Sociology of the Anarchists - Gozips.uakron.edu - The University of ...

auspice of the United States government). However, the “Federal government” has
become a power unto itself, and autonomy of individual states can be over-ridden by
hierarchical decisions nationally. [insert Watt's (2001) description of governmental
federations here—try to adapt it to non-governmental forms] It is interesting to note
that most anarchists (or, to my knowledge, social movement sociologists) have not
explored this misuse of the words “federation”/”federal” and how the Articles of
Confederation set-up a relatively anarchist political order (in structure, not necessarily in
policy, internal composition, or morality), which was ruined/gutted by the centralization
of power by the subsequent Constitution. The anarcho-syndicalist Paul Goodman seems
virtually alone in pointing out this fact. Weltman (2000) cites Goodman's argument that
“the American colonies originated as anarcho-syndicalist communities” and that “the
colonies used government to limit the power of the individual and used participatory
town meetings to limit the power of the government” (p. ??) [Also check Deleon 1973]
Black blocs are usually considered to be a tactic, not an organization. But, some
sociologist might still consider it to be an organization, just not a permanent-standing one
–it is similar to the popular fad of a “flash mob”. Thus, there is no “black bloc” to join or
be a part of. Nor does any one person speak for the bloc. It just exists as a street
demonstration phenomenon. Various local organizations will often make “a call” for a
black bloc when a demonstration is happening in their community, intending that an
internal unit of a march be composed of anarchists or anti-authoritarian activists. Black
blocs are usually employed for some of the following reasons: to radicalize a liberal
march, allow for internal anonymity in order to deter police provocation or “picking-off”,
to discourage internal authority figures and manipulation, and so forth. There are also
downsides to the tactic: unaccountability of “manarchists” 63 , marginalization by other
activists and the press, and escalated danger from police engagement. 64 Indeed, anarchists
are not above self-criticism: Severino (2003) asserts “We are indeed opposed to the
fetishization of the black bloc, which leads, among other things, to the phenomenon of
black bloc spectators as well as 'black bloc as fashion'” (Severino 2003, PAGE?). Even
though there is no “leadership” with a black bloc, it is usually understood that affinity
groups are the organizational actors within, as affinity groups have discussed amongst
themselves their general strategies and tactics prior to joining the bloc. During the bloc,
communication occurs with others, but key decisions are made frequently amongst
affinity group members.
Anarchists have also responded in recent years to protest situations by the formation of
autonomous collectives of protest-oriented organizations, such as medics, legal observers,
“radical cheerleaders”, who serve a specific purpose at an action (first aid, documentation
of police abuses, and encouragement respectively). Such groups are spurred by the values
of mutual aid and by the desire to assist in their own, unique ways to an action. This
diffusion has benefited by the exchange of tactics and skills via the Internet, and by
roaming “trainers” who help local groups form.
Collective action theory suggests that the divisions between gatherings, demonstrations,
and riots are easily blurred and can quickly transition from one category to another.
63 For more on the “manarchists”, please see the Rock Bloc Collective 2001.
64 For more on black bloc tactics and assumptions about them, please see the section entitled “Violence”.
[ Williams 67 ] [ this is a draft. do not cite. ]