Customer Reviews

Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

If there is any question thrown at organizers within the various tendrils of the global justice movement intended to make our efforts appear utopian and unrealizable, it would have to be "I understand what you're against, but what are you for?" The implicit idea being that there is no reason to believe that another world is possible in more than a rhetorical sense, or at least not examples to prove such is possible. Frequently those of us who dream of a liberated world without a market or state structures turn to anthropology for inspiration from the thousands of years of human history where such didn't exist. Anthropologists, worried about being accused of romanticizing populations, have generally responded to these inquiries with a confused silence.

In Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology Yale based anthropologist and political activist David Graeber asks, "what if that wasn't the case?" Drawing from the rich history of ethnographic materials and anthropological records as well as critical theory and current practices within the global justice movement Graeber demonstrates that there is an endless variety of revolutionary political and social organization to draw from. Rejecting both the Hobbesian fable of the "war of all against all" and the blatant forms of racism and Eurocentrism used to argue that so called "primitive" societies have no bearing on and are completely removed from the world we live in, Graeber explores the endless variety of political and organization which have existed throughout the world. From the Tsimhety of northwest Madagascar to Amazonian tribes what emerges are the dynamics of struggle and contention, of insurrection and resistance that have existed not just through the past two hundred years of European history but arguably since the dawn of human existence.

The anthropological cannon, from James Frazer to Pierre Clastres, once removed from its arcane status as obscure purely academic knowledge, brims with ideas and examples of social organization that could be of use to organizers seeking for alternatives practices. Organizers and radical theorists have long drawn from anthropology to find useful ideas for their work, from the Situationists usage of the potlatch of the Kwakiutl to current practices of consensus, which have existed through numerous indigenous societies throughout the world long before activists began to employ them for spokescouncils. Anarchism in this light is revealed not to be a political philosophy invented by a particular set of bearded European males sometime in the 1800s, but rather the practices of voluntary association, cooperation, and egalitarian social arrangements pervading societies worldwide.

Similarly Graeber connects currents of thought within autonomist traditions, such as the ideas of exodus and counterpower, to social structures within indigenous societies that operate in very much a similar manner. Particularly interesting is his exploration of the idea of ethnogenesis, or how enduring political projects and communities sediment and come to be recognized as ethnic categories. One can see such both in communities that formed in Madagascar as well as in the nomadic tribes formed in the United States by the mixing of escape slaves, indentured European servants, and Native American populations.

The greatest flaw of the book is that Graeber is throwing out so many ideas and concepts at such a dizzying pace that he never really has time to delve into any of them at great depth. But perhaps that's half the point. Drawing from the practice of ethnography in an attempt to reformulate radical intellectual practice, he argues that the task is to draw and tease out the hidden symbolic and pragmatic aspects of what people are doing and to give such information back as gifts. By beginning to draw out the liberatory possibilities contained within anthropology Graeber sets out not to define and delimit exactly what an anarchist anthropology is, but to point in some of the possible directions that those of us struggling for a better world could take such knowledge.

The book is meant to be examined not as a coherent set of theories or practices for instituting anarchist methods, but is instead, as the title indicates, meant to reveal fragments and pieces of an anarchist approach to society. Previous reviews mention the "dark side of humanity", or "basic human nature", but they would seem to assume much about the inner workings of human beings. It is not altogether absurd to forsee an interest in anarchist practice more broadly as people continue to see what results from the use and abuse of power. Graeber's book is a thought experiment, an attempt to envision an alternative to what we have now, not a manifesto pointing out exactly what should be done. He has excellent critiques of what we currently view as "democracy", and also does a thoughtful job examining Pierre Clastres' work "Society Against the State", as well as offering examples of groups which were much more egalitarian in nature, including those that broke away from states to become so.

David Graeber's highly engaging contribution to social theory doesn't claim to say anything particularly "new" about anarchist social movements. Rather, he seeks to link academic anthropology's body of knowledge (about "actually-existing self-governing communities" in the world today) to the utopian desires of global anarchism. Forging this link, Graeber intuits, would help academic social theory escape the pretension of prescribing radicalism and would instead attune it to already-existing utopian political practices. In this regard, Graeber's work is a modest attempt at transforming how we go about thinking *and* doing revolutionary strategy.

