[1] Lucien van der Walt, ‘Counterpower, Participatory Democracy, Revolutionary Defense: Debating Black Flame, Revolutionary Anarchism and Historical Marxism,’ International Socialism 130 (2011), accessed 19 February 2017, http://isj.org.uk/revolutionary-anarchism-and-historical-marxism/.

[2] Stuart Christie and Albert Meltzer, The Floodgates of Anarchy (London: Kahn & Averill, 1970), 6.

[3] Jorge Semprun, Communism in Spain in the Franco Era: The Autobiography of Federico Sanchez, trans. Helen R. Lane (Sussex: Harvester, 1980), 7.

[4] Marie-Louise Berneri, Neither East Nor West: Selected Writings 1939–1948 (London: Freedom Press, 1988), 66.

[5] Benjamin Franks, ‘Between Anarchism and Marxism: The Beginnings and Ends of the Schism …,,’ Journal of Political Ideologies 17:2 (2012), 207–27, accessed 15 February 2017, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13569317.2012.676867.

[6] ‘What Was the USSR? Part I: Trotsky and State Capitalism,’ Aufheben #06 (Autumn 1997), accessed 19 February 2017, http://libcom.org/library/what-was-the-ussr-aufheben-1.

[7] ‘Simon Springer and David Harvey Debate Marxism, Anarchism and Geography,’ Progressive Geographies, accessed 27 January 2017, https://progressivegeographies.com/2015/06/10/simon-springer-and-david-harvey-debate-marxism-anarchism-and-geography/.

[8] Alex Prichard and Owen Worth, ‘Left-Wing Convergence: An introduction,’ Capital & Class 40/1 (2016), 3–17, accessed 15 February 2017, http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0309816815624370.

[9] Benedict Anderson, Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anti-Colonial Imagination (London: Verso, 2005); Maia Ramnath, Decolonizing Anarchism: An Antiauthoritarian History of India’s Liberation Struggle (Oakland: AK Press, 2011).

[10] Murray Bookchin, Post-scarcity Anarchism, 2^nd edition (Montreal: Black Rose, 1986).

[11] Subcomandante Marcos, ‘I Shit on All the Revolutionary Vanguards of This Planet’ (January 2003), accessed 27 January 2017, http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/2003/marcos/etaJAN.html.

[12] Michael Knapp, Anja Flach, and Ercan Ayboga, Revolution in Rojava: Democratic Autonomy and Women’s Liberation in Syrian Kurdistan (London: Pluto, 2016).

[13] David Graeber, ‘Why is the world ignoring the revolutionary Kurds in Syria?,’ The Guardian, October 8, 2014, accessed 30 January 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/08/why-world-ignoring-revolutionary-kurds-syriaisis.

[14] Knapp et al., Revolution in Rojava.

[15] Jodi Dean, Crowds and Party: How Do Mass Protests Become an Organized Activist Collective? (London: Verso, 2016).

[16] Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams, Inventing the Future: Postcapitalism and a World without Work (London: Verso, 2015).

[17] These are the words that Bismarck was reported to have said on hearing of the split between the anarchists and Marxists in the First International. They appear in Burnette G. Haskell’s statement of the principles for the reunification of red and black, written in 1883. Haskell was the secretary of the West Coast International Workingmen’s Association, and his project failed. See Chester McA. Destler, ‘Shall Red and Black Unite? An American Revolutionary Document of 1883,’ Pacific Historical Review, 14, no. 4 (December, 1945), p. 447.

[18] For a critical revisionist account of the debate between Marx and Proudhon, see Iain McKay, Property Is Theft! A Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Anthology (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2011), pp. 64–79.

[19] Eric Hobsbawm, ‘Bolshevism and the Anarchists,’ Revolutionaries (London: Quartet Books, 1977), p. 57.

[20] Hobsbawm, ibid., p. 59. For a discussion of ideology and politics see Michael Freeden, ‘Thinking Politically and Thinking Ideologically,’ Journal of Political Ideologies, 13, no. 1 (2008), pp. 1–10; Michael Freeden, Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996).

[21] This is not to imply that all anarchists accepted the idea of violent revolution: Proudhon is a notable exception and others, including Stirner and Tolstoy, also rejected revolution on this model. However, both the idea of prefiguration — that the means of struggle are inextricably linked to its ends — and the rejection of state-led transformation are also common themes in non-revolutionary anarchist writing. For a recent exchange on the question of means and ends, revolutionary violence and the idea of the state, see Paul Blackledge, ‘Marxism and Anarchism,’ International Socialism: A Quarterly Journal of Socialist Theory, 125 (2010), at http://www.isj.org. uk/index.php4?id=616&issue=125 (accessed 14 May 2012), and Lucien van der Walt, ‘Detailed reply to International Socialism: debating power and revolution in anarchism, Black Flame and historical Marxism,’ at http://lucienvanderwalt.blogspot.com/2011/02/anarchism-black-flame-Marxism-and-ist.html (accessed 27 July 2011).

[22] A critique of the thesis is presented by Solomon F. Bloom, ‘The Withering Away of the State,’ Journal of the History of Ideas, 7, no. 1 (1946), pp. 113–121, and Richard Adamiak, ‘The Withering Away of the State: A Reconsideration,’ Journal of Politics, 32 (1970), pp. 3–18.

[23] Hobsbawm, ‘Bolshevism and the Anarchists,’ p. 58. The division on the question of centralization is noted in E. Yaorslavsky’s History of Anarchism in Russia (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1937) and by Ivan Scott, ‘Nineteenth Century Anarchism and Marxism,’ Social Science, 47 (1972), pp. 212–218.

[24] The extent to which the Marxism(s) against which anarchism is assessed has any relationship to Marx is a moot point. Daniel Guérin tackled the question of interpretation in ‘Marxism and Anarchism,’ in D. Goodway (ed.) For Anarchism: History, Theory and Practice (London: Routledge, 1989), pp. 109–125. For a discussion of Marxist distortions of Marxian thought see Paul Thomas, Marxism and Scientific Socialism: From Engels to Althusser (London: Routledge, 2008). Thomas’s Marxian analysis of anarchism does not result in a substantially more sympathetic account of anarchism than other Marxist readings. See Paul Thomas’s Karl Marx and the Anarchists (London: Routledge, 1985).

[25] See, for example, Subrata Mukherjee and Sushila Ramaswamy, A History of Socialist Thought: From the Precursors to the Present (Delhi: Sage, 2000).

[26] Darrow Schecter, The History of the Left from Marx to the Present: Theoretical Perspectives (London: Continuum, 2007), pp. 127–134.

[27] Murray Bookchin, ‘The Communalist Project,’ The Harbinger, 3 (1) (2002), at http://www.social-ecology.org/2002/09/harbinger-vol-3-no-1-the-communalistproject/ (accessed 14 June 2011).

[28] David Graeber and Andrej Grubacic, ‘Anarchism, or the Revolutionary Movement for the 21^st Century,’ at http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle. cfm?ItemID=4796 (accessed 14 June 2011).

[29] The claim that there has been a fundamental shift is made by Duane Rousselle and Süreyyya Evren in Anarchist Developments in Cultural Studies, vol. 1, 2010, at http://anarchist-developments.org (accessed 17 June 2011). A link to papers presented at ‘The Anarchist Turn’ conference held at the New School for Social Research, New York, 5–6 May 2011, at http://anarchist-developments.org/index.php/adcs/issue/view/4 (accessed 14 June 2011).

[30] See the collection ‘Anarchism Today’ edited by David Apter in Government and Opposition, 5, no. 4 (1970).

[31] Barbara Epstein, ‘Anarchism and the Alter-Globalization Movement,’ Monthly Review, 53, no. 4 (2001), at http://www.monthlyreview.org/0901epstein.htm (accessed 01 November 2010).

[32] Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Obsolete Communism the Left-Wing Alternative, trans. A. Pomerans (London: André Deutsch, 1968), p. 18.

[33] Donald Sassoon, One Hundred Years of Socialism: The West European Left in the Twentieth Century (London: Fontana, 1996), p. xxi; Tony Judt, Times Literary Supplement, 8 November 1996, p. 21. Judt was dismissive of the ‘multifarious socialist “sects”’ but argued their impact gave historians sufficient reason to study them. For a recent study of anarcho-syndicalism see Michael Schmidt and Lucien van der Walt, Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2009).

[34] Eric Hobsbawm, ‘The Spanish Background,’ Revolutionaries (London: Quartet Books, 1977), p. 75; Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914–1991 (London: Abacus, 1999), p. 74.

[35] George Woodcock, Anarchism (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975), p. 452.

[36] David Graeber, ‘The New Anarchists,’ New Left Review, 13 January/February 2002, pp. 61–73.

[37] Schmidt and van der Walt make this claim, though their analysis of the broad anarchist tradition and anarcho-syndicalist strategy also discusses a variety of other anarchisms. Schmidt and van der Walt, Black Flame.

[38] See, for example, Benedict Anderson, Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anti-Colonial Imagination (London, Verso 2005); Cécile Laborde, Pluralist Thought and the State in Britain and France, 1900–1925 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000).

[39] David Graeber, Direct Action: An Ethnography (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2010).

[40] The extent to which the horizontal politics of the alter-globalization movement is rooted in anarchism, for example, is contested. See, for example, Uri Gordon, Anarchy Alive! Antiauthoritarian Politics from Practice to Theory (London: Pluto, 2008).

[41] Cf. G. D. H. Cole, A History of Socialist Thought 1789–1939 (VII vols) (London: Macmillan, 1953–1961).

[42] Quentin Skinner, Visions of Politics Volume 1: Regarding Method (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).

[43] See also Ruth Kinna and Alex Prichard, ‘Anarchism: Past Present and Utopia,’ in Randall Amster et al. (eds.), Contemporary Anarchist Studies: An Introductory Anthology of Anarchy in the Academy (London: Routledge, 2009), pp. 270–279.

[44] For an example of this see William T. Armaline and Deric Shannon, ‘Introduction: Toward a More Unified Libertarian Left,’ Theory in Action, special edition, ‘Building Bridges Between Anarchism and Marxism,’ 3, no. 4 (2010), at http://www.transformativestudies.org/publications/theory-in-action-the-journal-of-tsi/past-issues/volume-3-number-4-october-2010/ (accessed 17 June 2011). See also Howard Zinn on Anarchism and Marxism in an interview with Sasha Lilley, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbaizDSg1YU (accessed 17 June 2011).

[45] For a discussion of the morphological character of ideologies see Freeden, Ideologies and Political Theory.

[46] On the historiography of anti-feminism in anarchist studies see Sharif Gemie, ‘Anarchism and Feminism: A Historical Survey,’ Women’s History Review 5, no.3 (1996), pp. 417–444, or a recent account of women’s involvement in a range of early twentieth-century movements and campaigns and a useful bibliography, see Sheila Rowbotham, Dreamers of a New Day: Women Who Invented the Twentieth Century (London: Verso, 2010).

[47] For an important and interesting collection of papers that traces a global history of anarcho-syndicalism see Steven Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt (eds) Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870–1940: The Praxis of National Liberation, Internationalism, and Social Revolution (Leiden: Brill, 2010).

[48] See the work of Allan Antliff, for example, Anarchist Modernism: Art, Politics and the First American Avant-Garde (London: University of Chicago Press, 2001).

[49] Elsewhere, anarchism maintained a healthy if subterranean existence. See Hirsch and van der Walt, Anarchism and Syndicalism for far more on this.

[50] In this essay I will use anarchism as a synonym for class struggle anarchism.

[51] Michael Bakunin, Power Corrupts the Best (1867), online at http://dwardmac.pitzer. edu/anarchist_archives/bakunin/bakuninpower.html

[52] Antony Jay, Oxford Dictionary of Political Quotations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 1.

[53] Paul Blackledge, ‘Marxism and Anarchism,’ International Socialism II/125 (2010), 144.

[54] Robert Michels, Political Parties (New York: Collier Press, 1962), p. 326.

[55] Ibid., pp. 342, 349.

[56] Ibid., p. 325.

[57] Michael Schmidt and Lucien van der Walt, Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism, vol. 1, Counter-Power (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2009), p. 189.

[58] Paul Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980), p. 252.

[59] Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism (London: HarperCollins, 2008), p. 23.

[60] Noam Chomsky, Government in the Future (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2005), p. 33.

[61] Rudolf Rocker, Anarcho-Syndicalism (London: Pluto Press, 1989), p. 21; cf. David Goodway, For Anarchism: History, Theory and Practice (London: Routledge, 1989), p. 1; Noam Chomsky, Introduction to Daniel Guérin, Anarchism (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970), p. xii; Marshall, p. 639.

[62] Sean Sayers, Marxism and Human Nature (London: Routledge, 1998).

[63] Maureen Ramsay, What’s Wrong with Liberalism? (London: Leicester University Press, 1997), p. 7.

[64] Scott Meikle, Essentialism in the Thought of Karl Marx (La Saale: Open Court, 1985).

[65] Ernst Bloch, The Principle of Hope (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986), pp. 173, 199. Paul Blackledge, Marxism and Ethics (New York: SUNY Press, 2012).

[66] David McLellan, The Young Hegelians and Karl Marx (London: Macmillan, 1969), p. 134.

[67] John Martin, Introduction to Stirner’s The Ego and His Own (New York: Dover, 2005), p. xiii; Thomas, Marx and the Anarchists, p. 130.

[68] Max Stirner, The Ego and His Own, p. 110.

[69] Ibid., pp. 122, 130.

[70] Ibid., p. 160.

[71] Ibid., pp. 75, 54.

[72] Hal Draper, Karl Marx’s Theory of Revolution, vol. IV (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990), p. 156.

[73] Stirner, pp. 18, 164, 258.

[74] Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, in The Revolutions of 1848 (London: Penguin, 1973), p. 87; cf. Thomas, Marx and the Anarchists, p. 154.

[75] Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, The German Ideology in Collected Works (New York: International Publishers, 1976), p. 247.

[76] Karl Marx, On the Jewish Question in Collected Works, vol. 3 (New York: International Publishers, 1975), p. 168.

[77] David Morland, Demanding the Impossible? Human Nature and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Social Anarchism (London: Cassell, 1997), pp. 38, 78.

[78] Ibid., pp. 62, 78.

[79] Ibid., p. 141.

[80] Ibid., p. 23.

[81] Ibid., p. 3.

[82] Ibid., pp. 188–189.

[83] Michael Bakunin, God and the State (1871), online at http://www.Marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/godstate/index.htm

[84] Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p. 296.

[85] Errico Malatesta, Democracy and Anarchy (1924), online at http://theanarchist library.org/HTML/Errico_Malatesta_Democracy_and_Anarchy.html; cf. Neither Democrats nor Dictators (1926), online at http://www.Marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1926/05/neither.htm

[86] George Woodcock, Anarchism (London: Penguin, 1962), pp. 7, 30.

[87] Uri Gordon, Anarchy Alive! Anti-authoritarian Politics from Practice to Theory (London: Pluto, 2008), p. 70.

[88] Schmidt and van der Walt, Black Flame, p. 70.

[89] Todd May, ‘Anarchism from Foucault to Ranciere,’ in Randall Amster and Others, Contemporary Anarchist Studies: An Introductory Anthology of Anarchy in the Academy (London: Routledge, 2009), p. 16; Wayne Price, The Abolition of the State (Bloomington: AuthorHouse, 2007), p. 164.

[90] Ibid., p. 165.

[91] Ruth Kinna, Beginner’s Guide to Anarchism (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005), pp. 114–115; Jo Freeman (1970), The Tyranny of Structurelessness, online at http://struggle.ws/pdfs/tyranny.pdf

[92] Price, Abolition of the State, p. 10.

[93] Lucien van der Walt, Anarchism, Black Flame, Marxism and the IST: Debating Power, Revolution and Bolshevism (2011), online at http://lucienvanderwalt. blogspot.com/2011/02/anarchism-black-flame-Marxism-and-ist.html; ‘Debating Black Flame, Revolutionary Anarchism and Historical Marxism,’ International Socialism II/130 (2011), pp. 195–196.

[94] Price, Abolition of the State, p. 50.

[95] Friedrich Engels, ‘Introduction to K. Marx’s The Civil War in France’, in Collected Works, vol. 27 (New York: International Publishers, 1990), p. 191.

[96] Alexander Berkman, What Is Communist Anarchism? (London: Phenix Press, 1989), pp. 76–77.

[97] Daniel Guérin, ‘Marxism and Anarchism,’ in Goodway, p. 120.

[98] John Holloway, Change the World without Taking Power (London: Pluto, 2002), p. 18.

[99] V.I. Lenin, The State and Revolution in Selected Works (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1968), p. 304.

[100] Kojin Karatani, Transcritique (London: MIT Press, 2003), p. 178.

[101] Karl Marx, Grundrisse (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973), p. 84.

[102] Ibid., p. 156.

[103] Alasdair MacIntyre, A Short History of Ethics (London: Routledge, 1967), pp. 121–128.

[104] Karl Marx, ‘Speech at the Anniversary of The People’s Paper,’ in Collected Works, vol. 14 (New York: International Publishers, 1980), p. 656.

[105] Marx, Grundrisse, pp. 161–162.

[106] Hal Draper, Karl Marx’s Theory of Revolution, vol. II (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1978), p. 24.

[107] Stephen Perkins, Marxism and the Proletariat (London: Pluto, 1993), p. 33.

[108] Blackledge, Marxism and Ethics, pp. 140–145.

[109] Marx and Engels, German Ideology, p. 53.

[110] Lars Lih, Lenin Rediscovered, What Is to Be Done? In Context (Amsterdam: Brill, 2006), p. 556.

[111] Ibid.

[112] Karl Marx, Theses on Feuerbach in Karl Marx Early Writings (London: Penguin, 1975), p. 422.

[113] Friedrich Engels, ‘Program of the Blanquist Commune Refugees,’ in Collected Works, vol. 24 (New York: International Publishers, 1989), p. 13; Hal Draper, Karl Marx’s Theory of Revolution, vol. III (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1978), p. 35.

[114] Donny Gluckstein, The Paris Commune (Chicago: Haymarket Press, 2011), pp. 181–207.

[115] Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What Is Property? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 75.

[116] Ibid., pp. 118, 152–153.

[117] Ibid., p. 171.

[118] Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists, pp. 180, 212.

[119] Proudhon, What Is Property?, pp. 105, 128, 153, 286.

[120] Ibid., 113ff; pp. 130, 206

[121] Guérin, Anarchism, p. 4.

[122] Ibid., p. 12.

[123] Henry Collins and Chimon Abramsky, Karl Marx and the British Labor Movement (London: Macmillan, 1964), p. 228; cf. Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists, p. 268.

[124] Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists, p. 294.

[125] Michael Bakunin, The Paris Commune and the Idea of the State in Bakunin on Anarchy (London: Allen and Unwin, 1973), pp. 263, 264, 268.

[126] Michael Bakunin, Statism and Anarchy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 142–143.

[127] Karl Marx, The Civil War in France in The First International and After (London: Penguin, 1974), pp. 206, 208, 212.

[128] Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p. 288.

[129] Bakunin, Statism and Anarchy, p. 136.

[130] Peter Kropotkin, ‘Revolutionary Government,’ in Peter Kropotkin: Anarchism (New York: Dover, 2002), pp. 237–242.

[131] Karl Marx, ‘Drafts of the Civil War in France,’ in Collected Works vol. 22 (New York: International Publishers,1986), p. 487.

[132] Hal Draper, The Dictatorship of the Proletariat (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1987), p. 29.

[133] Marx, Theses on Feuerbach, p. 421.

[134] Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p. 301.

[135] George Lukács, History and Class Consciousness (London: Merlin Press, 1971), pp. 34–35.

[136] Friedrich Engels, ‘A Critique of the Draft Program of 1891’ in Collected Works, vol. 27 (New York: International Publishers, 1990), p. 227.

[137] Lenin, The State and Revolution.

[138] Colin Barker, ‘Robert Michels and the “Cruel Game,”’ in Colin Barker and others (eds.) Leadership and Social Movements (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2001), pp. 24–43.

[139] Antonio Gramsci, ‘Address to the Anarchists’ in Selections from the Political Writings, 1910–1920 (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1977), p. 186.

[140] Morland, Demanding the Impossible?, p. 13; cf. David Miller, Anarchism (London: Dent, 1984), p. 93.

[141] Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists, p. 13.

[142] Ibid., p. 106.

[143] Murray Bookchin, Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism (Edinburgh: AK Press, 1995).

[144] István Mészáros, Marx’s Theory of Alienation (London: Merlin, 1975), p. 162.

[145] George Brenkert, Marx’s Ethics of Freedom (London: Routledge, 1983), pp. 87–88; Paul Blackledge, ‘Marxism, Nihilism and the Problem of Ethical Politics Today,’ Socialism and Democracy 24/2 (2010), 126–127.

[146] Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Program in The First International and After, p. 354.

[147] H. Marcuse, A Study on Authority (London: Verso, 2008), p. 87.

[148] Mark Bevir, ‘WilliamMorris: TheModern Self, Art and Politics,’ History of European Ideas 24 (1998), 176.

[149] William Morris, Statement of Principles of the Hammersmith Socialist Society, (London: Kelmscott Press, 1890), p. 6.

[150] On Morris’s divergence from Kropotkin on this issue see ‘Morris, Anti-statism and Anarchy,’ in Peter Faulkner and Peter Preston (eds), William Morris: Centenary Essays (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1999), pp. 215–228.

[151] Manifesto of English Socialists, (London: Twentieth Century Press, 1893), p. 8.

[152] Manifesto, p. 5.

[153] Stefan Collini, Liberalism and Sociology: L.T. Hobhouse and Political Argument in England 1880–1914, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), p. 16.

