THE SPECIFIC ORGANIZATION:

Over at the Anarkismo site there is an interesting new article titled 'The Specific Organization'. For those naive to the matter "Especivismo" is a South American variant of "Platformism" that has evolved often without reference to the document known as the 'Platform'. It perhaps owes more to the FAI than the General Union. The two traditions are actually quite similar in that they both posit the need for a "specifically anarchist" organization outside of the general mass organizations such as unions, community groups and others so as to maximize the effect of the libertarians on said organizations. Molly definitely believes that this is a necessity. Organizations in South America that posit the especivismo ideas generally place less emphasis on "theoretical unity" than traditional platformists do, a plus in Molly's view.

The article, written by a Brazilian author, Jaime Cubero of Sao Paulo, contains an extended discussion of the nature of freedom. This concept is often used in a crude and rhetorical way amongst the more juvenile "anarchists" influenced by American pseudo-individualism. People familiar with the real tradition of individualism, both American and otherwise, recognize many of the points that Cubero makes. Freedom also involves the ability to think things through, to compromise and to have the freedom to not be a slave of transitory whims, whatever post-leftist ideologues may say.

The article is an English translation of the Portuguese original. It discusses how freedom and liberation are not contradictory but rather incorporated together in the concept of federalism. It goes on to speak of "responsibility" which is where Molly parts company with the more extreme proponents of "platformism" and not just on their insistence on "ideological unity". Molly occupies something of a "middle position" between the platformist program and the ideology of those who believe that an anarchist organization should be nothing more than a name encompassing widely different groups and individuals who have nothing in common. The idea of "responsibility" to the organization, to participate at least minimally in its activities and definitely not to continually contradict them is a necessity for any organization that goes beyond a name and a newsletter controlled by an informal elite- as the late and unlamented SRAF was. This sort of "tyranny of structurelessness" is the so-called "alternative" proposed by the post-left crew who see the need for coordination but are threatened by the idea that their "desires armed" would be hamstrung by democratic control. Tsk,tsk,tsk. You poor little oppressed people, that you can't manipulate others. How opppppresive !

On the other hand Molly is of the opinion that any anarchist organization, to be maximally effective, must be pluralistic. This means the free right to disagree with the decisions of the organization whether they are arrived at democratically or are unfortunately arrived at through the low cunning of those who know how to use the heritage of political and personal manipulation inherited from the sadder parts of the left to maximal effect. It means the right to publicly disagree with same and to disassociate oneself from them or to simply ignore them. this means that an anarchist organization would more resemble a normal political party than a Leninist sect. Grounds for expulsion would still be present, but they would be restricted to the most egregious examples of groups and individuals who were persistently in conflict with the goals of the organization.

It is all a matter of balance. An anarchist organization should not demand adherence to the finer points of some "theory" given that theory should be provisional at its best. Neither should it demand that each and every member should give support to everything that the organization decides to do. The right of the individual conscience should be respected. On the other hand the organization should reserve the right to expel those whose purposes in the organization are obviously in direct contradiction to the general principles of the organization. Balance and once more balance. In any case go to the article above to see one take on this matter.