03.11.2014 Views

o_195qg5dto17o4rbc85q1ge61i84a.pdf

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

152<br />

anarchism: a beginner’s guide<br />

helping to revive local community networks. RTS argue that these<br />

illegal actions often wrong-foot the authorities because they emphasize<br />

the extent to which anarchism fosters collective responsibility,<br />

communality and fun. Whilst some class-struggle anarchists<br />

denounce RTS campaigning as middle-class posturing, others point<br />

out that RTS actions have mobilized effective mass support for<br />

old-style workers’ struggles.<br />

civil disobedience<br />

Civil disobedience is usually defined as an act of non-violent resistance<br />

(even in the face of violence) to a specific injustice for which<br />

participants anticipate arrest. The definition distinguishes civil disobedience<br />

from direct action: a monkeywrencher who attempts to<br />

disable bulldozers covertly wherever they are found is engaged in<br />

direct action, whilst a monkeywrencher who commits the same act<br />

publicly and in order to frustrate a particular building scheme is performing<br />

an act of civil disobedience. Like symbolic and direct action<br />

it is popular with non-anarchist as well as anarchist protestors.<br />

However, in contrast to non-anarchist civil disobedience, anarchist<br />

civil disobedience does not imply an acknowledgment of the state’s<br />

legitimacy. To the contrary, anarchists disobey with the long-term<br />

commitment to its overthrow (some anarchists prefer the term<br />

‘social’ to ‘civil’ disobedience in order to emphasize this<br />

difference).<br />

Civil disobedience is associated with four particular writers and<br />

activists – Thoreau, Tolstoy, Gandhi and Martin Luther King – and<br />

takes two forms. For followers of Thoreau civil disobedience can<br />

take violent or non-violent forms. In 1859 Thoreau famously<br />

defended the murder of five unarmed pro-slavery settlers by the<br />

abolitionist John Brown as an act of civil disobedience. In Thoreau’s<br />

view, each individual should decide what constitutes appropriate<br />

action. In contrast, Tolstoy, Gandhi and King rejected violence.<br />

Indeed, Tolstoy not only believed that violence was immoral, he<br />

specifically rejected the appeal to conscience as a justification for<br />

anarchist terrorism. There was, he believed, an intimate relationship<br />

between the means and ends of revolutionary change such that an<br />

act of violence was more likely to perpetuate than overcome an<br />

injustice based on the exercise of violence. Gandhi adopted a similar<br />

view. One of the outstanding features of his Sarvodaya movement<br />

was that means are never instrumental, but always end-creating. 62

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!