Graham R (Ed.) - Anarchism - A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas Volume One - From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE to 1939)

Conflict In The First International /95
and official impositions. If the Church and the State were private institutions, we
would, no doubt, be against them, but we would not contest their right to exist. We
fight them because they are organized to exploit the collective power of the masses
by official and violent superimposition. If the International were to become a State
we, its most zealous champions, would become its most implacable enemies.
But the point is precisely that the International cannot organize itself into a
State. It cannot do so because the International, as its name implies, means the abolition
of all frontiers, and there can be no State without frontiers, without sovereignty
...
The International Workingmen's Association would be totally devoid of meaning
if it did not aim at the abolition of the State. It organizes the masses only to facilitate
the destruction of the State. And how does it organize them Not from the top
down, not by constricting the manifold fu nctions of society which reflect the diversity
oflabour, not by fo rcing the natural life of the masses into the straitjacket of the
State, not by imposing upon them a fictitious unity. On the contrary, it organizes
them from the bottom up, beginning with the social life of the masses and their real
aspirations, and inducing them to group, harmonize, and balance their forces in accordance
with the natural diversity oftheir occupations and circumstances ...
But, someone will say, even though every worker may become a member of the International,
they cannot all have learning. And is it not enough fo r the International to
contain a group of men who possess the knowledge, the philosophy, and the policy
of Socialism ... in order for the majority, the people of the International, fa ithfully
obeying [the fo rmer'slfraternal command ... to be sure offollowing the path leading to
the full emancipation of the proletariat
That is the argument which the ... authoritarian party within the International
has often expressed, not openly-they are neither sincere nor courageous
enough-but clandestinely, developed with all kinds of rather clever qualifications
and demagogic compliments addressed to the supreme wisdom and omnipotence of
the sovereign people. We have always fo ught this view passionately, for we are convinced
that the moment the International...is divided into two groups-one comprising
the vast majority and composed of members whose only knowledge will be a
blind fa ith in the theoretical and practical wisdom of their commanders, and the
other composed only of a few score individual directors-from that moment this institution
which should emancipate humanity would turn into a type of oligarchic
State, the worst of all States. What is more, this learned, clairvoyant, and cunning mi-