The book is really a long essay that stakes out various positions in what Graeber says is a "non-existent science." Weary of academics who flaunt their leftist credentials while leading privileged lifestyles, Graeber uses anarchism to explain how theory and practice might be brought into dynamic consonance: "[Anarchism] is primarily concerned with forms of practice; it insists, before anything else, that one's means must be consonant with one's ends; one cannot create freedom through authoritarian means; in fact, as much as possible, one must oneself, in one's relations with one's friends and allies, embody the society one wishes to create." Basing his view of academic work on anarchist principles, then, Graeber argues that the knowledge one makes must have a real, practical relation to the politics one imagines.

This book is a breath of fresh air in the otherwise moribund sphere of academic social theory. By showing vanguardism and radical skepticism to be inimical to the kind of self-governing, direct-action politics that anarchism espouses, Graeber challenges intellectuals to engage real people, real desires, and real processes of decision-making beyond the low-stakes "game" of academic infighting (otherwise known as: my theory is better than yours). Thus, in addition to being a fine primer on anarchist theory-practice (where theory and practice are co-constitutive elements of revolutionary strategy), Graeber's book offers an important perspective on why intellectuals must question their stakes and their interests in "studying" politics at all.

In this book, "Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology", Graeber presents alternatives to the social systems we have presumed are our only paradigms. He points to successful anarchist organizations (and experiments) worldwide as a potential directions for Western societies to follow. What Graeber doesn't address is the complex role of humanity's "dark side" or the difficulties of integrating a technological society into a harmonious utopian anarchist whole. However, the book is commendable as it defends anarchy as an existing social alternative and charges the reader to consider how it could possibly be implemented.

I very much enjoyed this book. As something of an anarchist, I find myself thinking about anarchist approaches to world problems, but the problem I see is that anarchism is more of a methodology than an ideology. Essentially, it is a moral and practical approach toward social change. It reaches me than the theoretical approaches to strategizing like Marx's and other armchair revolutionists' work. Essentially, Graeber is searching for methods where we can institute the anarchist's approach to studying society, which sounds like a paradoxical premise at first because anarchism isn't so much a theory as it is a practice, but it makes sense. Basically, his approach aims tp make the study of society much more praxeological in approach, as opposed to creating a set of ideas alienated from real human behavior, by using an anarchist perspective to study society. I really like what he's done here, although there is much less meat than I had hoped for. I'd like to see a bigger book with some examples of what he's looking for (like new approaches to sociology and an entirely new way to look at the concept of the state). I think it will take years to develop a large body of theory to work with, but he's on to something groundbreaking.

With regards to the lone review (so far) that takes the book to task for not being practical enough, I must add input to this collection of reviews. Graeber is an engaging writer who is very clear about the intent of this book: it is the start of an inquiry that we must each undertake independently, unafraid of referencing historic examples or currently undersung autonomous projects. I was thoroughly impressed by his presentation of anthropology and its pragmatic possibilities. This book is nothing if not vital to helping those of us who must always explain themselves contrary to canards and wholesale deceptions about anarchism, especially at this time. I wish all authors could note how deftly Graeber gets all this done in 100 pages... sure, some detail is lacking, and a few points seem to be dashed off and barely considered, but the strength of the overall argument is enough to compensate for these shortcomings.

I really appreciate that Graeber had the courage to openly disparage academic attitudes, enough so that his own career was threatened. If anybody is still paying attention in time to come, this boldness will surely be recognized as a stirring and exceptional example of integrity.

There are many books of theory and high-minded ideas about revolution now available; this is not one of them. It contains helpful suggestions that just need more exposure and attention. The only people who would not relate to this are those who already don't give much consideration to other cultures anyway.

Brand new book and came very fast for before I had to leave for college. No markings as promised and new. It is very helpful to have a clean book to read from!

Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology presents some interesting theories. It even manages to sound convincing some of the time. What's missing is a practical, plausible way to begin implementing anarchist social theory into a system held in a chokehold by technocratic monopolies and apathetic consumerism. Anarchism is just too abstract and too presumptuous to actually ever be feasible. David Graeber manages to convince those of us still lingering on the edge of the mainstream that anarchism is still rooted in archaic, utopian-driven notions. Certainly the author can find global examples of anarchist principles at work, but the notion of dismantling massive capitalist-driven, corporate-country entities with something as problematical as anarchism, just doesn't seem reasonable - at least not in the format presented by Mr. Graeber.

The social and cultural development of humans has been marked by intense episodes of inhumanity and violence. Anarchism seems to desperately insist that dark, shadowy archetypes in the form of rulers, political systems and governments are solely responsible for the mess we currently find ourselves in, thus totally negating the roll of basic human nature.

Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology is a bold, optimistic work, but like most tracts on anarchism but will probably only hold appeal for intellectuals or academic nonconformists.