiddle.

This book is definitely a companion to "The Conquest of Bread." Kropotkin's elegant style makes even the longest of texts breeze by. The only reason why I gave this 4 stars instead of 5 is because what I believe to be Kropotkin's most important pamphletes were not included. "Small Communal Experiments and Why They Fail" is one of, if not the most important things Kropotkin has written besides his main body of work. He details why setting up a commune with communist principles in the existing capitalist world is futile and a waste of time. He stresses revolution as the only way to eliminate capitalism. Also, "Communism and Anarchy" is important in that Kropotkin effortlessly destroys the notion that Communism weakens individuality and "sacrifices" the individual.

Get this book.

This collection of anarchist writings by Peter Kropotkin is important historically for the inspiration it provided to other revolutionaries, but the understanding of human nature and social dynamics is charmingly optimistic and naïve.

Kropotkin was one of the best thinkers and writers of the Russian revolutionary philosophers. He was born a noble and renounced his title. He was trained as a Tsarist army officer and became an opponent of the Tsar and supporter of the serfs. He was educated as a military geographer in a time when this was synonymous with 'spy', and became an expatriate supporting his fellow anarchists, communists, and other revolutionaries. He inspired a number of other folks from his end of the political spectrum including Lenin, but his family refused a Soviet state funeral when he passed away. He spent several hours chatting with Jefferson Davis' widow and Booker Washington one afternoon. He travelled throughout Europe, America, and Siberia. Quite the character. This is a collection of his short writings, selected to represent his beliefs as succinctly and thoroughly as possible.

His statement of the problem that concerned him is clear; "The chasm between the modern millionaire who squanders the produce of human labor in a gorgeous and vain luxury, and the pauper reduced to a miserable and insecure existance". His answer is the absense of a 'coersive' government and only professional organizations grouped by function, i.e. a rail coalition, a postal league, a carpenters union, etc. Prisons, the most extreme case of government coersion, would be done away with and offenders, even the most hardened violent offenders would be given a stringent regimen of hugs until they were ready to be nice.

And therein we find the naïveté. Kropotkin's fundamental failing was his inability to understand the predatory nature of humans. His vision of social justice and order would be a trivial challenge to a high functioning and charismatic sociopath, like Slobodan Milosovic, Pol Pot, Hugo Chavez, or Fidel Castro. Donald Trump (Not that Donald Trump is a high functioning sociopath, just that he is the archtypical capitolist) could subvert Kropotkin's egalitarian vision without straining himself. It also depended on the absense of competition for resources, which would be the most bizarre notion to someone from an Arab or Central Asian culture. And it requires a world without competition, which is a surreal assumption as populations increase and resources remain constant at best, but more often are dimininshing. His vision is utopian, but completely disconnected from the realities of his world in the last half of the nineteenth century and only worse in the first half of the twenty-first century.

Kropotkin must have been a very nice person, and a very unhappy one, as are most people who have a well developed and defined vision of how things should be, but have not allowed for human nature. He wanted people to be passionate about their work, regardless of their trade. He believed everyone should work with their hands in addition to whatever intellectual endeavor they pursued. He believed in a classless and just society.

To bad he didn't apply equal effort to solving lesser problems that could be fixed rather than chasing an unobtainable ideal.

E. M. Van Court