[154] William Morris, ‘A Socialist Poet on Bombs and Anarchism: An Interview with William Morris,’ Justice (27 January 1894), p. 6.

[155] William Morris, ‘Why I Am a communist,’ Liberty (February 1894), pp. 13–15.

[156] Morris, ‘Socialist Poet.’

[157] Ibid.

[158] Morris, Statement of Principles, p. 5.

[159] Susan Buck-Morss, ‘Hegel and Haiti,’ Critical Inquiry 26 (2000), 821.

[160] William Morris, Journalism: Contributions to Commonweal 1885–1890, Nicholas Salmon (ed.) (Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1996), p. 27.

[161] William Morris, ‘The Dream of John Ball,’ in A.L. Morton (ed.), Three Works by William Morris (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1986), pp. 94–95.

[162] Morris, John Ball, p. 56.

[163] William Morris, The Story of the Glittering Plain (Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1996), p. 322.

[164] Morris, John Ball, p. 45.

[165] For a recent discussion see Laurence Davis, ‘Everyone an Artist: Art, Labor, Anarchy and Utopia,’ in Laurence Davis and Ruth Kinna (eds), Anarchism and Utopianism (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009), pp. 73–98.

[166] Norman Kelvin (ed.), The Collected Letters of William Morris, vol. IV: 1893–1896 (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 209.

[167] William Morris, Political Writings: Contributions to Justice and Commonweal, Nicholas Salmon (ed.) (Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1994), p. 397.

[168] This shift is sometimes interpreted as a principled reversal of his earlier position, but can be explained as a pragmatic response to his disappointment with the failure of the League and his perception that workers were more interested in electoral power and welfare reform than revolution and the realization of communism in the society of art. In 1895 Morris wrote that while he saw the ‘necessity’ of the ‘political side’ of the struggle, this was still an element with which he could not work. Norman Kelvin (ed.), The Collected Letters of William Morris, vol. IV: 1893–1896 (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 285.

[169] Letters IV, p. 113.

[170] Morris, Liberty, p. 18.

[171] Morris, ‘Socialist Poet.’

[172] Morris, Political Writings, p. 37.

[173] Ibid., pp. 37–38.

[174] Regina Gagnier, Individualism, Decadence and Globalization (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2010), p. 2.

[175] Collini, Liberalism and Sociology, pp. 14–15.

[176] Peter Kropotkin, in R. Baldwin (ed.), Kropotkin’s Revolutionary Pamphlets (New York: Dover, 1970), pp. 166, 295.

[177] Auberon Herbert, The Voluntaryist Creed: Being the Herbert Spencer Lecture Delivered at Oxford, June 7, 1906 (London: Henry Frowde, 1908), pp. 6–7, http://files. libertyfund.org/files/1026/0545_Bk.pdf (accessed 17 September 2010).

[178] See C. Tame, ‘The Libertarian Tradition no. 1: Auberon Herbert,’ Free Life, The Journal of the Libertarian Alliance, 1/2 (1980), 2; E. Mac, ‘Voluntaryism: The Political Thought of Auberon Herbert,’ Journal of Libertarian Studies, 2/4 (1978), 306; Wendy McElroy, The Debates of Liberty: An Overview of Individualist Anarchism, 1881–1908 (Lanham, Boulder, New York, Oxford: Lexington Books, 2003), p. 33.

[179] J. Levy, Appendix to Auberon Herbert, Taxation and Anarchism: A Discussion between the Hon. Auberon Herbert and J.H. Levy (London: Personal Rights Association, 1912), http://app.libraryofliberty.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile= show.php%3Ftitle=2257&chapter=212934&layout=html&Itemid=27 (accessed 17 October 2010).

[180] McElroy, Debates of Liberty, pp. 7, 164.

[181] Max Nettlau, A Short History of Anarchism, ed. H.M. Becker, trans. I.P. Isca (London: Freedom Press, 1996), p. 40.

[182] Mac, ‘Voluntaryism,’ p. 306.

[183] McElroy, Debates of Liberty, p. 164.

[184] Freedom, January 1904.

[185] Peter Kropotkin, Freedom, April 1893.

[186] Freedom, July 1895.

[187] Varlaam Tcherkesov, ‘Socialism or Democracy,’ Supplement to Freedom, June 1895.

[188] Freedom, July 1893.

[189] Freedom, June 1895.

[190] Mutualists distinguished between property and possession and argued that anything more than one’s tools, personal possessions and dwelling, must always be co-operatively organized and co-ordinated.

[191] Freedom, July 1895.

[192] Ibid.

[193] Kropotkin, Revolutionary Pamphlets, p. 297; Peter Kropotkin, Ethics: Origin and Development, trans. Louis S. Friedland and J. R. Piroshnikoff (Montreal/New York: Black Rose, 1992), pp. 269–270, 338.

[194] Kropotkin, Revolutionary Pamphlets, p. 172.

[195] T.H. Huxley, ‘Government: Anarchy or Regimentation’ (1890), in Collected Essays, http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE1/G-AR.html (accessed 17 October 2010).

[196] Ibid.

[197] Freedom, July 1893.

[198] V.I. Lenin, ‘Anarchism and Socialism,’ in Marx, Engels, Lenin: Anarchism and Anarcho-Syndicalism (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1972), pp. 185–186.

[199] Eugene Richter, Pictures of the Socialistic Future (London: Swan Sonnenschein & co. 1907), http://www.econlib.org.

[200] William Liebknecht, ‘Our Recent Congress,’ Justice, 15 August 1895.

[201] ‘Celebrating the Commune,’ Daily News, 18 March 1887.

[202] Florence Boos, ‘William Morris’s Socialist Diary,’ History Workshop 13 (1982), 38.

[203] Ibid., 28 n. 56–58.

[204] Ibid., 38 n. 106.

[205] Morris, Political Writings, pp. 180–183.

[206] Ibid., p. 180. For Donnisthorp’s comments on Joynes see Socialism Analyzed. Being a Critical Examination of Mr. Joynes’s ‘Socialist Catechism’ (London: Liberty and Property Defense League, 1888).

[207] W. Morris, Collected Letters of William Morris, vol. III: 1889–1892, Norman Kelvin (ed.) (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 59; Grant Allen, ‘Individualism and Socialism,’ Contemporary Review LV (1889), 730–734.

[208] Morris, Letters III, p. 88.

[209] Justice, 5 September 1896.

[210] Friedrich Engels, Letter to M. Hildebrand, in Marx, Engels, Lenin, p. 179.

[211] Morris, Letters III, p. 63.

[212] Ibid., p. 87.

[213] Ibid., p. 63.

[214] Ibid., p. 64.

[215] Morris, Letters II, p. 769.

[216] Morris, Letters III, p. 63.

[217] Ibid., p. 64.

[218] Morris, ‘Socialist Poet,’ p. 6.

[219] Morris, Liberty, p. 14.

[220] Morris, Letters II, p. 768.

[221] Ibid., p. 766.

[222] Morris, Liberty, p. 14.

[223] For a qualified anarchist defense of majoritarianism see A. Bertolo, ‘Democracy and Beyond,’ Democracy and Nature: An International Journal of Inclusive Democracy, 5(2) (1999), http://www.democracynature.org/vol5/vol5.htm (accessed 28 November 2010).

[224] William Morris, News from Nowhere, David Leopold (ed.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), p. 77.

[225] Ibid.

[226] Morris, Letters III, p. 64.

[227] Marcel van der Linden, ‘Second Thoughts on Revolutionary Syndicalism,’ Labor History Review, 63/2 (1998), 182.

[228] Lucien van der Walt and Michael Schmidt consequently include De Leonism as part of the broad anarchist tradition, notwithstanding De Leon’s self-identification as a Marxist. This is problematic not least because De Leon consistently defined his position against the ‘anarchists’ and with good reason. The issue of political action was crucial. Regardless of the weight that De Leon attached to political action, attitudes to its utility were significant in his and his followers’ rejection of the rest of the syndicalist milieu and especially of the anarchists. See Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism (Counter-Power) (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2009), pp. 16–17, 161–162.

[229] See D. Smith, ‘Tonypandy 1910: Definitions of Community,’ Past and Present, 87 (1980), 158–184.

[230] David Egan, ‘The Miners’ Next Step,’ Labor History Review, 38 (1979), 10; D.K. Davies, The Influence of Syndicalism, and Industrial Unionism in the South Wales Coalfield 1898–1921: A Study in Ideology, and Practice (Ph.D. thesis, University of Wales, 1991).

[231] C. Marshall, Levels of Industrial Militancy and the Political Radicalization of the Durham Miners, 1885–1914 (M.A. thesis, Durham University, 1976), pp. 92–95, 99–100, 310–311.

[232] See Melvyn Dubofsky and Joseph McCartin, We Shall Be All: A History of the Industrial Workers of the World (Chicago: Quadrangle, 1969).

[233] Ray Challinor, The Origins of British Bolshevism (London: Croom Helm, 1977).

[234] See John Atkins, Neither Crumbs nor Condescension: The Central Labor College, 1909–1915 (Aberdeen: Aberdeen People’s Press, 1981).

[235] Bob Holton, British Syndicalism 1900–1914. Myths and Realities (London: Pluto, 1976), p. 38.

[236] Holton, British Syndicalism, pp. 114–116; Challinor, British Bolshevism, pp. 95–96.

[237] Egan, ‘The Miners’ Next Step,’ p. 11.

[238] The Miners’ Next Step (1912) Reprinted with introduction by Dave Douglass (Doncaster: Germinal and Phenix Press, 1991), p. 30.

[239] Ibid., p. 31.

[240] Ibid., pp. 16–17, 21; Holton, British Syndicalism, p. 87.

[241] G. Walker, George Harvey: The Conflict Between the Ideology of Industrial Unionism and the Practice of Its Principles in the Durham Coalfield (M.A. thesis, Ruskin College, 1982), pp. 36–39.

[242] The Miners’ Next Step, p. 13.

[243] John Caldwell, Guy A. Aldred (1886–1963) (Glasgow: The Strickland Press, 1966).

[244] This chapter employs the term ‘anarchist syndicalist’ where specificity is necessary. Albert Meltzer, The Anarchists in London 1935–1955 (Sanday: Cienfuegos Press, 1976), p. 9; David Berry, A History of the French Anarchist Movement, 1917–1945 (London: Greenwood Press, 2002), pp. 134–135.

[245] G. Pattison ‘Anarchist Influence in the Durham Coalfield Before 1914,’ The Raven, 11 (1990), 239; John Quail, The Slow Burning Fuze: The Lost History of British Anarchists (London: Paladin, 1978), pp. 250–254.

[246] Holton, British Syndicalism, p. 142.

[247] Challinor, British Bolshevism, p. 116.

[248] The Industrial Syndicalist, 1(9), March 1911 in Geoff Brown, The Industrial Syndicalist (Nottingham: Spokesman Books, 1974), pp. 314–315; Ray Challinor, ‘Jack Parks, Memories of a Militant,’ Bulletin of the North-east Group for the Study of Labor History, 9 (1975), 34–38; Dave Douglass ‘The Durham Pitman,’ in Raphael Samuel (ed.), Miners, Quarrymen and Salt Workers (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977), pp. 286–287.

[249] Newcastle Journal, 8, 10, 11, 15 March 1955; R. Smith ‘Obituary Article: Sir William Lawther,’ Bulletin of the North-east Group for the Study of Labor History, 10 (1976), 27–28; J.F. Clarke, ‘An Interview with Sir Will Lawther,’ Bulletin of the Society for the Study of Labor History, 18 (1969), 20.

[250] Newcastle Journal, 15 March 1955.

[251] Ibid., 11 March 1955; 15 March 1955; Lawther’s Notebooks of Economics and Sociology Lectures, October 1911–July 1912 (both in possession of the late Jack Lawther); Smith, ‘Obituary Article,’ 28–29, 33; Clarke, ‘Lawther Interview,’ 14, 19.

[252] Smith, ‘Obituary Article,’ 33.

[253] Holton, British Syndicalism, p. 169.

[254] Smith, ‘Obituary Article,’ p. 29.

[255] Newcastle Journal, 17 March 1955.

[256] Durham Chronicle, 31 May 1912; Blaydon Courier, 1 June 1912.

[257] Blaydon Courier, 19 October 1912.

[258] Ibid., 18 October 1913.

[259] Ibid., 19 October 1912.

[260] Holton, British Syndicalism, pp. 142–143.

[261] Freedom, September 1913; Blaydon Courier, 20 September 1913.

[262] Blaydon Courier, 18 October 1913.

[263] See for example the Newcastle Chronicle, 13 April 1914.

[264] Ibid.

[265] Smith, ‘Obituary Article,’ 28.

[266] Holton, British Syndicalism, pp. 142–143.

[267] Newcastle Journal, 16 March 1955.

[268] Colin Harding, ‘George Davison,’ in John Hannavy (ed.) Encyclopedia of Nineteenth-century Photography (London: Routledge, 2008), pp. 387–288.

[269] Quail, Slow Burning Fuze, p. 254; Atkins, Crumbs nor Condescension, p. 63.

[270] Challinor, British Bolshevism, p. 117.

[271] Evening Chronicle, 7 November 1912.

[272] Lawther did, however, contribute fairly short theoretical pieces to the local press from 1916. See Lewis H. Mates, From Revolutionary to Reactionary: the Life of Will Lawther (M.A. Thesis, Newcastle University, 1996), pp. 11–16.

[273] Quail, Slow Burning Fuze, pp. 278–279.

[274] Freedom, July 1913.

[275] Blaydon Courier, 25 January 1913.

[276] Smith, ‘Obituary Article,’ 33.

[277] Holton, British Syndicalism, p. 169.

[278] Freedom, July 1913.

[279] Ibid., September 1913.

[280] Ibid. May 1914; Evening Chronicle, 13 April 1914.

[281] Paul Avrich, The Modern School Movement: Anarchism and Education in the United States (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2006), p. 263.

[282] The Herald of Revolt, February 1913.

[283] G. Walker ‘George Harvey and Industrial Unionism,’ Bulletin of the North-east Group for the Study of Labor History, 17 (1983), 21.

[284] Durham Chronicle, 15 November 1912.

[285] Evening Chronicle, 7 November 1912.

[286] Labor History Archive and Study Center, Manchester, CP/CENT/PERS/1/01, Tom Aisbitt biography by Horace Green.

[287] Lewis H. Mates, The Spanish Civil War and the British Left: Political Activism and the Popular Front (London: I.B. Tauris, 2007).

[288] Tyne and Wear Archive Service T148/1 Copy letter, 27 December 1913, p. 71. My thanks to Kevin Davies for drawing my attention to these files.

[289] Freedom, May 1914.

[290] L. Turnbull, Chopwell’s Story (Gateshead: Gateshead Borough Council, 1978), (no page numbers).

[291] Roy A. Church and Quentin Outram, Strikes and Solidarity: Coalfield Conflict in Britain, 1889–1966 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 62, 68.

[292] John Saville, ‘Will Lawther,’ in J. Bellamy and J. Saville, Dictionary of Labor Biography. Vol. VII (London: Macmillan, 1984), 141; Smith ‘Obituary Article,’ 29.

[293] White ‘Syndicalism,’ 110.

[294] Holton, British Syndicalism, p. 169.

[295] Ibid., pp. 117–119.

[296] Newcastle Journal, 11 March 1955.

[297] Challinor, British Bolshevism, pp. 116–118.

[298] Walker, ‘Harvey thesis,’ p. 40.

[299] Newcastle Journal, 16 March 1955.

[300] Challinor, British Bolshevism, p. 117.

[301] Blaydon Courier, 19 October 1912.

[302] Ibid.; Dubofsky and McCartin, We Shall Be All, p. 118.

[303] Blaydon Courier, 19 October 1912.

[304] Ibid.

[305] Challinor, British Bolshevism, pp. 120–121.

[306] Brown, Introduction, Industrial Syndicalist, p. 19.

[307] Challinor, British Bolshevism, p. 85.

[308] R. Page Arnot, South Wales Miners to 1914 (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1967), p. 376.

[309] The Herald of Revolt, February 1913.

[310] Freedom, September 1913.

[311] Blaydon Courier, 19 October 1912.

[312] See, for example, The Herald of Revolt, February 1913.

[313] Evening Chronicle, 7 November 1912.

[314] Durham Chronicle, 12 April 1912.

[315] Ibid., 5 December 1913.

[316] Blaydon Courier, 19 October 1912; 25 January 1913.

[317] Challinor, British Bolshevism, pp. 118–121.

[318] Maximilien Rubel, Rubel on Karl Marx, J. O’Malley and K. Algozin (eds. and trans.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 78, n. 119.

[319] M. Charzat, ‘A la source du “marxisme” de Gramsci’ in M. Charzat (ed.), Georges Sorel (Paris: Éditions de l’Herne, 1986), pp. 213–222; David McLellan, Marxism After Marx, 3^rd edn. (London: Macmillan, 1998), p. 193.

[320] I. Mészáros, Lukács’ Concept of Dialectic (London: The Merlin Press, 1972), p. 21.

[321] H. García Salvatecci, Georges Sorel y Mariátegui. Ubicación ideológica del Amauta (Lima: Delgado Valenzuela, 1979); R. Paris ‘Mariátegui: un sorelismo ambiguo’ in J. Aricó (ed.), Mariátegui y los orígenes del marxismo latinoamericano (Mexico City: Pasado y Presente, 1978), pp. 155–161.

[322] Antonio Labriola, Socialism and Philosophy, P. Piccone (trans.) (St. Louis: Telos Press, 1980).

[323] Eugene Kamenka, ‘Marxism and Ethics — A Reconsideration’ in Shlomo Avineri (ed.), Varieties of Marxism (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977), p. 119.

[324] John Gray, Post-Liberalism: Studies in Political Thought (New York and London: Routledge, 1993), pp. 100–101. Leszek Kolakowski also ranks Sorel highly in comparison with other Marxists; see Main Currents of Marxism, vol. 2, The Golden Age, P.S. Falla (trans.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), p. 153.

[325] J.C. Mariátegui, Mariátegui Total, vol. 1 (Lima: Empresa Editora Amauta S.A., 1994), p. 1292 (my translation).

[326] George Lichtheim, The Concept of Ideology and Other Essays (New York: Random House, 1967), p. 261; Marxism: An Historical and Critical Study, 2^nd edn. (New York and Washington: Praeger, 1965), p. 229, n. 2.

[327] V.I. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism in Collected Works, vol. 14 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1972), p. 292.

[328] Significantly, many of the commentators who link Sorel’s thought with reactionary or fascistic ideas and claim that Sorel was a right-wing thinker furnish very little evidence to support their claim. See George Woodcock, Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements (New York: Meridian, 1962), p. 323; Irving L. Horowitz, ‘A Postscript to the Anarchists’ in Horowitz (ed.), The Anarchists (New York: Dell Publishing, 1964), p. 592; George Lichtheim, From Marx to Hegel (New York: The Seabury Press, 1971), p. 116; James Joll, The Anarchists, 2^nd edn. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980), p. 194; Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism (London: Fontana Press, 1993), p. 442. Woodcock’s judgment is especially puzzling, considering that he both shares Sorel’s enthusiasm for syndicalism and writes from an anarchist perspective; cf. note 57 below.

[329] See Jeremy Jennings, ‘Sorel, Georges’ in T. Bottomore et al. (eds), A Dictionary of Marxist Thought (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), pp. 453–454; R.A. Gorman, ‘Sorel, Georges’ in R.A. Gorman (ed.), Biographical Dictionary of Neo-Marxism (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985), pp. 390–392; Kolakowski, Main Currents of Marxism, p. 14.

[330] Jennings, ‘Sorel,’ p. 453.

[331] J.L. Stanley, ‘Editor’s Introduction’ in From Georges Sorel (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976), pp. 7, 17. In his ‘In Defense of Lenin’ Sorel characterizes the Reflections as ‘Proudhonian in inspiration,’ Reflections on Violence, J. Jennings (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 292.

[332] ‘But one must always bear in mind that Sorel was really no Marxist, but a Proudhonist,’ Lichtheim, Marxism, p. 113.

[333] Horowitz, p. 17; cf. Horowitz’s Radicalism and the Revolt Against Reason (New York: The Humanities Press, 1961), p. 160.

[334] Joll, Anarchists, pp. 188–195. Just as some Marxists dispute Sorel’s Marxist credentials, some anarchists and writers sympathetic to anarchism tend to minimize Sorel’s affinities with the anarchist tradition. George Woodcock scarcely discusses Sorel’s ideas in Anarchism, while Peter Marshall devotes but two (ill-informed) paragraphs to Sorel in Demanding the Impossible, p. 442.

[335] D.C. Hodges, The Literate Communist: 150 Years of the Communist Manifesto (New York: Peter Lang, 1999), p. 113.

[336] Sorel, Reflections, p. 77; italics in the original.

[337] Ibid., pp. 77, 85; cf. p. 78.

[338] Ibid., pp. 78–79.

[339] Ibid., p. 85; cf. p. 251.

[340] Ibid., p. 279.

[341] Ibid., p. 108; emphasis added.

[342] Ibid., pp. 74–75.

[343] Ibid., pp. 105–106.

[344] Ibid., p. 150.

[345] Ibid., pp. 279–280.

[346] Ibid., p. 28.

[347] ‘[M]en who are participating in great social movements always picture their coming action in the form of images of battle in which their cause is certain to triumph. I propose to give the name of “myths” to these constructions …’ (Ibid., p. 20).

[348] Ibid., p. 140.

[349] Ibid., p. 250.

[350] J. Jennings, ‘Introduction’ in G. Sorel, Reflections on Violence, J. Jennings (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. xxi.

[351] See, for example, Sorel, Reflections, p. 40.

