{BOOKS} {FREEDOM} {THE RAVEN} {INTERNATIONAL NEWS}
To join the FREEDOM PRESS INTERNATIONAL mailing list send a message to:
Freedom Press
Is the Anarchist Society attainable?This has been hotly debated ever since the word 'anarchist' was coined, with many arguing that it can never be more than an ideal to measure other societies by.
I was brought to accept this ideal not by any contact with anarchism but by contemplation of my parents' dictum (a quote from . . . someone or other) that 'that government is best which governs least'. They had been members of the Kibbo Kift, which split in the '20s into the Wood craft Folk and the Social Credit Party (the Green Shirts). The SCP had decided that the financial system - essentially the banks' monopoly power to create the money supply as their own, and charge interest on their loans of it, manipulating the supply for their own power and profit - was the 'root of all evil' in the modern world.
This may have been over-simplistic, but I argued in the London Anarchist Group in the late '50s that anarchists should at least heed this argument to 'know their enemy'. Observation of events since have only strengthened my belief in this point.
For anarchists generally, government is anathema.
Why, then, do we find not merely in the broad Green movement but in the Green Party of this country, that there is a group of self confessed anarchists, myself included, openly arguing their case - within a party seeking political power?
The Green Party itself is something of an anomaly. Though not using my parents' dictum, it has fully accepted its essence, and is seeking 'the devolution of power to the lowest appropriate level'.
How to achieve this remains unresolved. Some seek priority for the aim of success in Parliamentary elections, but most of those active in the debate argue that not only is the chance of electoral success greater at local level (there are already local Green councillors, despite our lack of proportional representation), but that local success is a necessary precondition for Parliamentary success.
But the Green Party aims to remove from the national government most of its powers, so why seek election to Parliament? The recent history of Die Grunen might be seen as vindicating the anarchist case against seeking political power in order to destroy it. Can a Green Party have any real hope of devolving power?
In the March issue of Green Line, in an article originally in the US Left Green Notes, an anonymous American writer argues that 'It is crucial for the green movement to clarify and make distinctions about what constitutes electoral activity that is in harmony with our principles as Greens', and that 'It is our courage in confronting institutional structures of power, the real sources of our social and ecological problems, which makes us strong'.
He argues against the formation of a national political party, but that Greens should nevertheless seek election at the local level, because that 'is potentially a realm of face-to-face democracy, which the state is not'.
This article, however, serves to illustrate the different public percep tions of politics in the US and the UK. The US has a federal structure with a far greater measure of local autonomy. Here, the local authorities are firmly and increasingly under the control of the centre, and the public gives its support to political parties in both national and local elections; 'independents' have only a very slim chance of election. So, if only to boost its chances in local elections, the UK Green Party accepts that it must contest for Parliament.
It has just issued a 12-point 'Charter for Citizens' Power', backed by a campaigning document on 'Direct Democracy and Citizen Power' advocating 'Initiative, Recall and Referenda' as three ways for people to have a direct, democratic effect on legislation. It points out that these 'tools of direct democracy' are available to varying degrees to people of many other countries, and demands them for this country
This brings us back to the dilemma - and to the Social Credit point. The attacks in recent years by the UK government on its local authorities have been firmly based on increasing financial restrictions in response to the exponential growth of the debts created by the financial system, exacerbated by the Government's insane high-interest policy to "curb inflation . It is this system which is at the root of the world's problems and individually we are powerless to change it. Even for a nation, on its own, this would be dangerous.
Yet, if this system is allowed to continue without fundamental change, the total destruction of our life-support systems is the inevitable and imminent consequence.
I have no confidence that the Green Party, if it ever succeeds in forming a government, will have managed to retain its present deter mination to devolve power, or that even if it has it will achieve this against the concerted opposition of the powerful vested interests that will be ranged against it; but if it has first got wide local support, it may already have forced many concessions and swung the mood of the public against the power structures, and have its active support. Apathy is the greatest enemy of progress.
A key policy of the Green Party (as of Social Credit) is the issue to everyone of Basic Incomes - unconditional payments to every citizen of an income sufficient to meet basic needs. This would remove the overriding need to 'earn a living', the basis of our 'wage-slavery', allow ing more people the chance to opt out of conventional employment and removing the pressure on the system for ever-increasing production to provide that employment - and the profits-for-some which it generates This in itself could be a powerful liberating experience, as well as a necessary change to save the environment. It has the potential to boost the 'informal economy', that is all those activities ignored by economists because no money changes hands, but which nevertheless make an essential contribution to the economy: child-rearing, housekeeping, 'DIY', food-growing on allotments, etc. - mutual aid.
This, however, is a policy which could only be effected initially by a national government - albeit perhaps one of a different colour, under pressure from the Greens.
Similarly, the Green Party has policies to encourage the development of local currencies, and to remove from the private banks their monopoly of credit-creation in the national currency. These too need either a revolution, or national legislation to introduce them.
The slimness of the chance of successful libertarian revolution in the modern world is widely acknowledged, events in Eastern Europe and Russia notwithstanding. In none of these events has any attempt to throw off their masters, rather than change them, had any success. The only alternative appears to be through the electoral system - but with the fundamental difference of aiming for the 'bottom line': use local campaigns to raise public awareness of its powers to demand change locally, get the local population involved; keep at the front of your campaigning the need to devolve power.
So far, this is what the UK Green Party is doing. As long as it continues to, and to reflect and strengthen within its own organisation these principles, it will continue to have my active support. It may not be fully anarchist, but it is pushing strongly in the right direction.
© Brian Leslie The Raven 14 pp114-117
Do feel free to send comments and suggestions to
Freedom 
TAO
A-Infos