[352] G. Sorel, La Décomposition du Marxisme (Paris: Riviere, 1908), pp. 63–64, cited in Jennings, Introduction, p. 34, note ‘p.’

[353] Sorel, Introduction, p. 172; italics in the original.

[354] G. Sorel, ‘The Socialist Future of the Syndicates’ in From Georges Sorel, ed. J.L. Stanley (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976), p. 72; ‘Préface de 1905,’ in Matériaux d’une théorie du proletariat (Paris and Geneva: Slatkine Genève-Paris, 1981), p. 67 (my translation).

[355] Sorel, ‘Préface,’ p. 67 (my translation).

[356] See for example, Ibid., pp. 68, 75, and Sorel, Reflections, pp. 105, 279.

[357] Sorel, Reflections, p. 213; cf. ‘Préface,’ p. 63. This ‘Preface’ articulates many of the ‘new school’s’ characteristic views.

[358] Sorel, Reflections, p. 172.

[359] See, for example, G. Sorel, ‘Mes raisons du syndicalisme’ in Matériaux d’une théorie du proletariat, p. 253.

[360] On the material preconditions for socialism and the philosophy of history see Sorel, Reflections, pp. 73, 80, 128, 129; on class struggle, pp. 34, 85, 126, 182; on the state, pp. 18, 30, 161; on utopias and utopianism, pp. 28–29, 118–119, 129, 132, 224; on ‘the primacy of production,’ p. 138; on socialist revolution, pp. 126, 140, 155; on the conception of socialist society, pp. 155, 171, 238; and on the principle of proletarian self-emancipation, p. 32. All the views listed here are conventionally ascribed to Marx and Engels. On Marx and Engels’ commitment to ‘the principle of proletarian self-emancipation,’ which is relevant to my central thesis, I furnish some textual references in note 63.

[361] Sorel, Reflections, p. 73.

[362] Ibid., p. 279; cf. pp. 18, 107, 161, particularly as regards the suppression of the state. Sorel’s conception of the state as an instrument of class domination would probably not be endorsed by many anarchists, but what I wish to focus on here are practical political commitments, rather than their theoretical justifications.

[363] V.I. Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky in Collected Works, vol. 28 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1974), p. 233.

[364] Sorel, Reflections, p. 163.

[365] Ibid., p. 34.

[366] Ibid., p. 67 (italics in the original). On the failings of parliamentary socialism, see Ibid., pp. 67–68, 111, 154.

[367] Ibid., p. 83.

[368] Ibid., pp. 79, 118–119.

[369] Ibid., pp. 107, 108.

[370] Ibid., p. 151.

[371] Ibid., p. 147.

[372] Ibid., pp. 281, 280.

[373] Ibid., p. 150; cf. pp. 110, 113, 118, and Sorel, ‘Préface,’ p. 59.

[374] On Bakunin’s espousal of the general strike, see Michael Bakunin, ‘Geneva’s Double Strike’ in From Out of the Dustbin: Bakunin’s Basic Writings, 1869–1871, R. M. Cutler (ed. and trans.) (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1985), pp. 149–150. His views on the value of strikes more generally sound like an anticipation of Sorel’s (see, for example, ‘The International and Karl Marx,’ in Bakunin on Anarchy, S. Dolgoff (ed. and trans.) (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1972) pp. 304–307. According to Emma Goldman syndicalism constitutes ‘the economic expression of Anarchism’; see ‘Syndicalism: Its Theory and Practice’ in A.K. Shulman (ed.), Red Emma Speaks: Selected Writings and Speeches by Emma Goldman (New York: Vintage Books, 1972), p. 68. Woodcock similarly claims that ‘syndicalism is the industrial manifestation of anarchism’; see ‘Syndicalism Defined’ in G. Woodcock (ed.), The Anarchist Reader (Fontana Paperbacks, Glasgow, 1977), p. 208.

[375] See Rudolf Rocker, Anarcho-Syndicalism (London: Pluto Press, 1989); Goldman, ‘Anarchism: What It Really Stands for’ and ‘Syndicalism’ in Red Emma Speaks, pp. 47–77.

[376] Malatesta both criticized syndicalism — largely, it seems, because he equated it with conventional trade unionism — and expressed reservations about the general strike. On syndicalism, see ‘Syndicalism and Anarchism’ in Vernon Richards (ed.), The Anarchist Revolution: Polemical Articles 1924–1931 (London: Freedom Press, 1995), pp. 23–27; on the strategy of the general strike, see ‘Syndicalism: An Anarchist Critique’ in Woodcock Anarchist Reader, pp. 223–225.

[377] See, for example, Sorel, Reflections, p. 120.

[378] Ibid., p. 132.

[379] The separation of ‘the political’ and ‘the economic’ is in many ways quite artificial, an analytical construct — and one that often serves ‘bourgeois’ interests, as Marxists, among others, point out. Even so, the distinction seems useful with respect to the contrast that I wish to establish here.

[380] According to the First International’s ‘Provisional Rules,’ drafted by Marx in 1864, ‘the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves.’ See ‘Provisional Rules of the Association’ in Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Collected Works, vol. 20 (New York: International Publishers, 1985), p. 14. Marx subsequently cited the formulation in the ‘Critique of the Gotha Program’ (Collected Works, 1989, vol. 24, p. 88) in 1875. In their 1879 ‘Circular Letter’ to Bebel, Liebknecht and others, Marx and Engels reaffirm the paramount importance of this principle (Collected Works, vol. 24, p. 269), as does Engels in his ‘Preface’ to the 1888 English edition of the Communist Manifesto (Collected Works, 1990, vol. 26, p. 517). One of Marx and Engels’ pre-Manifesto expressions of this principle is in The Holy Family in Collected Works, vol. 4 (New York: International Publishers, 1975), p. 37. For discussion, see Hal Draper, ‘The Principle of Proletarian Self-Emancipation in Marx and Engels’ in Ralph Miliband and John Saville (eds), The Socialist Register 1971 (London: The Merlin Press, 1971); Theory, vol. I, pp. 213–234; and Theory, vol. II, pp. 147–165. For Lenin’s commitment, see Lenin, ‘Draft Program’ in Collected Works, vol. 2 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1972), p. 97.

[381] Sorel, Reflections, p. 126.

[382] Ibid., p. 226. Elsewhere Sorel unreservedly equates syndicalism with ‘proletarian socialism,’ which he contrasts with ‘political socialism.’ See, for example, ‘Mes raisons du syndicalisme,’ in Matériaux d’une théorie du proletariat, pp. 268–269.

[383] Rosa Luxemburg, ‘Our Program and the Political Situation’ in P. Hudis and K.B. Anderson (eds), The Rosa Luxemburg Reader (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004), p. 368.

[384] For Marxist views on strikes, see R. Hyman, ‘Strikes’ in Tom Bottomore et al. (eds), Dictionary of Marxist Thought, pp. 469–471; N. Harding, Leninism, pp. 68–69. On the Bakuninite origins of the revolutionary general strike, see Hyman ‘Strikes,’ p. 470; Joll, Anarchists, p. 179.

[385] Joll, Anarchists, p. 193.

[386] Sorel, Reflections, p. 122.

[387] Ibid., pp. 120, 130–131.

[388] Ibid., pp. 126, 140, 182.

[389] Ibid., p. 20.

[390] Ibid., p. 279.

[391] Ibid., p. 169.

[392] Ibid., p. 213.

[393] Ibid., pp. 103, 107.

[394] Ibid., pp. 18–19.

[395] Ibid., p. 108.

[396] Ibid., p. 107.

[397] Ibid., p. 163.

[398] Ibid., p. 18.

[399] For a detailed attempt to demonstrate that Marx upholds an essentially anarchist outlook on the question of the state, see Maximilien Rubel, ‘Marx, Theoretician of Anarchism,’ available at http://www.Marxists.org/archive/rubel/1973/Marx-anarchism.htm (accessed 12 April 2011).

[400] By ‘model of anarcho-Marxism’ I mean only the four political positions discussed here, together with an adherence to the various Marxist theses enumerated earlier. I do not include, for example, Sorel’s advocacy of ‘the ethics of the producers’ (the theme of the Reflections’ last chapter), his theses regarding ‘myths,’ or his conception and defense of violence.

[401] V.I. Lenin, What Is to Be Done? in Collected Works, vol. 5 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1961), p. 422 (italics in the original).

[402] Sorel, Reflections, pp. 243, 126.

[403] E.H. Carr underscores this point. See Studies in Revolution (London: Frank Cass, 1962), p. 157.

[404] Sorel, Reflections, p. 120.

[405] Michelle Maggi, La filosofia della rivoluzione. Gramsci, la cultura e la guerra Europea (Rome: Edizione di storia letteratura, 2008).

[406] Carl Boggs, Gramsci’s Marxism (London: Pluto Press, 1976).

[407] Richard Bellamy and Darrow Schecter, Gramsci and the Italian State (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993).

[408] Carl Levy, ‘ “Sovversivismo”: The Radical Political Culture of Otherness in Liberal Italy,’ Journal of Political Ideologies, 20.2 (2007), pp. 147–161.

[409] Peter Stallybrass, ‘Marx and Heterogeneity: Theorizing the Lumpenproletariat,’ Representations, 32 (1990), pp. 69–95.

[410] Marcus Green, ‘Gramsci Cannot Speak: Deconstruction and Interpretation of Gramsci’s Concept of the Subaltern,’ Rethinking Marxism, 13.1 (2001): pp. 1–24; K. Crehan, Gramsci, Culture and Anthropology (London: Pluto Press, 2002); K. Smith ‘Gramsci at the Margins: Subjectivity and Subalternity as a Theory of Hegemony,’ International Gramsci Journal, 2 (April 2010), pp. 39–50.

[411] Eric Hobsbawm, Primitive Rebels: Studies in Archaic Forms of Social Movement in the 19^th and 20^th Centuries (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1959).

[412] Paul Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980).

[413] Carl Levy, ‘Gramsci’s Cultural and Political Sources: Anarchism in the Prison Writings,’ Journal of Romance Studies, 22.3 (2012).

[414] Carl Levy, ‘A New Look at the Young Gramsci,’ Boundary 2, 24.3 (1986), pp. 31–48; Carl Levy, Gramsci and the Anarchists (Oxford and New York: Berg/NYU Press, 1999).

[415] Paul Piccone, ‘From Spaventa to Gramsci,’ Telos, 31 (1977), pp. 35–66.

[416] Darrow Schecter, ‘Two Views of Revolution: Gramsci and Sorel, 1916–1920,’ History of European Ideas, 22 (1990), pp. 636–653; Darrow Schecter, Gramsci and the Theory of Industrial Democracy (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1991), Levy, Gramsci.

[417] Antonio Gramsci, Pre-Prison Writings, edited by Richard Bellamy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), p. 15.

[418] Carl Levy, ‘ “The Rooted Cosmopolitan”: Errico Malatesta, Syndicalism, Transnationalism and the International Labor Movement’ in David Berry & Constance Bantman (eds.) New Perspectives on Anarchism, Labor & Syndicalism: The Individual, the National and the Transnational (Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2010), pp. 61–79.

[419] L. Michelini, ‘Antonio Gramsci e il liberismo italiano (1913–1919)’ in F. Giasi (ed.) Gramsci e il suo tempo, Vol. 1 (Rome: Carocci, 2008), pp. 175–196.

[420] Antonio Gramsci, Il nostro Marx: 1918–1919, edited by Sergio Caprioglio (Turin: Einaudi, 1980), pp. 236–237.

[421] C. Natoli, ‘Grande Guerra e rinnovamento del socialismo negli scritti del giovane Gramsci (1914–1918)’ in F. Giasi (ed.) Gramsci e il suo tempo, Vol. 1 (Rome: Carocci, 2008), pp. 51–76.

[422] Antonio Gramsci, La città futura: 1917–1918, edited by Sergio Caprioglio (Turin: Einaudi, 1980).

[423] Nicola Badaloni, Il Marxismo di Gramsci: dal mito alla ricomposizione politica (Turin: Einaudi, 1975).

[424] J. J. Roth, The Cult of Violence. Sorel and the Sorelians (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980).

[425] G. Morabito, ‘Antonio Gramsci e l’idealismo giuridico italiano. Due tesi a confronto,’ Storia e politica, 6.4 (1979), pp. 744–755.

[426] Antonio Gramsci, Cronache torinesi, edited by S. Caprioglio (Turin: Einaudi, 1980), pp. 99–103.

[427] F. Lucarini, ‘Socialismo, riformismo e scienze sociali nella Torino del giovane Gramsci (1914–21)’ in F. Giasi (ed.) Gramsci e il suo tempo (Rome: Carocci, 2008), pp. 219–240.

[428] Gramsci, La città futura, p. 332.

[429] Ibid., p. 498; Carl Levy, ‘The People and the Professors: Socialism and the Educated Middle Classes in Italy, 1870–1914,’ Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 4.2 (2001), pp. 205–208.

[430] P. Audenino, ‘Non più eterni iloti: valori e modelli della pedogogia socialista’ in L. Rossi (ed.) Cultura, istruzione e socialismo nell’età giolittiana (Milan: Franco Angeli, 1991), pp. 37–54.

[431] F. Lo Piparo, Lingua intellettuali egemonia in Gramsci (Bari: Laterza, 1979); Peter Ives, Gramsci’s Politics of Language. Engaging the Bakhtin Circle & the Frankfurt School (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004); Peter Ives, Language and Hegemony in Gramsci (London: Pluto, 2004); F. Lussana & G. Pissarello (eds.) La lingua/le lingue di Gramsci e delle sue opera. Scrittura, riscritture, letture in Italia e nel mondo (Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino, 2008); P. Ives & R. Lacorte (eds), Gramsci, Language and Translation (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2010).

[432] G. Fiori, Antonio Gramsci: Life of a Revolutionary (London: NLB, 1970), pp. 74–75, 93, 104, 113: G. Bergami, Il giovane Gramsci e il marxismo: 1911–1918 (Milan: Feltrinelli, 1977), pp. 70, 92.

[433] G.B. Furiozzi, Sorel e l’Italia (Florence: D’Anna, 1975).

[434] Gramsci, La città futura, pp. 751–752.

[435] Gramsci, Il nostro Marx, pp. 113–117.

[436] Ibid., pp. 113–114.

[437] A. M. Cirese, ‘Gramsci’s Observations on Folklore’ in A. Showstack Sassoon (ed.) Approaches to Gramsci (London: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative, 1982), pp. 212–247; J. Nun, ‘Elements for a Theory of Democracy: Gramsci and Common Sense,’ Boundary 2, 14.3 (1986), pp. 197–230; M. Green and P. Ives, ‘Subalternity and Language: Overcoming the Fragmentation of Common Sense,’ Historical Materialism, 17.3 (2009), pp. 3–30; G. Liguori, ‘Common Sense in Gramsci’ in J. Francese (ed.) Perspectives on Gramsci. Politics, Culture and Social Theory (London: Routledge, 2009), pp. 122–133.

[438] Levy, ‘The People and the Professors’; Deb Hill, Hegemony and Education. Gramsci, Post-Marxism and Radical Democracy Revisited (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007).

[439] L. Zanardi, Luigi Molinari. La Parola, l’azione, il pensiero (Mantua: Sometti, 2003).

[440] For overviews see, A. S. Lindemann, ‘The Red Years’: European Socialism and Bolshevism, 1919–1921 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974); D. Kirby, War, Peace and Revolution. International Socialism at the Crossroads 1914–1918 (London/Aldershot: Gower, 1986); C. Levy, ‘Anarchism, Internationalism and Nationalism in Europe, 1860–1939,’ Australian Journal of Politics and History, 50.3 (2004), pp. 330–342; R. Darlington, Syndicalism and the Transition to Communism. An International Comparative Analysis (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008).

[441] Levy, Gramsci, pp. 94–99.

[442] Gramsci, Cronache torinesi, pp. 76–77.

[443] Levy, Gramsci, pp. 63–118.

[444] Ibid., pp. 102–103.

[445] M. Clark, Antonio Gramsci and the Revolution that Failed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977).

[446] Levy, Gramsci, pp. 197–206; R. Medici, ‘Giacobinismo’ in F. Frosini & G. Liguori (eds.) Le parole di Gramsci. Per un lessico di Quardern del Carcere, Vol. 1 (Rome: Carocci, 2004), pp. 112–130; R. Shilliam, ‘Jacobinism: The Ghost in the Gramscian Machine of Counter-Hegemony’ in A.J. Ayers (ed.) Gramsci, Political Economy and International Relations Theory. Modern Princes and Naked Emperors (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), pp. 189–208.

[447] Gramsci, Il nostro Marx, p. 149.

[448] I. Tognarini, ‘Giacobinismo e bolschevismo: Albert Malthiez e l’Ordine Nuovo,’ Ricerche storiche, 6 (1976), pp. 523–549.

[449] L. Paggi, Le strategie del potere in Gramsci (Rome: Riuniti, 1984).

[450] Levy, Gramsci, pp. 221–228.

[451] Levy, ‘ “Sovversivismo”.’

[452] F. Benvenuti & S. Pons (eds), ‘L’Unione Sovietica nei Quarderni del Carcere’ in G. Vacca (ed.) Gramsci e il novecento (Rome: Carcocci, 1999), pp. 93–124; A. Kolpakidi & J. Leontiev, ‘Il peccato originale: Antonio Gramsci e la fondazione del PCd’I’ in S. Bertelli & F. Bigazzi (eds.) P.C.I. La storia dimentica (Milan: Arnaldo Mondadori, 2001), pp. 25–60; A. Rossi & G. Vacca, Gramsci tra Mussolini e Stalin (Rome: Fazi, 2007); E. Saccarelli, Gramsci and Trotsky in the Shadow of Stalin. The Political Theory and Practice of Opposition (London: Routledge, 2008).

[453] G. Berti (ed.), ‘ “Problemi del movimento operaio.” Scritti critiche e storiche inediti di Angelo Tasca,’ Annali della Biblioteca G.G. Feltrinelli, X (1968), pp. viii–721; S. Soave, ‘Gramsci e Tasca’ in F. Giasi (ed.) Gramsci nel suo tempo, Vol. 1 (Rome: Carocci, 2008), pp. 99–125.

[454] Levy, ‘Gramsci, Anarchism.’

[455] Carl Levy, ‘Charisma and Social Movements: Errico Malatesta and Italian Anarchism,’ Modern Italy, 3.2 (1998), pp. 205–217.

[456] Antonio Gramsci, Quaderni del carcere, Vol. 1 (Turin: Einaudi, 1975), p. 330.

[457] A. Tasca, Nascita e avvento del fascismo (Florence: Le Monnier, 1950), Preface.

[458] Richard J. F. Day, Gramsci Is Dead. Anarchist Currents in the Newest Social Movements (London: Pluto Press, 2005).

[459] Gustav Landauer, Revolution and Other Writings. A Political Reader, edited and translated by G. Kuhn (Oakland: PM Press, 2010).

[460] Colin Ward, Anarchy in Action (London: Allen & Unwin, 1973); S. White, ‘Making Anarchism Respectable: The Social Philosophy of Colin Ward,’ Journal of Political Ideologies, 12.1 (2007), pp. 11–28; C. Levy (ed.), ‘Colin Ward (1924–2010),’ Anarchist Studies, 19.2 (2011), pp. 7–15.

[461] John Holloway, Change the World Without Taking Power (London: Pluto Press, 2002).

[462] S. Chattopadhyay and B. Sarkar, ‘The Subaltern and the Popular,’ Postcolonial Studies, VIII.4 (2005), pp. 357–363; T. Brennan, Wars of Position. The Cultural Politics of Left & Right (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006); G. Baratta, Antonio Gramsci in contrappunto. Dialoghi al presente (Rome: Carocci, 2007); A. Davidson, ‘The Uses and Abuses of Gramsci,’ Thesis Eleven, 95.1 (2008), pp. 68–94; G. Schirru (ed.), Gramsci, le culture e il mondo (Rome: Viella, 2009).

[463] Robert Service, Lenin A Biography (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000).

[464] C. Read, Revolution, Religion and the Russian Intelligentsia (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1979); R. C. Williams, The Other Bolsheviks. Lenin and His Critics, 1904–1919 (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1986).

[465] Gramsci, Pre-Prison Writings, pp. 34–42.

[466] D. Settembrini, ‘Mussolini and the Legacy of Revolutionary Socialism,’ Journal of Contemporary History, 11.4 (1976), pp. 239–268.

[467] Perry Anderson, ‘The Antinomies of Antonio Gramsci,’ New Left Review, 100, (1976–1977), pp. 5–78.

[468] P. Ghosh, ‘Gramscian Hegemony: An Absolutely Historicist Approach,’ History of European Ideas, 27 (2001), pp. 1–43; D. Boothman, ‘The Sources of Gramsci’s Concept of Hegemony,’ Rethinking Marxism, 20.2 (2008), pp. 201–215; A. D’Orsi (ed.), Egemonie (Naples: Libreria Dante & Descartes, 2008).

[469] Carl Levy, Antonio Gramsci. Machiavelli. Marxism and Modernism (Cambridge: Polity, 2013).

[470] For example B. Franks, Rebel Alliances: The Means and Ends of Contemporary British Anarchisms (Edinburgh/Oakland: AK Press and Dark Star, 2006), pp. 12–16; W. Price, The Abolition of the State: Anarchist and Marxist Perspectives (Bloomington/Milton Keynes: Authorhouse, 2007), pp. 3–5.

[471] For example R. Hahnel, Economic Justice and Democracy: From Competition to Cooperation (New York: Routledge, 2005), pp. 392–393, n. 1 and n. 2; D. Guérin, Towards a Libertarian Communism (1988): http://libcom.org/library/towards-libertarian-communism-daniel-guerin (accessed 8 February 2010); and N. Chomsky, Government in the Future (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2005), pp. 23–30.

[472] Steve Wright notes that ‘if anything, the climate of the Cold War would be even more inhospitable for those who saw the rival blocs as simply different forms of capitalist imperialism.’ ‘Radical traditions: Council Communism,’ Reconstruction 4 (1995): www.libcom.org/library/radical-traditions-council-communism-stevewright (accessed 04 August 2009).

[473] A notable exception to this is the definitive though largely unknown outside of a German readership: H. Bock, Syndicalismus und Linkskommunismus von 1918 bis 1923. Zur Geschichte und Soziologie der Kommunistischen Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands (K.A.P.D.), der Allgemeinen Arbeiterunion (A.A.U.D.) und der Freien Arbeiterunion (F.A.U.D.) (Meisenheim: Verlag Anton Hain, 1969). On the relationship of German syndicalism to Council Communism in the Weimar Republic, see H. Bock, ‘Anarchosyndicalism in the German Labor Movement’ in W. Thorpe and M. van der Linden (eds.), Revolutionary Syndicalism: An International Perspective (Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1990), pp. 59–79.

[474] M. Freeden, Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).

[475] P. Mattick, ‘Introduction,’ New essays: a quarterly dedicated to the study of modern society (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Reprint Corporation, 1969), viii–ix. As will be discussed below, this journal changed its title twice between 1934 and 1943: International Council Correspondence, then Living Marxism and finally New Essays. These will be referred to collectively hereafter as New Essays.

[476] For a discussion of the ‘deaths’ of Durruti, see A. Paz, Durruti in the Spanish Revolution (Edinburgh, Oakland: AK Press, 2007), pp. 637–681.

[477] The two most important studies are A. Guillamón, The Friends of Durruti Group: 1937–1939 and the definitive Spanish-language treatment M. Amorós, La revolución traicionada: La verdadera historia de Balius y los Amigos de Durruti (Barcelona: VIRUS editorial, 2003). See also G. Fontenis, The Revolutionary Message of the ‘Friends of Durruti’ (1983), available online: www.flag.blackened.net/revolt/spain/FODtrans/intro.html (accessed 09 July 2010); P. Sharkey, The Friends of Durruti — A Chronology (1984), available online: www.flag.blackened.net/revolt/spain/fod_chron.html (accessed 09 July 2010); and B. Bolloten, The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1991), pp. 420;428;866–867, n.49.

[478] A. Pannekoek, Workers’ Councils (Oakland/Edinburgh: AK Press, 2003), pp. 44–50.

[479] P. Rachleff, Marxism and Council Communism: The Foundation for Revolutionary Theory for Modern Society (Brooklyn: Revisionist Press, 1976), p. 207.

[480] See P. Rachleff, Marxism and Council Communism, p. 106; Mattick, ‘Introduction’ in New essays, v.; A. Pannekoek, Workers’ Councils, pp. 76–77.

[481] For a summary of the left, right, and centrist currents in German pre-war social democracy, represented by Luxemburg, Eduard Bernstein, and Karl Kautsky respectively see R. Gombin, The Radical Tradition: a study in modern revolutionary thought (London: Methuen & Co Ltd., 1978), pp. 93–94.

[482] Bourrinet writes that ‘There is not on the one hand a German Left and on the other a Dutch Left, but truly a German-Dutch Communist Left, with Gorter as its leading political figure.’ P. Bourrinet, The Dutch and German Communist Left: a contribution to the history of the revolutionary movement (London: Porcupine Press, 2001), p. 9.

[483] R. Luxemburg, Reform or Revolution (New York: Gordon Press, 1974). Karl Korsch and Paul Mattick regarded this as a central text, and in general, Luxemburg as a key figure in the development of the councilist current. See K. Korsch, ‘The Passing of Marxian Orthodoxy,’ New Essays 3:11/12 (December 1937), pp. 7–11; P. Mattick, ‘Luxemburg vs. Lenin,’ New Essays 2:8 (July 1936), pp. 17–35.

[484] R. Luxemburg, The mass strike, the political party, and the trade unions and The Junius pamphlet (London: Harper and Row, 1971).

[485] R. Luxemburg, The Russian Revolution (1918): http://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1918/russian-revolution/ch06.htm (accessed 28 September 2010).

[486] P. Broué, The German Revolution 1917–1923 (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2006), p. 39.

[487] V. Lenin, April Theses (1917): www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/apr/04.htm (accessed 15 October 2010) and V. Lenin, State and Revolution (1918): www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev (accessed 15 October 2010).

[488] G.P. Maximoff, wrote that ‘The slogans formulated by the Bolsheviks (Communists) voiced, in a precise and intelligible manner, the demands of the masses in revolt, coinciding with the slogans of the Anarchists: “Down with the war,” “Immediate peace without annexations or indemnities, over the heads of the governments and capitalists,” “Abolition of the army,” “Arming of the workers,” “Immediate seizure of land by the peasants,” “Seizure of factories by the workers,” “A Federation of Soviets,” etc. […] Wasn’t it natural for the Anarchists to be taken in by these slogans, considering that they lacked a strong organization to carry them out independently? Consequently, they continued taking part in the joint struggle.’ G.P. Maximoff, Syndicalists in the Russian Revolution (n.d., c.1940): www.libcom.org/library/syndicalists-in-russian-revolutionmaximov (accessed 24 August 2009). See also P. Avrich, The Russian Anarchists (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967), pp. 128–129;171–203; M. Bookchin, The Third Revolution: Popular Movements in the Revolutionary Era, Volume 3 (London: Continuum, 2004), p. 199; K. Zimmer, ‘Premature Anti-Communists?: American Anarchism, the Russian Revolution, and Left-Wing Libertarian Anti-Communism, 1917–1939,’ Labor: Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas, 6:2 (Summer 2009), pp. 45–71; I. de Llorens, The CNT and the Russian Revolution, trans. Paul Sharkey (London/Berkeley: Kate Sharpley Library, 2007); D. Berry, ‘Sovietism as Council Anarchism’ in A History of the French Anarchist Movement, 1917 to 1945 (Edinburgh/Oakland: AK Press, 2009), pp. 55–83; R. Gombin, The Radical Tradition, p. 34.

[489] P. Broué, The German Revolution 1917–1923, pp. 393–491.

[490] See the ‘Conditions of Admission into the Communist International’ in Minutes of the Second Congress of the Communist International (1920): www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/2^nd-congress/ch07.htm (accessed 24 October 2009).

[491] V. Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder (1920): www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/ (accessed 12 October 2010).

[492] P. Mattick, ‘Introduction,’ New Essays, vi.

[493] See for example ‘What was the USSR? Towards a Theory of the Deformation of Value under State Capitalism Part III: Left Communism and the Russian Revolution,’ in Aufheben 8 (Autumn 1999): http://libcom.org/library/what-wasussr-aufheben-left-communism-part-3 (accessed 05 August 2009).

[494] See H. Gorter, Open Letter to Comrade Lenin, A Reply to ‘Left-wing’ Communism, an Infantile Disorder (1920): www.marxists.org/archive/gorter/1920/open-letter/index.htm (accessed 23 June 2009).

[495] H. Wagner, ‘Theses on Bolshevism,’ New Essays 1:3 (December 1934), pp. 1–18.

[496] Program of the Communist Workers Party of Germany (KAPD) (1920): www.libcom.org/library/program-communist-workers-party-germany-kapd-1920 (accessed 06 July 2009).

[497] See P. Rachleff, Marxism and Council Communism, p. 172. As early as 1912, Pannekoek had regarded the principles of the IWW as ‘perfectly correct’: P. Bourrinet, The Dutch and German Communist Left, p. 78. See also A. Pannekoek, Workers’ Councils’, pp. 65–66. John Gerber writes that ‘Familiarity with the IWW came from the Hamburg left radical Fritz Wolffheim, who had edited an IWW publication in the USA, and from the activities of American IWW sailors in the ports of Bremen and Hamburg.’ John Gerber, ‘From Left Radicalism to Council Communism: Anton Pannekoek and German Revolutionary Marxism,’ Journal of Contemporary History 23 (1988), 169–189: www.libcom.org/library/left-radicalism-council-communismanton-pannekoek-german-revolutionary-marxism-john-gerb (accessed 21 September 2009); Broué also notes the influence of the IWW on Wolffheim and the KAPD/AAUD, P. Broué, The German Revolution, p. 66. The ideas of the Dutch-German Left Radicals found a major platform for an American audience in the International Socialist Review. This journal was published by the Chicago-based Charles H. Kerr Publishing Company between 1900 and 1918 and was politically close to both the left-wing of the Socialist Party of America and the IWW. The International Socialist Review regularly published articles by Luxemburg, Liebknecht, Pannekoek and other major voices within the radical and Zimmerwald lefts.

[498] For a more detailed discussion of these divisions see M. van der Linden, On Council Communism (2004) www.kurasje.org/arkiv/15800f.htm (accessed 5 July 2009); M. Shipway, ‘Council Communism’ in M. Rubel and J. Crump (eds.), Non-Market Socialism in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (London: MacMillan Press, 1987), pp. 104–126; R. Gombin, The Radical Tradition, pp. 104–114.

[499] See O. Rühle, From the Bourgeois to the Proletarian Revolution (1924) www.marxists.org/archive/ruhle/1924/revolution.htm (accessed 05 August 2009).

[500] O. Rühle, The Revolution is Not a Party Affair (1920): www.marxists.org/archive/ruhle/1920/ruhle02.htm (accessed 01 August 2009).

[501] Bock writes that ‘The contacts between the AAUE and the FAUD [a German syndicalist union] were never wholly severed; AAUE representatives, for example, participated regularly as guests at the congresses of the FAUD.’ Bock, ‘Anarchosyndicalism in the German Labor Movement,’ p. 66. Thorpe speculates that the ‘policy of admitting only one affiliate from each country also prevented the councilist AAUE from joining [the syndicalist international IWMA], as the FAUD was the German IWMA section.’ W. Thorpe, Revolutionary Syndicalism: An International Perspective, p. 250.

[502] M. van der Linden, On Council Communism.

[503] Mattick wrote that ‘History bypassed both groups; they argued in a vacuum. Neither the Communist Workers Party nor the anti-party section of the General Labor Union overcame their status of being “ultra-left” sects. Their internal problems became quite artificial for, as regards activities, there was actually no difference between them.’ Paul Mattick, ‘Anti-Bolshevist Communism in Germany,’ Telos 26 (Winter 1975–1976): www.libcom.org/library/antibolshevist-communism-germany-paul-mattick (accessed 8 August 2009). See also Mattick’s correspondence with members and supporters of the British Anti-Parliamentary Communist Federation on the question of revolutionary parties, ‘Party and Class’ in Class War on the Home Front (1998): www.libcom.org/library/apcf-class-war-home-front-4 (accessed 26 August 2009).

[504] P. Rachleff, Marxism and Council Communism, p. 208.

[505] This is particularly true of the conclusions of the ‘platformist’ current of anarchist-communism which developed out of the experiences of several former Makhnovist militants in the Russian Revolution and Civil War (1917–1921). Wolodomyr Holota, in the most comprehensive account of the Makhnovist movement, argued that the Council Communist conception of the ‘party’ closely resembled platformist conceptions of revolutionary organization, and were also similarly devised as anti-statist alternatives to Bolshevism with a basis in workers’ councils. Le Mouvement machnoviste ukrainien 1918–1921 et l’évolution de l’anarchisme européen à travers le débat sur la plate-forme 1926–1934 (Unpublished PhD, Strasboug Université des sciences humaines, 1975), pp. 513–514. It bears mention that the questions surrounding the role of a specific revolutionary political organization has remained a recurring, often divisive, and arguably unresolved issue for many groups on the anti-statist revolutionary Left — cutting across ‘anarchist’ and ‘Marxist’ lines — as have issues of ‘boring from within’ traditional unions rather than forming independent ‘dual unions’ or autonomous workers’ groups.

[506] H. Bock, ‘Anarchosyndicalism in the German Labor Movement,’ pp. 63–64.

[507] M. van der Linden, On Council Communism.

[508] G. Bonacchi, ‘The Council Communists Between the New Deal and Fascism’ (1976): www.libcom.org/library/council-communism-new-deal-fascism (accessed 15 August 2010).

[509] Paul Mattick, ‘Introduction,’ New Essays, vi.

[510] P. Mattick, Die Todeskrise des kapitalistischen Systems und die Aufgaben des Proletariats (1933): www.workerseducation.org/crutch/pamphlets/todeskriese. html (accessed 20 July 2009).

[511] Mattick still maintained correspondence and good relations with IWW members. See for example the letter from Industrial Worker editor Ferd Thompson to Paul Mattick, Dec. 6, 1946, Paul Mattick Papers, International Institute for Social History.

[512] P. Mattick, ‘Introduction’ New Essays, xi.

[513] New Essays, 1:1 (October 1934), p. 9.

[514] P. Mattick, ‘Introduction’ New Essays, i.

[515] United Workers Party of America, World-wide Fascism or World Revolution? Manifesto and Program of the United Workers Party of America (1934): www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1934/fascism-revolution.htm (accessed 20 July 2009).

[516] P. Mattick, ‘Introduction’ New Essays, vii.

[517] New Essays, 2:2 (January 1936), 9.

[518] P. Mattick, ‘Introduction’ New Essays, vii.

[519] Ibid.

[520] Formed in 1927, the Dutch Group of International Communists (GIC; Groep van Internationale Communisten) was the other leading councilist organization in the post-1924 period.

[521] See M. Nomad, ‘The Masters of Tomorrow,’ International Council Correspondence 2:9&10 (September 1936), pp. 16–42 and D. Guérin, ‘Fascist Corporatism’ International Council Correspondence 3:2 (February 1937), pp. 14–26.

[522] Perhaps the standard and authoritative historical work is H. Thomas, The Spanish Civil War (London: Penguin, 1990).

[523] CNT-FAI, ‘To All the Workers of the World,’ New Essays 2:11 (October 1936), p. 41.

[524] P. Bourrinet, The Dutch and German Communist Left, p. 297.

[525] Ethel MacDonald and Jane Patrick of the British United Socialist Movement, an organization which included Guy Aldred and was politically close to the councilists, worked with the propaganda sections of the CNT-FAI in Barcelona during the war. See ‘The Civil War in Spain’ in Class War on the Home Front (1988): http://libcom.org/library/apcf-class-war-home-front (accessed 28 August 2009). The Dutch GIC also had one member who joined the anarchist militias fighting on the Aragon front, see P. Bourrinet, The Dutch and German Communist Left, pp. 295, 299.

[526] P. Mattick, ‘The Spanish Civil War,’ New Essays 2:11 (October 1936), 1.

[527] Ibid. 9.

[528] Ibid. 10.

[529] Ibid. 14.

[530] Ibid. 13.

[531] Ibid. 14.

[532] Ibid. 15.

[533] Ibid. 13.

[534] Of the POUM, Bolloten writes: ‘A vigorous advocate of Socialist revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat, an unrelenting critic of the Popular Front and of Stalin’s trials and purges, the POUM was denounced as “trotskyist.” Although some of its leaders, including Andres Nin and Juan Andrade, had once been disciples of Leon Trotsky and after the outbreak of the Civil War had favored giving him political asylum in Catalonia, the POUM was not a trotskyist party, and it frantically attempted to prove that it was not in numerous articles and speeches. Nevertheless, in accordance with the tactic used by Stalin at the Moscow trials of amalgamating all opponents under a single label, the communists denounced the dissidents of the POUM as Trotskyist agents of Franco, Hitler, and Mussolini.’ Bolloten, The Spanish Civil War, p. 405.

[535] P. Mattick, ‘The Spanish Civil War,’ New Essays 2:11 (October 1936), p. 18.

[536] Ibid. p. 21.

[537] WRB, ‘Anarchism and Marxism,’ Ibid. pp. 1–6.

[538] D. Guérin, Anarchism: From Theory to Practice (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970), p. 121.

[539] I. Puente, Libertarian Communism (1932): http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/libcom.html (accessed 18 September 2009).

[540] See V. Richards, Lessons of the Spanish Revolution, pp. 24–27.

[541] D. Guérin, ‘Preface’ in G. Fontenis, The Revolutionary Message of the ‘Friends of Durruti’ (1983): http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/spain/FODtrans/preface.html (accessed 01 October 2009).

[542] P. Mattick, ‘The Spanish Civil War,’ New Essays 2:11 (October 1936), p. 21.

[543] Ibid. pp. 21–22.

[544] Berneri helped to organize the first group of Italian volunteers to fight in the Spanish Civil War, and politically, positioned himself between the CNT-FAI and the Friends of Durruti. Berneri was executed during the May Days in Barcelona in 1937.

[545] N. Chomsky, ‘Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship’ in American Power and the New Mandarins (Middlesex/Victoria: Penguin Books, 1969), pp. 91–92.

[546] Ibid. p. 38.

[547] P. Mattick, ‘What Next in Spain?,’ Ibid. p. 16.

[548] P. Mattick, ‘The Spanish Civil War,’ New Essays 2:11 (October 1936).

[549] Ibid. p. 17.

[550] W. D. Jones, The Lost Debate: German Socialist Intellectuals and Totalitarianism (Urbana: University of Illinois, 1999), p. 97.

[551] K. Korsch, ‘Economics and Politics in Revolutionary Spain,’ New Essays 4:3 (May 1938), p. 76.

[552] Ibid.

[553] Ibid. p. 77.

[554] Ibid. p. 80.

[555] Ibid.

[556] Ibid. p. 81.

[557] K. Korsch, ‘Collectivization in Spain,’ New Essays 4:6 (April 1939), 179.

[558] Ibid. p. 178.

[559] Ibid. p. 180.

[560] Ibid. p. 181.

[561] K. Korsch, ‘Economics and Politics in Revolutionary Spain,’ New Essays 4:3 (May 1938), p. 79.

[562] P. Mattick, Review of D.A. Santillan ‘After the Revolution,’ New Essays 3:9&10 (October 1937), p. 29.

[563] For discussions of the Barcelona May Days see H. Graham, ‘ “Against the State”: A Genealogy of the Barcelona May Days (1937),’ European History Quarterly, 29 (1999) pp. 485–542; B. Bolloten, The Spanish Civil War, pp. 414–461. For a first hand account and analysis, see G. Orwell, Homage to Catalonia, pp. 101–131; 216–248.

[564] B. Bolloten, The Spanish Civil War: revolution and counterrevolution, p. 429.

[565] Ibid. p. 430.

[566] Ibid. p. 422.

[567] Ibid. pp. 425–427.

[568] Ibid.

[569] H. Graham, ‘ “Against the State,”’ p. 531.

[570] P. Mattick, ‘Civil War in Catalonia,’ New Essays 3:5&6 (June 1937), p. 41.

[571] P. Mattick, ‘Moscow Fascism in Spain: The Barricades Must be Torn Down!,’ New Essays 3:7&8 (August 1937), p. 28.

[572] Ibid. p. 26.

[573] Ibid. p. 29.

[574] See excerpts from the FoD articles ‘The problem of militarization’ and ‘A Confederal Army’ in G. Fontenis, The Revolutionary Message of the ‘Friends of Durruti’ (1983): http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/spain/FODtrans/fod_main2.html (accessed 15 September 2010).

[575] In 1937, the FoD numbered some four to five thousand members. Balius claimed that the second issue of their main organ El Amigo del Pueblo (Friend of the People, which appeared in 12 issues between May 1937 and February 1938) had a distribution of nearly 15,000 copies. See letter from Jaime Balius to Burnett Bolloten, 24 June 1946 (Box 5, Folder 9 — Balius, Jaime, 1946–1949, Bolloten Collection, Stanford University).

[576] Jaime Balius, Towards a Fresh Revolution (1938): www.flag.blackened.net/revolt/fod/towardshistory.html (accessed 16 August 2010).

[577] Ibid.

[578] Ronald Fraser, Blood of Spain: An Oral History of the Spanish Civil War (New York: Pantheon Books, 1979), p. 381, n. 1.

[579] P. Mattick, Karl Korsch: His Contribution to Revolutionary Marxism (1967): www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1962/korsch.htm (accessed 20 July 2009).

[580] Leon Trotsky, In Defense of Marxism (New York: Pathfinder Press, 1976), p. 164.

[581] P. Berman, ‘Facing Reality,’ in Paul Buhle (ed.), C.L.R. James: His Life and Work (London: Allison & Busby, 1986), p. 211. Berman’s piece focuses on James’s 1958 work Facing Reality, co-written with Cornelius Castoriadis and Grace Lee Boggs, a work which politically shares much common ground with Council Communism.

[582] J.D. Young, ‘C.L.R. James,’ Journal of the Scottish Labor History Society, 22 (1987), pp. 38–39. See also J.D. Young, The World of C.L.R. James: His Unfragmented Vision (Glasgow: Clydeside Press, 1999).

[583] On Robin Blackburn’s obituary in the Independent of 8 June 1989, see Ian Birchall’s letter in Revolutionary History, 2:3 (1989), online at ‘http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/revhist/backiss/vol2/no3/birchall.html.’ For Thompson’s obituary, see F. Rosengarten, Urbane Revolutionary: C.L.R. James and the Struggle for a New Society (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2008), p. 26.

[584] C.L.R. James, Notes on Dialectics: Hegel, Marx, Lenin (London: Allison & Busby, 1980), pp. 60–61, 197–199, 215. This was a document written strictly for his supporters and not a work that was published in his name while a member of the official Trotskyist movement — indeed it was not first published in a widely available format until 1980. In the co-written 1950 work State Capitalism and World Revolution, a work which was published while James and his comrades were still in the official Trotskyist movement, anarchism was casually included alongside liberalism, social democracy and Stalinism as an ideology of ‘counter-revolution within the revolution.’ See C.L.R. James, R. Dunayevskaya and G. Lee, State Capitalism and World Revolution (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 1986), p. 132.

[585] Berman, ‘Facing Reality,’ p. 208.

[586] See Christian Høgsbjerg, ‘C.L.R. James: The Revolutionary as Artist,’ International Socialism, 112 (2006); and Hal Draper, The Two Souls of Socialism (London: Bookmarks, 1996). For my brief critical discussion of two pieces of recent James-scholarship, see Christian Høgsbjerg, ‘Remembering C.L.R. James, Forgetting C.L.R. James,’ Historical Materialism, 17:3 (2009), pp. 221–234

[587] Paul Buhle, ‘Marxism in the USA,’ in S. McLemee and P. Le Blanc (eds), C.L.R. James and Revolutionary Marxism; Selected Writings of C.L.R. James, 1939–49 (New Jersey: Humanity Books, 1994), pp. 55–56.

[588] David Renton, Dissident Marxism: Past Voices for Present Times (London: Zed Books, 2004); David Renton, C.L.R. James; Cricket’s Philosopher King (London: Haus Books, 2007).

[589] C.L.R. James, ‘Michel Maxwell Philip: 1829–1888 [1931],’ in S.R. Cudjoe (ed.), Michael Maxwell Philip; A Trinidad Patriot of the 19^th Century (Wellesley: Calaloux, 1999), pp. 102–103.

[590] Quoted in R.W. Sander, ‘Introduction: The Beacon and the Emergence of West Indian Literature,’ in B. Samaroo (ed.), The Beacon, Volumes I–IV, 1931–1939 (New York: Kraus, 1977), p. xvii.

[591] The American labor historian George Rawick, who knew James from the 1960s, thought him a ‘Victorian hippie.’ Personal information from Marcus Rediker, 6 November 2007.

[592] David Goodway, ‘Charles Lahr,’ London Magazine (June/July 1977).

[593] Jonathan Rose, The Intellectual Life of the British Working Classes (London: Yale University Press, 2001), p. 303.

[594] C.L.R. James, ‘Charlie Lahr’ [1975], unpublished manuscript in the possession of David Goodway, pp. 2–3.

[595] James, ‘Charlie Lahr,’ pp. 3–4, 7. James’s chapter on the rise of the Nazis in Germany in his 1937 pioneering anti-Stalinist Marxist history of ‘the rise and fall of the Communist International,’ World Revolution, would owe much to Lahr’s influence and would depart somewhat from Trotsky’s analysis. See C.L.R. James, ‘Discussions with Trotsky,’ in C.L.R. James, At the Rendezvous of Victory; Selected Writings, Vol. 3 (London: Allison & Busby, 1984); and also James, Notes on Dialectics, pp. 38, 149.

[596] As Alfred Rosmer recalled in his 1953 work Moscou sous Lenine, Lenin praised The Great French Revolution as Kropotkin ‘well understood and demonstrated the role of the people in that bourgeois revolution.’ See A. Rosmer, Lenin’s Moscow (London: Bookmarks, 1987), p. 117. Trotsky is also said to have preferred Kropotkin’s history to Jaurès.’ See Daniel Guérin, Le feu du sang: autobiographie politique et charnelle (Paris: B. Grasset, 1977), p. 133. Thanks to Ian Birchall for these references.

[597] See C.L.R. James, The Black Jacobins; Toussaint Louverture and the San Domingo Revolution (London: Secker & Warburg, 1938), p. 320.

[598] It might be noted in passing that Kropotkin’s book was translated into Italian by one Benito Mussolini, then a young revolutionary socialist — and, incidentally, Kropotkin thought Mussolini’s translation ‘brilliant.’ Peter Kropotkin, The Great French Revolution (Quebec: Black Rose Books, 1989), pp. xv, 15.

[599] Kropotkin, The Great French Revolution, p. 95.

[600] C.L.R. James, The Black Jacobins; Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution (London: Penguin, 2001), pp. 68–69, 71.

[601] Ibid., p. 291.

[602] For further discussion of Trotsky’s critical influence on James here, see C. Høgsbjerg, ‘C.L.R. James and the Black Jacobins,’ International Socialism, 126 (2010), pp. 95–120

[603] James, The Black Jacobins, p. 112.

[604] Ibid., p. 144; Kropotkin, The Great French Revolution, pp. 484–492.

[605] See James, The Black Jacobins, p. 332. One should also note James’s respect for and subsequent friendship with Daniel Guérin, and his unfinished attempt to translate into English what in 1963 he described as Guérin’s ‘brilliant, original and well documented iconoclastic study’ of the French Revolution, La Lutte de classes sous la première république, bourgeois et ‘bras nus,’ 1793–1797 (1946). For more on James and Guérin, see Rosengarten, Urbane Revolutionary, p. 149.

[606] G. Cohen, The Failure of a Dream; The Independent Labor Party from Disaffiliation to World War II (London: Taurus Academic Studies, 2007), p. 111.

[607] Young, The World of C.L.R. James, pp. 82–83.

[608] David Goodway, Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow: Left-Libertarian Thought and British Writers from William Morris to Colin Ward (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2006), p. 126.

[609] Vernon Richards, ‘Printers We Have Known: 1936–1986,’ in Freedom; Anarchist Magazine, Centenary Edition, 47:9 (October, 1986). Freedom, the main British anarchist publication, then called Spain and the World used the Narod Press from October 1936-December 1936 and then from June 1937-September 1938. On Richards, see Goodway, Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow, p. 126.

[610] ‘The Struggle for the Fourth International,’ Fight, 1:11 (November, 1937).

[611] F.A. Ridley, ‘Anarchism and Marxism,’ Controversy, 2:23 (August 1938). On Ridley, see R. Morrell, The Gentle Revolutionary; The Life and Work of Frank Ridley, Socialist and Secularist (London: Freethought History Research Group, 2003).

[612] E. Mannin, Comrade O Comrade; or, Low-Down on the Left (London: Jarrolds, 1947), p. 118. On Braithwaite, see B. Bush, Imperialism, Race and Resistance; Africa and Britain, 1919–1945 (London: Routledge, 1999), p. 222. On Mannin, see A. Croft, ‘Ethel Mannin: The Red Rose of Love and the Red Flower of Liberty,’ in A. Ingram and D. Patai (eds), Rediscovering Forgotten Radicals; British Women Writers, 1889–1939 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1993), pp. 205–225.

[613] George Padmore, Pan-Africanism or Communism? The Coming Struggle for Africa (London: Dennis Dobson, 1956), p. 151. On 26 February 1943, Braithwaite was billed to speak on ‘Colonial Blacks on the move’ at the anarchist-run Freedom Press Rooms on 27 Belsize Road in London. See New Leader, 6 February 1943.

[614] Raya Dunayevskaya, The Marxist-Humanist Theory of State-Capitalism (Chicago: News and Letters, 1992), pp. x–xi.

[615] Ibid.

[616] From the Special Branch file on C.L.R. James. The National Archives, London, KV/2/1824/1z. ‘Stalin, he said, was striving for National Socialism, while Trotsky was upholding International Socialism.’

[617] C.L.R. James, World Revolution 1917–1936; The Rise and Fall of the Communist International (New Jersey: Humanity Books, 1994), pp. 168, 175, 178, 185. A. Rosenberg, A History of Bolshevism; From Marx to the First Five Years’ Plan (London: Oxford University Press, 1934), pp. viii, 236–237. James’s meeting with Korsch is recorded by Kent Worcester, from an interview in 1981 with American historian George Rawick. K. Worcester, C.L.R. James; A Political Biography (New York: State University of New York Press, 1996), p. 30. On Korsch’s analysis of state capitalism, see the discussion in M. van der Linden, Western Marxism and the Soviet Union; A Survey of Critical Theories and Debates Since 1917 (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2009), pp. 41–44.

[618] Boris Souvarine, Stalin: A Critical Survey of Bolshevism (London: Secker &Warburg, 1940), pp. 564, 570. See also C. Phelps, ‘C.L.R. James and the Theory of State Capitalism,’ in N. Lichtenstein (ed.), American Capitalism; Social Thought and Political Economy in the Twentieth Century (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006), p. 165.

[619] James, World Revolution, p. 140, and Worcester, C.L.R. James, p. 45.

[620] James, World Revolution, p. 371.

[621] Trotsky felt the Stalinist bureaucracy was a ‘temporary’ phenomenon, and in 1939 argued ‘Might we not place ourselves in a ludicrous position if we fixed to the Bonapartist oligarchy the nomenclature of a new ruling class just a few years or even a few months prior to its inglorious downfall?’ See Alex Callinicos, Trotskyism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990), p. 21.

[622] James, World Revolution, p. 296.

[623] Ibid., pp. 17, 415.

[624] The best general survey and discussion of state capitalist theories is Marcel van der Linden’s Western Marxism and the Soviet Union. One former comrade of James’s from the Marxist Group, Dr Ryan L. Worrall in 1939 would put forward a substantial and sophisticated state capitalist analysis in the ILP journal Left. Phelps, ‘C.L.R. James and the Theory of State Capitalism,’ pp. 165–166, 331–332.

[625] M. Low and J. Breá, Red Spanish Notebook; The First Six Months of the Revolution and the Civil War (London: Secker & Warburg, 1937), pp. 254–255.

[626] P. Davison (ed.), The Complete Works of George Orwell, Vol. 11 (London: Secker & Warburg, 1998), p. 87. L. Cripps, C.L.R. James; Memories and Commentaries (London: Cornwall Books, 1997), p. 21. George Orwell, Homage to Catalonia (London: Penguin, 1989), p. 83. As Orwell noted of the Soviet Union in 1939, ‘Is it Socialism, or is it a peculiarly vicious form of state capitalism? All the political controversies … for two years past really circle round this question.’ Quoted in J. Newsinger, ‘Destroying the Myth: George Orwell and Soviet Communism,’ in P. Flewers (ed.), George Orwell: Enigmatic Socialist (London: Socialist Platform, 2005), p. 138.

[627] Socialist Platform, C.L.R. James and British Trotskyism; An Interview (London: Socialist Platform, 1987), p. 10. See also I. Deutscher, The Prophet Outcast; Trotsky: 1929–1940 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), pp. 419–421.

[628] For my take on these discussions, see Christian Høgsbjerg, ‘The Prophet and Black Power: Trotsky on race in the US,’ International Socialism, 121 (2008), pp. 99–119

[629] In 1956, James would borrow ‘Every cook can govern,’ a phrase of Lenin’s, as a title for a Correspondence pamphlet on ‘democracy in Ancient Greece.’ Ian Birchall has reminded me that it is worth remembering that Lenin’s own relations with anarchism were rather more complex than is often acknowledged. The State and Revolution was widely accused of ‘anarchism’ when it was first published, and Lenin made considerable efforts to engage with visiting anarchists in Moscow, particularly at the Second Congress of the Communist International in the summer of 1920. See, for example, Rosmer, Lenin’s Moscow, pp. 51–65.

[630] C.L.R. James, Beyond a Boundary (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1969), p. 149.

[631] James, Notes on Dialectics, p. 135.

[632] Ibid., 150.

[633] James et al., State Capitalism and World Revolution, pp. 58–59. James, Notes on Dialectics, p. 118.

[634] James, Notes on Dialectics, p. 151.

[635] Steve Wright, Storming Heaven; Class Composition and Struggle in Italian Autonomist Marxism (London: Pluto Press, 2002), pp. 1, 3.

[636] Ibid.; H. Cleaver, Reading Capital Politically (Brighton: Harvester Press, 1979), pp. 50, 53, 183. On Mothé, see I. Birchall, ‘Nineteen Fifty-Six and the French Left,’ Revolutionary History, 9:3 (2006), pp. 160–181.

[637] P. Singer, The American Worker (Part 1: Life in the Factory), online at http://www.prole.info/texts/americanworker1.html, p. 1. (accessed 25 April 2011)

[638] Singer, The American Worker, p. 1.

[639] Grace Lee Boggs, Living for Change: An Autobiography (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998), p. 62.

[640] T. Cliff, Lenin: Building the Party, 1893–1914 (London: Bookmarks, 1994), p. 342.

[641] James, World Revolution, p. 123.

[642] Fight, 1:3 (January, 1937) and Fight, 1:4 (February, 1937).

[643] Trotsky, In Defense of Marxism, p. 112.

[644] J.R. Johnson, F. Forest and M. Harvey, Trotskyism in the United States, 1940–47: Balance Sheet; The Workers Party and the Johnson-Forest Tendency (Detroit: Johnson-Forest Tendency, 1947), pp. 8–9. See also Worcester, C.L.R. James, pp. 88–89, Rosengarten, Urbane Revolutionary, p. 71; P. Buhle, C.L.R. James: The Artist as Revolutionary (London: Verso, 1993), p. 70.

[645] The work was heralded as being highly original at the time. As Castoriadis later recalled, ‘for the first time there was something that was absent totally from the entire Marxist tradition and from Karl Marx himself except in the Economic and Philosophical manuscripts of 1844: that is the acknowledgment that being a worker does not mean that one is just working or that one is just being exploited. Being a worker means living with workers, being in solidarity with other workers, living in working class quarters of the city, having women who are either workers themselves or, if they are not, their predicament is the same or even worse than that of the men.’ C. Castoriadis, ‘C.L.R. James and the fate of Marxism,’ in S.R. Cudjoe and W.E. Cain (eds), C.L.R. James; His Intellectual Legacies (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1995), p. 283.

[646] S. Weir, ‘Revolutionary Artist,’ in P. Buhle (ed.), C.L.R. James: His Life and Work (London: Allison & Busby, 1986), pp. 183–184. It is a pity Weir never seems to have had the chance to hear the Palestinian Trotskyist Tony Cliff, based in Britain, as James was not quite so unique in this. See, for example, Cliff’s discussion in The Employers’ Offensive (1970) of how the ‘demand for workers’ control’ is ‘the most important fact about modern industrial capitalism — for the “bloody-mindedness” of workers, and the thousand and one ways in which they express their demand, implicitly and explicitly, for control over their own lives, is the embryo of workers’ power, of socialism.’ See T. Cliff, In the Thick of Workers’ Struggle: Selected Writings, Vol. 2 (London: Bookmarks, 2002), p. 290.

[647] ‘A young participant in the Resistance in Cremona, Montaldi became the bridgeman between Socialisme ou Barbarie and its intercontinental ramifications on the one hand and the Italian non-Stalinist groups on the left of the Italian CP and SP on the other.’ See F. Gambino, ‘Only Connect,’ in P. Buhle (ed.), C.L.R. James: His Life and Work (London: Allison & Busby, 1986), p. 199.

[648] Quoted in Wright, Storming Heaven, pp. 23–24.

[649] Gambino, ‘Only Connect,’ pp. 197–198.

[650] M. Glaberman (ed.), Marxism for Our Times: C.L.R. James on Revolutionary Organization (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1999), p. xxii. Paul Buhle, ‘Political Styles of C.L.R. James: An Introduction,’ in Paul Buhle (ed.), C.L.R. James: His Life and Work (London: Allison & Busby, 1986), p. 26. Gambino was especially inspired by the League of Revolutionary Black Workers in Detroit — a Jamesian group whose first interview abroad was with Potere Operaio around the same time as The Black Jacobins – which had inspired the League of Revolutionary Black Workers — appeared in Italian. As Gambino recalled, ‘the interview of the League [of Revolutionary Black Workers] in Potere Operaio led to more than the well-known slogan of Potere Operaio: “Turin, Detroit, Togliattigrad, class struggle will win.” It signaled the death knell of the isolated within the narrow confines of the official left’s “Italian road to socialism.”’ Gambino, ‘Only Connect,’ p. 198.

[651] George Rawick published with others including Antonio Negri — Operai e stato [Workers and the state] (Milan: Feltrinelli, 1972); Lo schiavo americanodal tramonto all’alba (Milan: Feltrinelli, 1973), with Harold Baron and Herbert Gutman, Da schiavo a proletario (From slave to proletarian) (Turin: Musolini, 1973). In 1976 Martin Glaberman published Classe operaia, imperialismo, rivoluzione negli USA [Working class, imperialism, and revolution in the USA] (Turin: Musolini), with an introduction by Bruno Cartosio. See F. Fasce, ‘American Labor History, 1973–1983: Italian Perspectives,’ Reviews in American History, 14:4 (1986), pp. 602, 610–611. See also C. Taylor, ‘James and those Italians,’ http://clrjames.blogspot.com/2008/09/james-and-those-italians.html (accessed25 April 2011); P. Buhle, ‘From a Biographer’s Notebook: The Field of C.L.R. James Scholarship,’ in S.R. Cudjoe and W.E. Cain (eds), C.L.R. James; His Intellectual Legacies (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1995), p. 449.

[652] Cleaver, Reading Capital Politically, p. 184. A. Lichtenstein, ‘George Rawick’s “From Sundown to Sunup” and the Dialectic of Marxian Slave Studies, Reviews in American History, 24:4 (1996), pp. 712–725. See also the excellent comparative discussion by Nicola Pizzolato, ‘Transnational radicals: labor dissent and political activism in Detroit and Turin (1950–1970),’ International Review of Social History 56 (2011), pp. 1–30.

[653] J. Fuller, ‘The New Workerism; The Politics of the Italian Autonomists [1980],’ International Socialism, 92 (2001), pp. 63–76. For some brief discussion of the possible influence of James on Hardt and Negri, see P. Hudis, ‘Workers as Reason: The Development of a New Relation of Worker and Intellectual in American Marxist Humanism,’ Historical Materialism, 11:4 (2003), p. 290.

[654] C. El-Ojeili, ‘Book Review: “Many Flowers, Little Fruit”? the Dilemmas of Workerism,’ Thesis Eleven, 79 (2004), pp. 114–115. After they left the official Trotskyist movement, the Johnson-Forest Tendency in their newspaper Correspondence noted that ‘From the stories we get everyday from the shops, we can see a new form of struggle emerging. It never seems to be carried to its complete end, yet its existence is continuous. The real essence of this struggle and its ultimate goal is: a better life, a new society, the emergence of the individual as a human being…. This is the struggle to establish here and now a new culture, a workers’ culture…. It is this that we must be extremely sensitive to. We must watch with an eagle eye every change or indication of the things that these changes reflect.’

[655] For my discussion of James’s failed attempt to build a ‘Marxist Group’ in Britain during the tumult of 1956 after he was forced to leave McCarthyist North America in 1953, see C. Høgsbjerg, ‘Beyond the Boundary of Leninism? C.L.R. James and 1956,’ Revolutionary History, 9:3 (2006), pp. 144–159. This article explores the republication of the Johnson-Forest Tendency’s 1950 work State Capitalism and World Revolution in the aftermath of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, with a new preface by James, through an anarchist publisher in London, Philip Sansom. The republication of State Capitalism and World Revolution after the Hungarian Revolution was a collaboration by James’s ‘Marxist Group’ with Castoriadis and Theo Massen from Socialisme ou Barbarie in France and Cajo Brendel, a Dutch ‘Council Communist,’ then researching autonomous class struggles in Britain for a book.

[656] T. Topham (ed.), Report of the 5^th National Conference on Workers’ Control and Industrial Democracy held at Transport House, Coventry on June 10^th and 11^th, 1967 (Hull: Center for Socialist Education, 1967), p. 55.

[657] Berman, ‘Facing Reality,’ p. 209. James at times in this work certainly seems to have an almost mystical fear of the state in itself, as opposed to a rational analysis of how the state is tied up with modern capitalist society. Raya Dunayevskaya criticized the ‘stateism’ of Facing Reality. See Worcester, C.L.R. James, p. 141.

[658] James, Notes on Dialectics, p. 197.

[659] E. San Juan Jr., Beyond Postcolonial Theory (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1998), p. 249.

[660] James, Notes on Dialectics, p. 197.

[661] E.P. Thompson, William Morris: Romantic to Revolutionary (London: Merlin Press, 1976), pp. 801–802.

[662] For more on differences between syndicalist (or mass) and insurrectionary anarchism, see, M. Schmidt and L. van der Walt, Black Flame: The Revolutionary Class Politics of Anarchism and Syndicalism (Oakland: AK Press, 2009).

[663] See, for example, the Why? Group’s translation of a pamphlet prepared by L’Adunata, no author, ‘War or Revolution: An Anarchist Statement’ (New York: Why? Publications Committee, 1944).

[664] B. de Ligt, The Conquest of Violence: An Essay on War and Revolution (London: Pluto Press, [1937]), pp. 58, 64, 162.

[665] D. T. Wieck, Woman from Spillertown: A Memoir of Agnes Burns Wieck (Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1992), p. 203.

[666] J. Tracy, Direct Action: Radical Pacifism from the Union Eight to the Chicago Seven (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), p. 16.

[667] J. K. Kosek, Acts of Conscience: Christian Nonviolence and Modern American Democracy (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009).

[668] Tracy, Direct Action; S. Bennett, Radical Pacifism: The War Resisters League and Gandhian Nonviolence in America, 1915–1963 (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2003).

[669] Swarthmore College Peace Collection, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, David Thoreau Wieck Papers, 1942–1969, memo by D. T. Wieck, ‘Peace-related activities, post World War II,’ no date.

[670] D. Dellinger, From Yale to Jail: The Life Story of a Moral Dissenter (New York: Pantheon, 1993); A. Hunt, David Dellinger: The Life and Times of a Nonviolent Revolutionary (New York: New York University Press, 2006).

[671] Dachine Rainer Papers, Uncat MSS 139, Box 8, ‘D-E,’ letter, D. Dellinger to H. Cantine, 4 February 1945.

[672] A. Hunt, David Dellinger, p. 86.

[673] Dwight MacDonald, no title, Politics, 2:8 (August 1945).

[674] M. Wreszin, A Rebel in Defense of Tradition: The Life and Politics of Dwight MacDonald (New York: Basic Books, 1994). 184 ‘White Skin, Black Masks’

[675] R. Arsenault, Freedom Riders: 1961 and the Struggle for Racial Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006); D. Catsam, Freedom’s Main Line: The Journey of Reconciliation and the Freedom Rides (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2009).

[676] Tracy, Direct Action, pp. 47–75; Bennett, Radical Pacifism, pp. 145–55.

[677] Bennett, Radical Pacifism, pp. 148–149.

[678] J. D’Emilio, Lost Prophet: The Life and Times of Bayard Rustin (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2003), pp. 191–210.

[679] J. Farrell, The Spirit of the Sixties: The Making of Postwar Radicalism (New York: Routledge, 1997), pp. 88–92.

[680] Editors, ‘Tract for the Times,’ Liberation, 1:1 (1956), pp. 2–6.

[681] Editors, ‘Mississippi Muddle,’ Liberation, 7:9 (1962), pp. 9–12. Reprinted with credit given to David Dellinger and Bayard Rustin in Paul Goodman (ed.), Seeds of Liberation (New York: George Braziller, 1964), pp. 306–316.

[682] D. Dellinger, ‘Are Pacifists Willing to be Negroes?’ Liberation, 4:6 (1959), 3.

[683] C. Carson, In Struggle: SNCC and the Black Awakening of the 1960s (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981), p. 11; Farrell, Spirit of the Sixties, p. 97.

[684] E.W., ‘The “Civil Rights” Struggle,’ Views and Comments, 38 (May 1960).

[685] B. Ransby, Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005), pp. 188–190.

[686] Carson, In Struggle, p. 30.

[687] F. Polletta, Freedom Is an Endless Meeting: Democracy in American Social Movements (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), p. 82.

[688] Ibid, pp. 120–175; W. Brienes, Community and Organization in the New Left: The Great Refusal, 1962–1968 (New Brunswick, NJ Rutgers University Press, 1989).

[689] A. Cornell, Oppose and Propose! Lessons from Movement for a New Society (Oakland: AK Press and Institute for Anarchist Studies, 2011); B. Epstein, Political Protest and Cultural Revolution: Nonviolent Direct Action in the 1970s and 1980s (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991).

[690] Starhawk, Webs of Power: Notes from the Global Uprising (Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, 2002); D. Solnit and R. Solnit (eds), The Battle of the Story of ‘the Battle of Seattle’ (Oakland: AK Press, 2009).

[691] F. Dupuis-Déri, ‘The Black Blocks Ten Years after Seattle: Anarchism, Direct Action, and Deliberative Practices,’ Journal for the Study of Radicalism, 4:2 (2010), pp. 45–82; G. Katsiaficas, The Subversion of Politics: European Autonomous Social Movements and the Decolonization of Everyday Life (Oakland: AK Press, 2006); S. Lotringer and C. Marazzi, Autonomia: Post-Political Politics (Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2007).

[692] On the transnational circulation of counter-cultures, see J. MacPhee and D. Greenwald, Signs of Change: Social Movement Cultures, 1960s to Now (Oakland: AK Press, 2010); G. McKay, Senseless Acts of Beauty: Cultures of Resistance since the Sixties (London and New York: Verso, 1996); R. Lumley, States of Emergency: Cultures of Revolt in Italy from 1968 to 1978 (London and New York: Verso, 1990).

[693] T. Boraman, Rabble Rousers and Merry Pranksters: A History of Anarchism in Aotearoa/New Zealand from the Mid 1950s to the Early 1980s (Christchurch: Kapito Books and Irrecuperable Press, 2007).

[694] L. Hamalian, A Life of Kenneth Rexroth (New York: Norton, 1991), pp. 149–156; P. Frank, ‘San Francisco 1952: Painters, Poets, Anarchism,’ Drunken Boat, 2 (1994), pp. 136–153. Andrew Cornell 185

[695] J. Brown, ‘The Zen of Anarchy: Japanese Exceptionalism and the Anarchist Roots of the San Francisco Poetry Renaissance,’ Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, 19:2 (2009), 207–242; K. Knabb, ‘The Relevance of Rexroth,’ in K. Knabb (ed.), Public Secrets: Collected Skirmishes of Ken Knabb: 1970–1997 (Berkeley: Bureau of Public Secrets, 1997), pp. 310–356.

[696] F. Rosemont, ‘To Be Revolutionary in Everything: The Rebel Worker Story, 1964–1968’ in F. Rosemont and C. Radcliffe (eds.) Dancin’ in the Streets! Anarchists, IWWs, Surrealists, Situationists & Provos in the 1960s as Recorded in the Pages of The Rebel Worker and Heatwave (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2005), pp. 5–6. Also see, P. Rosemont, Dreams and Everyday Life: André Breton, Surrealism, Rebel Worker, SDS & the Seven Cities of Cibola (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2008).

[697] S. Saul, Freedom Is, Freedom Ain’t: Jazz and the Making of the Sixties (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003), p. 33. On the concept of ‘hipness’ and the relation between bebop jazz and the Beats, see J. Leland, Hip: The History (New York: Harper Collins, 2004).

[698] Rosemont, ‘To be Revolutionary,’ p. 45.

[699] John Sinclair, manager of the MC5 and a founder of the White Panther Party, tellingly named his book about the Detroit milieu Guitar Army. J. Sinclair, Guitar Army: Rock and Revolution with the MC5 and the White Panther Party (Los Angeles: Process, 2007 [1972]). See also G. McKay, Senseless Acts of Beauty; G. McKay, DiY Culture: Party and Protest in Nineties Britain (London and New York: Verso, 1998).

[700] F. Rosengarten, Urbane Revolutionary: C.L.R. James and the Struggle for a New Society (Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 2008); G.L. Boggs, Living for Change: An Autobiography (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998).

[701] A. Hirsch, The French Left: A History and Overview (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1982), pp. 108–135; H. Cleaver, Reading Capital Politically (Leeds and San Francisco: Anti/Theses and AK Press, 2000), pp. 59–64.

[702] C.L.R. James, G. Lee and C. Castoriadis, Facing Reality: The New Society, Where to Look for It and How to Bring it Closer (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2006 [1958]).

[703] D. Goodway (ed.), For Workers’ Power: The Selected Writings of Maurice Brinton (Oakland: AK Press, 2004).

[704] M. Glaberman, Punching Out and Other Writings, ed. S. Lynd (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2002); George Rawick, Listening to Revolt: Selected Writings, ed. D. Roediger and M. Smith (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2010).

[705] F. Rosemont, ‘Mods, Rockers and the Revolution,’ in F. Rosemont and C. Radcliffe (eds.) Dancing in the Streets, pp. 127–131.

[706] Rosemont, ‘To be Revolutionary,’ p. 45.

[707] Ben Morea, Interview with author, New York, NY, 29 March 2009.

[708] J. Malina, The Diaries of Judith Malina, 1947–1957 (New York: Grove Press, 1984).

[709] Polletta, Freedom, 88–119; Carson, In Struggle, pp. 133–211; P. Joseph, Waiting ‘til the Midnight Hour: A Narrative History of Black Power in America (New York: Henry Holt, 2006).

[710] J. Foreman, The Making of Black Revolutionaries (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997 [1972]); S. Carmichael with M. Thelwell, Ready for Revolution: The Life and Struggles of Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Ture) (New York: Scribner, 2003); J. Al-Amin (H. Rap Brown), Die, Nigger, Die! A Political Autobiography (New York: Dial Press, 1969]).

[711] See R. Young, Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001); L. Pulido, Black, Brown, Yellow, and Left: Radical Activism in Los Angeles (Berkeley: 186 ‘White Skin, Black Masks’ University of California Press, 2006); M. Elbaum, Revolution in the Air: Sixties Radicals turn to Lenin, Mao, and Che (New York: Verso, 2002).

[712] B. Morea, interview.

[713] R. Hahne, Black Mask and Up Against the Wall Motherfucker: The Incomplete Works of Ron Hahne, Ben Morea and the Black Mask Group (Oakland: PM Press, 2011), pp. 7–12. On the Lowndes County Freedom Organization, see H. Jeffries, Bloody Lowndes: Civil Rights and Black Power in Alabama’s Black Belt (New York: New York University Press, 2010).

[714] Morea, interview.

[715] O. Neumann, Up Against the Wall Motherf**ker: A Memoir of the ’60s, with Notes for Next Time (New York: Seven Stories, 2008), pp. 53–67. LeRoi Jones later changed his name to Amiri Baraka. On Baraka and the Newark uprising, see K. Woodard, A Nation Within a Nation: Amiri Baraka (Leroi Jones) and Black Power Politics (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999).

[716] L. Jones/A. Baraka, ‘Black People!’ in W. J. Harris (ed.) The Leroi Jones/Amiri Baraka Reader (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 1991), p. 224.

[717] Morea, interview.

[718] Neumann, Up Against the Wall, p. 66.

[719] The Diggers, Fifth Estate and the pro-situationist groups are among the most important of these. On the Diggers, see J. Stephens, Anti-Disciplinary Protest: Sixties Radicalism and Postmodernism (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998); T. Hodgdon, Manhood in the Age of Aquarius: Masculinity in Two Counter-Cultural Communities, 1965–1983 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008). On Fifth Estate, see P. Werbe, ‘The History of the Fifth Estate,’ Fifth Estate, 368–369 (2005), 8–19; S. Millett, ‘Technology Is Capital: Fifth Estate’s Critique of the Megamachine’ in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (eds.) Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004). On the pro-situationist groups, see K. Knabb, Public Secrets: Collected Skirmishes of Ken Knabb, 1970–1997 (Berkeley: Bureau of Public Secrets, 1997).

[720] S. Plant, The Most Radical Gesture: The Situationist International in a Postmodern Age (London: Routledge, 1992); K. Ross, May ’68 and Its Afterlives (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2002).

[721] D. Wise and S. Wise, ‘The End of Music’ in S. Home (ed.) What Is Situationism? A Reader (Edinburgh: AK Press, 1996), pp. 63–102.

[722] R. Lumley, States of Emergency; G. Katsiaficas, The Subversion of Politics; S. Wright, Storming Heaven: Class Composition and Struggle in Italian Autonomist Marxism (London: Pluto Press, 2002).

[723] The Invisible Committee, The Coming Insurrection (Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2009).

[724] Daniel Guérin, Front populaire, Révolution manquée. Témoignage militant (Arles: Editions Actes Sud,1997), p. 29. All translations are mine unless otherwise indicated. I would like to thank Anne Guérin and Editions Agone (who will be publishing a new edition of Front populaire, Révolution manquée in 2013) for permission to use this quotation as an epigraph.

[725] Letter to Marceau Pivert, 18 November 1947, BDIC, Fonds Guérin, F◦ Δ Rés 688/10/2. La Lutte de classes sous la Première République, 1793–1797 (Paris: Gallimard, 1946; 2^nd edition 1968).

[726] Daniel Guérin, A la recherche d’un communisme libertaire (Paris: Spartacus, 1984), pp. 10–11.

[727] On Malon, see K. Steven Vincent, Between Marxism and Anarchism: Benoît Malon and French Reformist Socialism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992).

[728] Daniel Guérin, Autobiographie de jeunesse, d’une dissidence sexuelle au socialisme (Paris: Belfond, 1972), pp. 126–127. Charles Maurras was the leader of the right-wing movement, Action Française.

[729] See my “Workers of the World, Embrace!’ Daniel Guérin, the Labor Movement and Homosexuality’ in Left History, vol.9, no.2 (Spring/Summer 2004), pp. 11–43; and Peter Sedgwick, ‘Out of Hiding: The Comradeships of Daniel Guérin,’ Salmagundi 58:9 (June 1982), pp. 197–220.

[730] Guérin, À la recherche, p. 9; Front populaire, p. 23.

[731] Guérin, Front populaire, p. 147.

[732] See Thierry Hohl, ‘Daniel Guérin, ‘pivertiste.’ Un parcours dans la Gauche révolutionnaire de la SFIO (1935–1938)’ in Dissidences 2 (2007), pp. 133–149. ‘Luxembourgismé was an identifiable current on the French Left opposed to both Bolshevism and social-democracy from around 1928–1931 — see Alain Guillerm’s preface to Rosa Luxembourg, Marxisme et Dictature: La démocratie selon Lénine et Luxembourg (Paris: Spartacus, 1974).

[733] Guérin’s Front populaire is a classic ‘revolutionist’ interpretation of the Popular Front experience.

[734] ‘Entryism,’ originally ‘the French turn,’ was a new tactic proposed by Trotsky in response to the growing Fascist threat, and first implemented in June 1934 in France in order to contribute to the development of a more radical current within the party. Daniel Bensaïd, Les trotskysmes (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2002), pp. 31–32; Alex Callinicos, Trotskyism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990), pp. 18–19.

[735] Guérin, Front populaire, p. 104. Guérin’s Fascisme et grand capital (Paris: Gallimard, 1936) was inspired by Trotsky.

[736] Guérin, La Peste brune a passé par là (Paris: Librairie du Travail, 1933), translated as The Brown Plague: Travels in Late Weimar and Early Nazi Germany (Durham & London: Duke University Press, 1994); Fascisme et grand capital (Paris: Gallimard, 1936), trans. Fascism and Big Business (New York: Monad Press, 1973). Fascism has been criticized by some for tending towards reductionism: see Claude Lefort, ‘L’analyze marxiste et le fascisme,’ Les Temps modernes 2 (November 1945), pp. 357–362. Others regard Guérin’s methodology as fundamentally correct: see Alain Bihr’s introduction to the 1999 edition of Fascisme et grand capital (Paris: Editions Syllepse and Phénix Editions), pp. 7–14.

[737] Guérin, ‘Quand le fascisme nous devançait’ in La Peste brune (Paris: Spartacus, 1996), pp. 21–22. This was originally commissioned for an issue of Les Temps Modernes on the state of the Left, but was rejected by Sartre for being too critical of the PCF. Letter from Guérin to C.L.R. James, 10 August 1955, BDIC, Fonds Guérin, F◦ Δ 721/60/5.

[738] Guérin, ‘Quand le fascisme,’ p. 25.

[739] Guérin, Front populaire, pp. 150; 156–157; 365.

[740] Ibid., p. 157.

[741] Ibid., p. 213.

[742] Ibid., p. 23.

[743] L. Trotsky, ‘La guerre impérialiste et la révolution prolétarienne mondiale’ in D. Guérin (ed.), Sur la deuxième guerre mondiale (Brussels: Editions la Taupe, 1970), pp. 187–245; Jean van Heijenoort, ‘Manifeste: La France sous Hitler et Pétain,’ in Rodolphe Prager (ed.), Les congrès de la quatrième internationale (manifestes, thèses, résolutions) (Paris: La Brèche, 1981) Vol.II, pp. 35–44.

[744] Interview with Pierre André Boutang in Guérin, television documentary by Jean-José Marchand (1985; broadcast on FR3, 4 & 11 September 1989). See my ‘ “Like a Wisp of Straw Amid the Raging Elements”: Daniel Guérin in the Second World War’ in Hanna Diamond and Simon Kitson (eds), Vichy, Resistance, Liberation: New Perspectives on Wartime France (Festschrift in Honor of H. R. Kedward) (Oxford & New York: Berg, 2005), pp. 143–154.

[745] Letter to Marceau Pivert, 2 January 1948, BDIC, Fonds Guérin, F◦ Δ 688/9/1.

[746] Guérin, Le Feu du Sang. Autobiographie politique et charnelle (Paris: Editions Grasset & Fasquelle, 1977), p. 149. Guérin’s researches led to the publication of the two-volume Où va le peuple américain? (Paris: Julliard, 1950–1951), published in sections as Décolonization du Noir américain (Paris: Minuit, 1963), Le Mouvement ouvrier aux Etats-Unis (Paris: Maspero, 1968), La concentration économique aux Etats-Unis (Paris: Anthropos, 1971) — with a preface by the Trotskyist economist Ernest Mandel — and De l’Oncle Tom aux Panthères: Le drame des Noirs américains (Paris: UGE, 1973). Translations: Negroes on the March: A Frenchman’s Report on the American Negro Struggle, trans. Duncan Ferguson (New York: George L. Weissman, 1956), and 100 Years of Labor in the USA, trans. Alan Adler (London: Ink Links, 1979). See Larry Portis, ‘Daniel Guérin et les Etats-Unis: l’optimisme et l’intelligence’ in Agone 29–30 (2003), pp. 277–289.

[747] Guérin, Lutte de classes. See Denis Berger, ‘La révolution plurielle (pour Daniel Guérin)’ in E. Balibar, J.-S. Beek, D. Bensaïd et al., Permanences de la Révolution. Pour un autre bicentenaire (Paris: La Brèche, 1989), pp. 195–208; David Berry, ‘Daniel Guérin à la Libération. De l’historien de la Révolution au militant révolutionnaire: un tournant idéologique,’ Agone 29–30 (2003), pp. 257–273; Michel Lequenne, ‘Daniel Guérin, l’homme de 93 et le problème de Robespierre,’ Critique communiste 130–131 (May 1993), pp. 31–34; Julia Guseva, ‘La Terreur pendant la Révolution et l’interprétation de D. Guérin,’ Dissidences 2 (2007), pp. 77–88; Jean-Numa Ducange, ‘Comment Daniel Guérin utilize-t-il l’œuvre de Karl Kautsky sur la Révolution française dans La Lutte de classes sous la première République, et pourquoi?,’ ibid., pp. 89–111. Norah Carlin, ‘Daniel Guérin and the working class in the French Revolution,’ International Socialism 47 (1990), pp. 197–223, discusses changes made by Guérin to La Lutte de classes for the 1968 edition.

[748] Guérin, La Révolution française et nous (Paris: Maspero, 1976), pp. 7–8.

[749] Guérin, La Lutte de classes (1968), vol.I, p. 31.

[750] Ibid., p. 58.

[751] E.J. Hobsbawm, Echoes of the Marseillaise: Two Centuries Look Back on the French Revolution (London: Verso, 1990), p. 53.

[752] Guérin, La Révolution française et nous, p. 7.

[753] See Olivier Bétourné and Aglaia I. Hartig, Penser l’histoire de la Révolution. Deux siècles de passion française (Paris: La Découverte, 1989), esp. pp. 110–114; Antonio de Francesco, ‘Daniel Guérin et Georges Lefebvre, une rencounter improbable,’ La Révolution française, http://lrf.revues.org/index162.html, date accessed 28 March 2011.

[754] Ian Birchall, ‘Sartre’s Encounter with Daniel Guérin,’ Sartre Studies International, 2:1 (1996), p. 46.

[755] Guérin, ‘Faisons le point,’ Le Libérateur politique et social pour la nouvelle gauche (12 February 1956). A populist, reactionary and xenophobic anti-taxation movement of small shopkeepers founded by Pierre Poujade in 1953, ‘Poujadisme’ had ‘more than a hint of fascism’ — Rod Kedward, La Vie en Bleu. France and the French since 1900 (London: Penguin, 2006), p. 376.

[756] C.L.R. James, ‘L’actualité de la Révolution française,’ Perspectives socialistes: Revue bimensuelle de l’Union de la Gauche Socialiste 4 (15 February 1958), pp. 20–21.

[757] Guérin, ‘La Révolution déjacobinisée,’ in Jeunesse du socialisme libertaire (Paris: Rivière, 1959), pp. 27–63.

[758] Guérin, ‘La Révolution déjacobinisée,’ p. 43.

[759] Ibid., pp. 43–44.

[760] Guérin, ‘Preface,’ in Jeunesse du socialisme libertaire, pp. 7–8.

[761] Guérin, ‘La Révolution déjacobinisée,’ pp. 30–31.

[762] Michel Crosier, Ma Belle Epoque. Mémoires. 1947–1969 (Paris: Fayard, 2002), pp. 79;86.

[763] Guérin, Le Feu du sang, p. 218; Kent Worcester, C.L.R. James. A Political Biography (Albany: SUNY, 1996), p. 201; James, letter to Guérin, 24 May 1956, BDIC, Fonds Guérin, F◦ Δ 721/57/2.

[764] Guérin, Le Feu du sang, p. 189. In his account, Guérin refers positively to the collection La Contre-révolution bureaucratique (Paris: UGE, 1973), which contained texts by Korsch, Pannekoek, Rühle and others taken from International Council Correspondence, Living Marxism and International Socialism. The councilists had previously republished in translation an article of Guérin’s from the French syndicalist journal Révolution prolétarienne: ‘Fascist Corporatism,’ in International Council Correspondence, 3:2 (February 1937), pp. 14–26. (I am grateful to Saku Pinta for bringing this to my attention.) See Douglas Kellner (ed.), Karl Korsch: Revolutionary Theory (Austin & London: University of Texas Press, 1977).

[765] Guérin/Korsch correspondence, April–June 1954, Karl Korsch Papers, IISG, Boxes 1–24.

[766] Guérin, Le Feu du sang, p. 156.

[767] Guérin Papers, IISG, Box 1, Folder 14.

[768] The list included James Guillaume’s history of the IWMA, Victor Serge’s Mémoires d’un révolutionnaire, Voline’s La Révolution inconnue, Makhno, and the many publications of the Spartacus group created by Erné Lefeuvre. Mohammed Harbi, Une Vie debout. Mémoires politiques, Tome I: 1945–1962 (Paris: La Découverte, 2001), pp. 109–112. Harbi incorrectly describes the Cercle Lénine as being connected to the PCF; see La Vérité, 1 January 1954. On the different analyzes of the nature of the USSR, see Marcel van der Linden, Western Marxism and the Soviet Union. A Survey of Critical Theories and Debates Since 1917 (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2007); on Castoriadis and Lefort, see pp. 116–118.

[769] Edgar Morin, ‘L’Anarchisme en 1968,’ Magazine littéraire 19 (1968), available at www.magazine-litteraire.com/archives/ar_anar.htm, accessed 6 October 2002.

[770] See Edgar Morin, ‘La réfome de pensée,’ in Arguments, 1956–1962 (Toulouse: Privat, 1983), vol.I, p. ix.

[771] For an explanation of why Yugoslavia’s break with the soviet bloc in 1948 was so important to the extreme Left in the West, see Le Trotskisme. Une histoire sans fard (Paris: Editions Syllepse, 2005) by Guérin’s friend and comrade Michel Lequenne.

[772] Anne Guérin, ‘Les ruptures de Daniel Guérin. Notice biographique,’ in Daniel Guérin, De l’Oncle Tom aux Panthères noires (Pantin: Les bons caractères, 2010), p. 9.

[773] See Georges Fontenis, Changer le monde: Histoire du mouvement communiste libertaire, 1945–1997 (Paris: Alternative libertaire, 2000); Philippe Dubacq, Anarchisme et marxisme au travers de la Fédération communiste libertaire (1945–1956), Noir et Rouge 23 (1991).

[774] Guérin, Le Feu du sang, p. 233.

[775] Guérin, À la recherche, p. 9.

[776] Ibid.

[777] See Guérin’s 1969 article, ‘Conseils ouvriers et syndicalisme révolutionnaire. L’exemple hongrois, 1956’ in A la recherche, pp. 111–115; republished as ‘Syndicalisme révolutionnaire et conseillisme’ in Pour le communisme libertaire, pp. 155–162.

[778] A la recherche, p. 10. L’Anarchisme, de la doctrine à la pratique (Paris: Gallimard, 1965); Ni Dieu ni Maître, anthologie de l’anarchisme (Lausanne: La Cité-Lausanne, 1965). Both have been republished several times since, and L’Anarchisme has been translated into more than 20 languages. They have been published in English as Anarchism: From Theory to Practice (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970), introduced by Noam Chomsky; No Gods No Masters: An Anthology of Anarchism (Edinburgh: AK Press, 1998).

[779] This is not uncontentious — indeed Ernest Mandel takes issue with Guérin over this question in his anthology Contrôle ouvrier, conseils ouvriers, autogestion (Paris: Maspero, 1970), p. 7.

[780] Letters to the author, 12 and 26 February 1986.

[781] Georges Fontenis, ‘Le long parcours de Daniel Guérin vers le communisme libertaire,’ special number of Alternative Libertaire on Guérin (2000), p. 37.

[782] Guérin, Le Feu du sang, p. 228.

[783] It is also noteworthy that Guérin would include a section on decolonization in his Anarchism and found material from Proudhon and Bakunin which supported the FCL’s position. See Sylvain Pattieu, Les camarades des frères: Trotskistes et libertaires dans la guerre d’Algérie (Paris: Syllepse, 2002); Sidi Mohammed Barkat (ed.), Des Français contre la terreur d’Etat (Algérie 1954–1962) (Paris: Editions Reflex, 2002); Sylvain Boulouque, Les anarchistes français face aux guerres coloniales (1945–1962) (Lyon: Atelier de création libertaire, 2003); David Porter, Eyes to the South. French Anarchists and Algeria (Oakland, Edinburgh, Baltimore: AK Press, 2011).

[784] Editors’ note in Guérin, Pour le communisme libertaire (Paris: Spartacus, 2003), p. 5. Rubel (1905–1996) had links with the councilist movement and published ‘Marx théoricien de l’anarchisme’ in his Marx, critique du Marxisme (Paris: Editions Payot, 1974; new edition 2000); since republished as Marx théoricien de l’anarchisme (Saint-Denis: Vent du ch’min, 1983; Geneva: Editions Entremonde, 2011). Rubel: ‘Under the name communism, Marx developed a theory of anarchism; and further, that in fact it was he who was the first to provide a rational basis for the anarchist utopia and to put forward a project for achieving it.’ ‘Marx, Theoretician of Anarchism,’ Marxists Internet Archive, www.marxists.org/archive/rubel/1973/marx-anarchism.htm, date accessed 29 March 2011.

[785] Preface of 1970 to Guérin (ed.), Ni Dieu ni Maître. Anthologie de l’anarchisme (Paris: La Découverte, 1999), vol. I, pp. 6–7.

[786] L’Anarchisme, p. 21.

[787] Daniel Guérin, Pour un marxisme libertaire (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1969), p. 7.

[788] Fontenis, ‘Le long parcours,’ p. 38.

[789] ‘Anarchisme et marxisme,’ p. 237, in L’Anarchisme (1981), pp. 229–252. Published in English as Anarchism & Marxism (Sanday, Orkney: Cienfuegos Press, 1981), and ‘Marxism and Anarchism,’ in David Goodway (ed.), For Anarchism. History, Theory and Practice (London: Routledge, 1989), pp. 109–126.

[790] L’Anarchisme, pp. 13–14.

[791] Anarchism, p. 153.

[792] Nicolas Walter, ‘Daniel Guérin’s anarchism,’ Anarchy 8:94, 381.

[793] Patrice Spadoni, ‘La synthèse entre l’anarchisme et le marxisme: «Un point de ralliement vers l’avenir»,’ Alternative Libertaire (2000), p. 43. Guérin, Proudhon oui et non (Paris: Gallimard, 1978).

[794] See his ‘1917–1921, de l’autogestion à la bureaucratie soviétique,’ in De la Révolution d’octobre à l’empire éclaté: 70 ans de réflexions sur la nature de l’URSS (Paris: Alternative libertaire/UTCL, n.d.); ‘Proudhon et l’autogestion ouvrière’ in L’Actualité de Proudhon (Bruxelles: Université libre de Bruxelles, 1967), pp. 67–87; ‘L’Espagne libertaire,’ editorial introduction to Autogestion et socialisme, special issue on ‘Les anarchistes et l’autogestion’ 18/19 (janvier-avril 1972), 81–82; ‘L’autogestion contemporaine,’ Noir et rouge 31/32 (octobre1965 — février 1966), pp. 16–24.

[795] See similarly critical remarks by Castoriadis: ‘Marx aujourd’hui. Entretien avec Cornelius Castoriadis’ Lutter! 5 (May 1983), pp. 15–18.

[796] L’Anarchisme, p. 16.

[797] ‘Proudhon père de l’autogestion’ (1965) in Proudhon oui et non, p. 165.

[798] ‘Proudhon père de l’autogestion,’ p. 191.

[799] Guérin, Ni Dieu ni Maître, vol.I, p. 12 and ‘Stirner, «Père de l’anarchisme»?,’ p. 83. Guérin began his anthology with the ‘precursor’ Stirner and added an appendix on him to the 1981 edition of L’Anarchisme. See also Guérin, Homosexualité et Révolution (Saint-Denis: Le Vent du ch’min, 1983), p. 12, and ‘Stirner, «Père de l’anarchisme»?,’ La Rue 26 (1er et 2ème trimestre 1979), pp. 76–89.

[800] See my “Workers of the World, Embrace!.”

[801] See Fontenis, Changer le monde, pp. 161–162 and 255–256.

[802] The UTCL’s manifesto, adopted at its Fourth Congress in 1986, was republished (with a dedication to Guérin) by the UTCL’s successor organization, Alternative Libertaire: Un projet de société communiste libertaire (Paris: Alternative libertaire, 2002).

[803] Fontenis, Changer le monde, p. 80, note 1. See also my ‘Change the world without taking power? The libertarian communist tradition in France today,’ Journal of Contemporary European Studies 16:1 (Spring 2008), pp. 111–130.

[804] Guérin, ‘Anarchisme et Marxisme’ in L’Anarchisme (1981), p. 250.

[805] Ibid., p. 248.

[806] Ibid., p. 237.

[807] On Abad de Santillan, see the section on ‘L’Espagne libertaire’ in Les anarchistes et l’autogestion.

[808] See Guérin, Ni Dieu ni Maître, vol.I, 268–291.

[809] Guérin, ‘Anarchisme et Marxisme’ in L’Anarchisme (1981), p. 252.

[810] Rosa Luxemburg, Le socialisme en France, 1898–1912 (Paris: Belfond, 1971), with an introduction by Guérin, pp. 7–48; Rosa Luxemburg et la spontanéïté révolutionnaire (Paris: Flammarion, 1971).

[811] Gilbert Badia et al., ‘Rosa Luxemburg et nous: Débat,’ Politique aujourd’hui: Recherches et pratiques socialistes dans le monde (1972), 77–106.

[812] Guérin, ‘Anarchisme et Marxisme,’ p. 233. As the coeditor (with Jean-Jacques Lebel) of a collection titled ‘Changer la Vie’ for the publisher Pierre Belfond, Guérin took the opportunity to republish Trotsky’s Our Political Tasks (1904), in which the young Trotsky was very critical of Lenin’s ‘Jacobinism’ and of what he called the ‘dictatorship over the proletariat’: Léon Trotsky, Nos tâches politiques (Paris: Belfond, 1970). Luxemburg’s ‘Organizational Questions of Russian Social Democracy’ is included in this as an appendix.

[813] Guérin, ‘Anarchisme et Marxisme,’ p. 252.

[814] Guérin, À la recherche, pp. 10–11.

[815] Guérin, ‘Pourquoi communiste libertaire?,’ in A la recherche, p. 17.

[816] Guérin, ‘Un communisme libertaire, pour quoi?,’ A la recherche, pp. 123–125.

[817] Walter, ‘Daniel Guérin’s anarchism,’ pp. 376–382.

[818] George Woodcock, ‘Chomsky’s Anarchism’ in Freedom, 16 November 1974, pp. 4–5.

[819] Miguel Chueca, ‘Anarchisme et Marxisme. La tentative de Daniel Guérin d’unir les deux philosophies et ‘l’anarchisme’ de Marx vu par Maximilien Rubel’ in Réfractions 7, available at http://www.plusloin.org/refractions/refractions7/chueca1.htm (accessed 29 August 2006).

[820] Ian Birchall, ‘Daniel Guérin’s Dialogue with Leninism’ in Revolutionary History vol.9, no.2, pp. 194–222 (194–195).

[821] See Irène Pereira, Un nouvel esprit contestataire. La grammaire pragmatiste du syndicalisme d’action directe libertaire (Unpublished PhD, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, 2009); Patrice Spadoni, ‘Daniel Guérin ou le projet d’une synthèse entre l’anarchisme et le marxisme’ in Contretemps 6 (February 2003), 118–126. Guérin’s daughter Anne has claimed recently that Guérin was the ‘Maître à penser’ of both Daniel Cohn-Bendit and the Trotskyist Alain Krivine — preface to Guérin, De l’Oncle Tom aux Panthères noires, p. 8. Christophe Bourseiller also comments that ‘the politics of the Mouvement communiste libertaire derived largely from the theoretical reflexion of Daniel Guérin.’ Histoire générale de ‘l’ultra-gauche’ (Paris: Editions Denoël, 2003), p. 484. In 1986 Guérin also contributed to the UTCL’s ‘Projet communiste libertaire,’ which was republished by Alternative Libertaire in 1993 and again in 2002. The ‘Appel pour une alternative libertaire’ of 1989 (which ultimately led to the creation of AL) was also co-written by Guérin: see Guérin, Pour le communisme libertaire (Paris: Spartacus, 2003), pp. 181–186.

[822] Guérin, A la recherche, p. 10.

[823] Guérin, ‘Un communisme libertaire, pour quoi?,’ in A la recherche, p. 123.

[824] To differentiate between the group and the publication, I use SouB for the group and Socialisme ou Barbarie for the journal.

[825] For an overview of such elaborations inside Council Communism, see Anton Pannekoek, Workers’ Councils (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2002).

[826] Liebich is one of the first to thematise this tension. See A. Liebich, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie: A Radical Critique of Bureaucracy,’ Our Generation 12:2 (1977), pp. 55–62; M. van der Linden, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie: A French Revolutionary Group (1949–65),’ Left History 5:1 (1997) at www.left-dis.nl/uk/lindsob.htm (accessed June 2010); and for the most detailed analysis, see P. Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie.’ Un engagement politique et intellectuel dans la France de l’après-guerre (Lausanne: Payot, 1997).

[827] See H. Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu (Castoriadis) et Anton Pannekoek 1953–1954 (Paris: Échanges et Mouvement, 2002). The text, with an introduction and comments, from Henri Simon is available at www.mondialisme.org/spip. php?rubrique86 (accessed July 2010).

[828] See, for example, Castoriadis, L’institution imaginaire de la société (Paris: Seuil, 1975) and Domaines de l’homme. Le carrefour du labyrinthe (Paris: Seuil, 1986).

[829] For a detailed description, see Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 31–40 or P. Mattick Jr., ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, in R.A. Gorman (ed.), Biographical Dictionary of Neo-Marxism (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985), pp. 387–389, for a brief overview.

[830] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 21–23.

[831] Translation from Castoriadis, Political and Social Writings, Vol. 1: 1946–1955, ed. and trans. David Ames Curtis (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), p. 97. See also in Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 23–30, and ‘An interview with Cornelius Castoriadis,’ Telos 23 (1975), pp. 131–155.

[832] Gottraux (see ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 377–383), who provides the most detailed account of SouB life, distinguishes three generations: the war generation, the intermediary, and the Algerian war generations.

[833] See J.-F. Sirinelli, Histoire culturelle de la France (Paris: Seuil, 2005).

[834] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 58ff.

[835] See Mattick, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 389.

[836] See P. Grémion, Intelligence de l’Anticommunisme. Le Congrès pour la liberté de la culture à Paris 1950–1975 (Paris: Fayard, 1995); and V.R. Berghahn, America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe: Shepard Stone Between Philanthropy, Academy and Diplomacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001).

[837] This is obviously a matter of debate, and there have been Marxist intellectuals considering themselves Leninists who have nonetheless developed antiauthoritarian ideas, in primis Gramsci and his revised dichotomy of civil v. political society to distinguish the sphere of spontaneous association v. oppression of the bourgeois state’s institutions. Moreover, Lih has recently argued that Lenin’s élitist and manipulating attitude towards the workers has been overstated in the course of the last century. See L. Lih, Lenin Rediscovered. What Is to Be Done? in Context (Amsterdam: Brill University Press, 2006). Yet, the tragic upheaval of Kronstadt is a reminder of the little space for debate that Trotsky himself would allow inside the party.

[838] There are of course counter-examples of constructive openings to other communist trends, as certain sections of the Fourth International have been in alliance with larger communist factions, as was the case of Bandiera Rossa in Italy until recently. Yet it is difficult to argue that the story of the Fourth International is not replete with internal divisions.

[839] H. Arendt, ‘The Ex-Communists,’ Commonweal 57:24 (20 March 1953), pp. 595–599.

[840] D. Kelly, James Burnham and the Struggle for the World: A Life (Washington, DC: ISI Books, 2008).

[841] See G. Scott Smith, ‘A Radical Democratic Political Offensive. Melvin J. Lasky, Der Monat and the CCF,’ Journal of Contemporary History 35:2 (2000), pp. 265–268; Scott Smith, The Politics of Apolitical Culture. The Congress for Cultural Freedom, the CIA and Postwar American Hegemony (London and New York: Routledge, 2002); F.S. Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters (New York: New Press, 2001), pp. 47–56.

[842] Our point is not to suggest that all ex-communists or ex-Trotskyists have been complacent and aware of the CIA activities in the name of anti-communism, but that there were some ties. For example, Aron was critical of these external manipulations by the CIA, as Grémion has documented in his Intelligence de l’Anticommunisme, pp. 429–474.

[843] See Scott Smith, The Politics of Apolitical Culture.

[844] On how a certain amount of these counterpart funds of the Marshall Plan could be used for secret operations of the US government and in particular by the CIA, see A. Carew, ‘American Labor Movement in Fizzland: The Free Trade Union Committee and the CIA,’ Labor History 39:1 (1998), pp. 25–42.

[845] See Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, note 38, p. 334: For a detailed trajectory of his function inside the OECD, see note 47, p. 337.

[846] The full list is given on http://www.agorainternational.org/englishworksb.html. In the famous 1968 book Castoriadis, next to E. Morin and C. Lefort, signs as Jean-Marc Coudray. See Edgar Morin, Claude Lefort and Jean-Marc Coudray, Mai 68: la brèche. Premières réflexions sur les événements (Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard, 1968). It was in 1968 that Castoriadis signed a text under his real name for the first time; however it was not a political text, but an article dealing with psychoanalysis. See Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie,’ p. 336.

[847] See Castoriadis, ‘An Interview.’ See Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, note 49, p. 337.

[848] See Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 253, my translation. Notes 219 and 226 also illustrate this vision of SouB thinking of itself as super partes. See note 219: ‘Michel, approved by Chaulieu, underlines the originality of SouB’s position. We do not represent a tendency polemicizing from within “worker” organizations, we are outside, against them.’ (trans. Dave Berry)

[849] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 23.

[850] See, for example, Castoriadis, Political and Social Writings, pp. 96–97.

[851] C., Lefort, ‘La contradiction de Trotsky et le problème révolutionnaire,’ Les Temps Modernes 4:39 (1948–1949), pp. 46–69.

[852] Van der Linden, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’.

[853] Ibid.

[854] See Castoriadis, ‘An interview,’ p. 134.

[855] For a clear description of how their approach gradually became anti-Marxist, see both Castoriadis, ‘An Interview’ (esp. pp. 144–150), and ‘An interview with Claude Lefort,’ Telos 30 (1976), pp. 173–192, esp. pp. 181–183. Lefort expressed strong disagreement with Castoriadis over the fact that the latter shared the views of Raya Dunayevskaya, a militant in the Johnson-Forest tendency in the USA, whose selection of texts were published in SouB in the first half of the 1950s. Lefort criticized these views as ‘vaguely Hegelian’ and noted that ‘the close rapport between Castoriadis and Rya Stone [Raya Dunayevskaya] made me aware for the first time of profound conceptual differences between us that underlay our political differences’ (177). Note that in his interview, Lefort confused Rya Stone (that is, Grace Lee Boggs) with Raya Dunayevskaya.

[856] See C. Lefort, ‘Alain Sergent et Claude Harmel. Recension du livre Histoire de I’Anarchie, vol. I,’ Les Temps Modernes 5:56 (1950), pp. 269–274.

[857] Liebich, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 58. Lefort describes the bulletin of ILO/ICO as ‘as unprogrammatic as possible’ (Lefort, ‘An Interview,’ 179). Simon developed views closer to libertarian communism and was therefore very open to the suggestions made by Pannekoek, as some of his later publications demonstrated, in particular his side commentary in Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu.

[858] Translated and reproduced by Marcel van der Linden, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, note 49. The report was originally published as ‘Splitsing in de Franse groep “Socialisme ou Barbarie”: Brieven uit Frankrijk,’ Spartacus 18 (October-December 1958), pp. 21–25.

[859] Ibid.

[860] For an English imprint, see Pannekoek, Workers’ Councils.

[861] See P. Mattick Jr., ‘Ruehle, Otto,’ in R.A. Gorman (ed.), Biographical Dictionary of Neo-Marxism (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press), p. 365.

[862] See Pannekoek, Workers’ Councils, p. 206. Pannekoek also had a non-deterministic reading of modern capitalism. So rather than seeing capitalism as containing the seeds of its own demise, he saw in capitalism an innate capacity of continuous adaptation allowing it to survive difficult times and transform itself into an ever stronger ideology.

[863] See Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 241–242; Van der Linden, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’; and Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu. Henri Simon, who was an actor of this period, also points the finger at Castoriadis’s slightly manipulating capacities. The most virulent accusation against Castoriadis can be found in Cahier du Communisme de Conseils, 8 (1971). Castoriadis gave his own version of the polemic in L’expérience du movement ouvrier (Paris: 10–18 ed. Bourgeois, 1974), pp. 261ff.

[864] This chronology is adapted in large parts from Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu.

[865] Ibid. (see doc. ‘Les voiles commencent à se lever’).

[866] Pannekoek’s original formulation in the third letter is as follows: ‘It was not my intention to see it published, or rather I had not thought when writing it that it was for publication; if I remember rightly, I did not put much care into writing it. If, however, you believe that certain passages could provide some clarification, then I think you should select passages such that my remarks do not take up too much space in the review. I have the impression that what is said in the book Les Conseils Ouvriers could provide a much broader and more general base.’ (trans. Dave Berry). Quoted in Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu (see doc. ‘Encore sur la question du parti’).

[867] In a note ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie à l’étranger’ published in Socialisme ou Barbarie 15–16 (October-December 1954), it states that ‘The discussion between Anton Pannekoek […] and Pierre Chaulieu is of great importance from the viewpoint of the elaboration of revolutionary theory. One cannot but agree with the firm and brilliant critique which the latter provides of Pannekoek, whose positions vis-à-vis the Comintern are, or rather were, historically justified, but which today are as outdated as the theses against which they were a healthy reaction’ (trans. Dave Berry).

[868] Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu (doc. ‘Premiers contacts’).

[869] Part 1 of the article is published in SouB 31 (1960–1961), pp. 51–81, and part 2 in SouB 32 (1961), pp. 84–111.

[870] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 135–136.

[871] Ibid., pp. 137–138.

[872] SouB 31 (1960–1961), p. 63.

[873] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 333, or n. 37, p. 334.

[874] Ibid., p. 91.

[875] Ibid., pp. 89–92.

[876] Ibid., p. 34

[877] Ibid., p. 67.

[878] Mattick, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 388.

[879] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, p. 348.

[880] See Lefort, ‘An Interview,’ p. 185.

[881] For example, Castoriadis writes: ‘Things are even clearer when one considers the revolution as self-organized activity aiming at the institution of a new order, rather than an explosion and destruction of the old order. (The distinction is, of course, a separating abstraction.)’ The parenthesis seems a personal aside directed against the undeterministic Lefort to tell him that the does not really believe in a before and an after of the revolutionary moment. See Castoriadis, ‘The Hungarian Source,’ Telos 26 (1976), pp. 4–22 (13).

[882] The text was written and published first in English and a French version was published a year later: ‘La Source Hongroise’ Libre 1 (1977), pp. 51–85.

[883] Mandel is openly quoted in many places (for example, ‘The Hungarian Source,’ 6), but some indirect criticism against Mandel’s thinking can also be found throughout the text (for example, 11).

[884] In particular see Castoriadis, L’institution imaginaire, and Domaines de l’homme.

[885] See, for example, Castoriadis, Domaines de l’homme, p. 518.

[886] Castoriadis, C., World in Fragments. Writings on Politics, Society, Psychoanalysis, and the Imagination, ed. and trans. David Ames Curtis (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997), p. 17.

[887] Castoriadis, Domaines de l’homme, p. 513.

[888] See for example the sarcastic remarks of Henri Simon about Castoriadis’s new idea of the social imaginary in Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu. See also A. Callinicos, Trotskyism (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1990), Section 4.3 ‘Castoriadis and the triumph of the will.’

[889] For a succinct presentation of Castoriadis’s commitment to a revolutionary praxis and the ‘conscious transformation of society by the autonomous activity of men’ (that is, a non-alienated society), see Castoriadis, L’institution imaginaire, pp. 90–92. Translation from The Imaginary Institution of Society (London: Polity Press, 1987, trans. K. Blamey), p. 62.

[890] See Castoriadis, ‘The Hungarian Source,’ p. 11. His emphases.

[891] Pannekoek’s 15 June 1954 letter to Chaulieu, reproduced in Simon, Correspondance de Pierre Chaulieu (doc. ‘Deuxième lettre de Pannekoek’). Our emphases.

[892] See Castoriadis, ‘La Source Hongroise,’ p. 73.

[893] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 360–361, where Gottraux also notes how the Gulag effect (that is, publication of Soljenitsin’s main piece) and anti-totalitarian writings in the 1970s contributed in making Castoriadis’s theories appealing.

[894] Gottraux, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’, pp. 40; 104.

[895] Ibid., pp. 255–314.

[896] See note 70. The journal Constellations held a conference shortly after the death of Lefort in 2010. Original texts presented then can be found at http://constellationsjournal.blogspot.com/search/label/Claude%20Lefort%20 Memorial%20-%20TEXTS. A. Kalyvas’ comparison of Castoriadis and Lefort is for our discussion illuminating but has not been included in the final publication (Constellations 2012, Volume 19, Issue 1).

[897] For a discussion of Lefort’s historical revisionism, see J. Barthas, ‘Machiavelli in political thought from the age of revolutions to the present,’ in J. Najemy (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Machiavelli (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 269–270.

[898] For a critique of this view and another interpretation, see Jean-Christophe Angaut ‘La fin des avant-gardes: les situationnistes et Mai 68,’ Actuel Marx, 41 (2009), pp. 149–161.

[899] In the 1990s, several high quality books about the Situationist International were published and have corrected the picture of a merely artistic avant-garde. The first ones were Pascal Dumontier Les Situationnistes et Mai 68 — Théorie et pratique de la révolution (Paris: Éditions Gérard Lebovici, 1990), Anselm Jappe Guy Debord (Paris: Denoël, 2001 — originally published in Italian, Pescara: Edisioni Tracce, 1992), Gianfranco Marinelli L’amère victoire du situationnisme (Arles: Gulliver, 1998) and Shigenobu Gonzalvez, Guy Debord ou la beauté du négatif (Paris: Nautilus, 2002). Among the numerous books published since then, Laurent Chollet L’insurrection situationniste (Paris: Dagorno, 2000), Fabien Danesi Le Mythe brisé de l’Internationale Situationniste: l’aventure d’une avant-garde au coeur de la culture de masse (1945–2008) (Dijon: Les Presses du Réel, 2008) and Patrick Marcolini, Le mouvement situationniste: une histoire intellectuelle (Montreuil: L’Échappée, 2012) must especially be mentioned.

[900] That does not mean, however, that the situationists should be considered as an artistic avant-garde that became purely political. It would be more correct to say that they refused the separation between art and politics. For a discussion of this point, see Chollet, L’insurrection situationniste, p. 84 and Danesi, Le Mythe brisé, pp. 21–29, 229–233, and for the implications of this double label over the concept of avant-garde used by the situationists, see below.

[901] Raoul Vaneigem Traité de savoir-viver à l’usage des jeunes générations (Paris: Gallimard, 1992). The book (translated into English as The Revolution of Everyday Life) was actually written between 1963 and 1965 but was published only in 1967, the same year as Debord’s book. English translations of both texts can be found on the Internet: www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm; http://library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/pub_contents/5.

[902] See Erné Riesel ‘Préliminaires sur les conseils et l’organization conseilliste,’ Internationale Situationniste, 12 (1969), in Internationale Situationniste (Paris: Fayard, 1997), pp. 632–641.

[903] In May 1968, several situationists, including Debord, had control of the occupation committee at the Sorbonne and in its name sent telegrams to such correspondents as the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam or the politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. To the latter, they wrote this funny and insulting telegram: ‘TREMBLE BUREAUCRATS STOP THE INTERNATIONAL POWER OF THE WORKERS COUNCILS WILL SOON SWEEP YOU AWAY STOP HUMANITY WILL BE HAPPY ONLY WHEN THE LAST BUREAUCRAT HAS BEEN HANGED WITH THE GUTS OF THE LAST CAPITALIST STOP LONG LIVE THE STRUGGLE OF THE KRONSTADT SAILORS AND OF THE MAKHNOVTCHINA AGAINST TROTSKY AND LENIN STOP LONG LIVE THE COUNCILIST INSURRECTION OF BUDAPEST IN 1956 STOP DOWN WITH THE STATE STOP LONG LIVE REVOLUTIONARY MARXISM STOP,’ in Erné Viénet, Enragés et Situationnistes dans le mouvement des occupations (Paris: Gallimard, 1968), p. 275. A similar telegram was sent to the Chinese Communist Party. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are my own.

[904] See Guy Debord ‘Le commencement d’une époque,’ Internationale Situationniste, 12 (1969), in Guy Debord OEuvres (Paris: Gallimard, 2004), pp. 917–963.

[905] In this paper, socialism is not intended as a particular trend beside syndicalism or communism but as a generic notion including both syndicalism and communism as particular socialist trends.

[906] Debord OEuvres, pp. 1104–1125. Debord’s critique of the ‘pro-situs’ is the response to what he perceived as the transformation of the SI, after 1968, into a kind of collective star, a new object of contemplation, and therefore a new source of alienation.

[907] Regarding Nanterre University in the pre-’68 period, see Jean-Pierre Duteuil Nanterre 1965–66–67–68: Vers le Mouvement du 22 Mars (Mauléon: Acratie, 1988).

[908] The members of the Noir et rouge group (including future MEP Daniel Cohn-Bendit) had been expelled from the French Anarchist Federation in 1967 after accusations of Marxist conspiracy. The connections between the SI and the (mainly French) anarchist movement are thoroughly exposed in Miguel Amoros, Les situationnistes et l’anarchie (Villasavary: Éditions de la Roue, 2012).

[909] ICO (Informations et correspondances ouvrières) was founded in 1958 by former members of ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie’ Claude Lefort and Henri Simon.

[910] According to the situationists, Lefebvre had plagiarized one of their texts on the Paris Commune. See the 1963 tract ‘Aux poubelles de l’histoire’ in Debord OEuvres, pp. 624–634. But according to Lefebvre, the text was jointly written by him and several situationists who visited him at his home in the Pyrenees. See Henri Lefebvre ‘On the Situationist International,’ Interview by Kristin Ross (1983), October, 79 (1997), pp. 77–78.

[911] Viénet, Enragés et situationnistes, p. 18. Actually, that book was written by Erné Viénet, Guy Debord, Mustapha Kayati, Raoul Vaneigem and Erné Riesel.

[912] Debord OEuvres, p. 803. And again in 1980, the text ‘Aux libertaires’ evokes ‘the 1936 proletarian revolution, the greatest which ever began in history until today, and so the one which also best prefigures the future. The only organized force which had the will and the ability to prepare and to make the revolution, and to defend it — although with less lucidity and consistency — was the anarchist movement […].’ Ibid., p. 1515. Similarly, when they speak about black flags in the giant demonstration of May 13, 1968, the situationists refuse to see it as a sign of significant anarchist presence inside the demonstration: ‘More than a hundred black flags were mixed with the many red flags, realizing for the first time this junction of the two flags which was about to become the sign of the most radical trend inside the occupation movement, not as an affirmation of an autonomous anarchist presence, but as a sign of workers’ democracy.’ Viénet Enragés et Situationnistes, p. 73.

[913] Vaneigem Traité, p. 100.

[914] Ibid., p. 216. I rectify the current English translation which speaks about ‘authoritarian positions’ where the French original text says ‘les attitudes autoritaires de Marx.’

[915] One of the most famous is the editor of Marx’s works in the prestigious collection ‘Bibliothèque de la Pléiade,’ Maximilien Rubel. See Maximilien Rubel Marx critique du marxisme (Paris: Payot, 2000) in which one of the chapters is titled ‘Marx, théoricien de l’anarchisme’ (‘Marx as anarchist theoretician’).

[916] Debord OEuvres, p. 797.

[917] Ibid., p. 798.

[918] Ibid., Italics in the original.

[919] Karl Marx, Manifeste du parti communiste (Paris: Éditions Sociales, 1966), p. 67 (English translation from the Marxists Internet Archive website www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm).

[920] Karl Marx, La Guerre civile en France (Paris: Éditions Sociales, 1968), p. 59 (English translation from the MIA website www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/civil-war-france/ch05.htm).

[921] Debord OEuvres, p. 800. Italics in the original.

[922] At the end of his life, in a letter to Jean-Pierre Baudet, published in Jean-François Martos, Correspondance avec Guy Debord (Paris: Le Fin Mot de l’Histoire, 1998), Debord recommended the reading of Robert Michels’ famous critique of political parties. This letter of 18 December 1987 is part of the letters that are unavailable because of the dispute between Debord’s widow and Jean-François Martos. The latter had published his own correspondence with Debord in 1998, but the book was withdrawn from sale after Alice Debord was recognized as the sole claimant of Debord’s work. In retaliation, Jean-Pierre Baudet opposed the publication of Debord’s letters that were sent to him in the ‘official’ edition of his correspondence. That added another shortcoming to an edition which also omits all the letters sent to Debord.

[923] Actually, Debord, Kotanyi and Vaneigem did praise the Paris Commune in a 1962 text (‘Sur la Commune,’ republished in Internationale Situationniste), but as an historical experiment, and not as a political form.

[924] Debord Internationale Situationniste, p. 641.

[925] Actually, the book was signed by Debord and Gianfranco Sanguinetti, member of the Italian section of the Situationist International, in order to protest against the deportation of the latter from France by decision of the Minister of the Interior. An English translation of the Theses can be found on the Internet: www.notbored.org/theses-on-the-SI.html.

[926] Debord Œuvres, pp. 1127–1128. Italics in the original.

[927] Ibid., p. 801. Italics in the original.

[928] See Guy Bodson La F.A. et les Situationnistes — 1966–1967, ou mémoire pour discussion dans les familles après boire (Paris: 1968) and Miguel Amoros, Les situationnistes et l’anarchie.

[929] On the Italian Anarchist Federation, see Debord, Œuvres, pp. 1147–1456; about the Spanish CNT, see ibid., pp. 1514–1515.

[930] Ibid., p. 794.

[931] In the first affirmation of Left Hegelianism, Phenomenology of the Spirit is mentioned as the only Hegelian book that can be used for a Left interpretation of Hegelian thought. See David Friedrich Strauss, Streitschriften zur Verteidigung meiner Schirft über das Leben Jesu und zur Charakteristik der gegenwärtigen Theologie (Tübingen: 1838), p. 65. See also for English translation David Friedrich Strauss, In Defense of My Life of Jesus Against the Hegelians, Archon Books, 1983.

[932] Debord Œuvres, p. 856. See also Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Phénoménologie de l’Esprit, trans. Bernard Bourgeois (Paris: Vrin, 2006), p. 201, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Phenomenology of the Spirit, trans. A.V. Miller (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), p. 111.

[933] The title of this book is a détournement from the title of the pamphlet written by Marx and Engels in the name of the General Council of the International after the Congress of The Hague in 1872 and the exclusion of Bakunin’s friends: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels Les Prétendues Scissions dans l’Internationale (Genève: Imprimerie Coopérative, 1872). English translation on the MIA website: www.Marxists.org/archive/Marx/works/1872/03/fictitious-splits.htm.

[934] Debord Œuvres, p. 1087. See also Hegel, Phénoménologie, p. 490 and Hegel, Phenomenology, p. 350.

[935] It is interesting to note that Bakunin, possibly remembering Hegel, used the same conception in 1870, during the war between France and Germany, when he thought that a civil war in France could propagate in Germany. See Michel Bakunin Œuvres complètes, vol. VII, ‘La guerre franco-allemande et la révolution sociale en France (1870–1871)’ (Paris: Champ Libre, 1979), pp. 59–60, and Jean-Christophe Angaut ‘Marx, Bakunin et la guerre franco-allemande,’ Sens public. Cosmopolitique (2005), www.sens-public.org/article.php3?id_article=131.

[936] Other ways of comparison are possible, especially from a sociological point of view. See the description of Young Hegelians as a literary bohemia and as an avant-garde in Wolfgang Essbach Die Junghegelianer: Soziologie einer Intellektuellengruppe (München: W. Fink, 1988).

[937] See August von Cieszkowski Prolégomènes à l’historiosophie (Paris: Champ Libre, 1973). Partially translated in Lawrence S. Stepelevitch (ed.), The Young Hegelians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 57–90.

[938] ‘Présentation inédite des Prolégomènes à l’historiosophie d’August von Cieszkowski’ [1983], in Debord, Œuvres, pp. 536–537.

[939] Viénet Enragés et Situationnistes, p. 57 about the barricades night of 10–11 May 1968: ‘the passion of destruction had never shown itself to be more creative’ (a hidden quotation of the conclusion of Bakunin’s article: ‘the passion of destruction is also a creative passion’). See also Vaneigem Traité de savoir-viver, p. 152 (Chapter XIII) about ‘the pleasure of creating and the pleasure of destroying.’

[940] Debord Œuvres, p. 793. Italics in the original.

[941] August von Cieszkowski, Prolégomènes, p. 116 and Stepelevitch (ed.), The Young Hegelians, p. 77: ‘Philosophy must descend from the height of theory to the plane of praxis. […] To be […] the development of truth in concrete activity – this is the future fate of philosophy in general.’ (Italics in the original).

[942] A French translation of Bakunin’s article can be found in Jean-Christophe Angaut, Bakunin jeune hégélien: la philosophie et son dehors (Lyon, ENS Éditions, 2007), p. 123 for the quotation and pp. 91–95 for a commentary. See also Paul McLaughlin Mikhail Bakunin; The Philosophical Basis of His Anarchism (New York: Algora, 2002), pp. 21–61.

[943] Karl Marx Critique du droit politique hégélien, trans. Albert Baraquin (Paris: Éditions Sociales, 1975), p. 197 (English translation from the MIA website www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm).

[944] Marx Critique du droit politique hégélien, pp. 211–212.

[945] Vaneigem Traité, p. 353.

[946] Angaut Bakunin jeune hégélien, p. 125.

[947] For a comparison of Bakunin’s and Bauer’s views on this point, see McLaughlin, Mikhail Bakunin, pp. 68–71.

[948] Debord Œuvres, p. 816.

[949] Ibid., p. 853.

[950] Vaneigem Traité, pp. 266, 352.

[951] Angaut Bakunin jeune hégélien, p. 136.

[952] Viénet Enragés et Situationnistes, p. 57, about the ‘night of the barricades’ (May 10, 1968): ‘Never had the passion of destruction been so creative.’

[953] Vaneigem Traité, p. 152: ‘People may be forced to swing back and forth across the narrow gap between the pleasure of creating and the pleasure of destroying, but this very oscillation suffices to bring Power to its knees.’ (Italics in the original).

[954] See Jappe Guy Debord, pp. 29–31. It is more difficult to agree with Anselm Jappe when he asserts that situationists take a lot here from Lukâcs, who had indeed emphasized the concept of commodity fetishism in Marx’s Capital but could not have been familiar with the 1844 Manuscripts, which were published later (first in Russian in 1927, then in German in 1932), after the publishing of Geschichte und Klassenbewusstsein (History and Class Consciousness, 1923). In Lukâcs, reification is more important than alienation.

[955] About this transfer, see David Wittmann ‘Les sources du concept d’aliénation,’ in Emmanuel Renault (ed.), Lire les Manuscrits de 1844 (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2008), pp. 91–110 and Jean-Christophe Angaut ‘Un Marx feuer-bachien?,’ in Renault (ed.), Lire les Manuscrits de 1844, pp. 51–70.

[956] Significantly, Feuerbach is the first author quoted in The Society of the Spectacle.

[957] Vaneigem Traité, p. 96.

[958] About ‘the alienation of the spectator to the profit of the contemplated object,’ see Debord Œuvres, p. 774

[959] Jappe, Guy Debord, p. 21.

[960] Debord Œuvres, pp. 1107–1125.

[961] Angaut Bakunin jeune hégélien, p. 111

[962] In a paper read at the Université du Québec à Montréal in June 2010 (‘Les situationnistes et le concept d’avant-garde: art, politique et stratégie’), I tried to show what the differences were between Leninist and situationist conceptions of the avant-garde: basically, Lenin understands the avant-garde as a general staff and not as an advanced detachment. See http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/65/07/60/PDF/Les_situationnistes_entre_avant-garde_artistique_et_avant-garde_politique.pdf (last consultation: 06/27/2012).

[963] See Debord’s letter to Asger Jorn, August 23, 1962, in Guy Debord Correspondance, vol. II, ‘Septembre 1960-Décembre 1964’ (Paris: Fayard, 2001), pp. 93–94.

[964] On the question of the exclusions, the best reference is Marinelli L’amère victoire. One can also find interesting self-criticism in Raoul Vaneigem, Entre le deuil du vieux monde et la joie de viver (Paris: Verticales, 2008).

[965] Greg George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance to Modern Society (Brisbane: Self-Management Group (SMG), c.1974), p. 8.

[966] Toby Boraman, ‘The New Left and Anarchism in New Zealand from 1956 to the Early 1980s’ (PhD dissertation, University of Otago, 2006), and Toby Boraman, Rabble Rousers and Merry Pranksters: A History of Anarchism in Aotearoa/New Zealand from the Mid-1950s to the Early 1980s (Christchurch: Katipo Books, 2007).

[967] Although precise membership figures for these organizations are lacking, estimates claim that the SMG had more than 200 members and Solidarity had between 80 and 100 members in the 1970s. SouB’s discussion meetings in the late 1950s were attended by more than 100 people. Tim Briedis personal correspondence, May 2010; Louis Robertson, ‘Reflections of My Time in Solidarity,’ http://libcom.org/library/recollections-solidarity-louisrobertson [accessed 01/03/12]; and Marcel van der Linden, ‘Socialisme ou Barbarie: A French Revolutionary Group (1949–65),’ Left History 5(1) (1997), p. 36 n. 50.

[968] Philippe Bourrinet, The Dutch and German Communist Left (1900–68) (N.p.: Philippe Bourrinet, 2008), pp. 319–322.

[969] Marcel van der Linden, ‘On Council Communism,’ Historical Materialism, 12(4) (2004), pp. 30–31.

[970] Bourrinet, The Dutch and German Communist Left, p. 324.

[971] Ibid.

[972] Ibid., pp. 209, 322.

[973] Richard Gombin, The Origins of Modern Leftism (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975) goes further and argues that councilism was part of the council communist tradition.

[974] While rejecting the term councilism as a frozen and dogmatic ideology ‘which restrains and reifies their [workers’ councils] total theory and practice.’ Erné Riesel, ‘Preliminaries on the Councils and Councilist Organization,’ in Ken Knabb (ed.) Situationist International Anthology (Berkeley: Bureau of Public Secrets, 1981), p. 274.

[975] See also Benjamin Franks, Rebel Alliances (Edinburgh and San Francisco: AK Press, 2006), pp. 12–13.

[976] NicolasWalter, ‘Has Anarchism Changed? Part Two,’ Freedom (26 June 1976), p. 9. For this revival, see Alexandre Skirda, Facing the Enemy: A History of Anarchist Organization from Proudhon to May 1968 (Edinburgh, San Francisco, and London: AK Press and Kate Sharpley Library, 2002).

[977] Daniel Cohn-Bendit, ‘Interview,’ Anarchy, 99 (May 1969), p. 153.

[978] Quoted in George Woodcock, Anarchism (London: Penguin, 1986), p. 271.

[979] See Peter Stansill and David Mairowitz (eds), BAMN: Outlaw Manifestos and Ephemera 1965–70 (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971).

[980] The term is borrowed from John Englart, ‘Anarchism in Sydney 1975–1981: Part I,’ Freedom (12 June 1982), yet used differently from Englart www.takver.com/history/sydney/syd7581.htm [accessed 01/03/12].

[981] See CrimethInc Workers’ Collective, Days of War, Nights of Love (Atlanta: CrimethInc, 2001) and the Invisible Committee, The Coming Insurrection (Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 2009).

[982] See for instance Tom Bramble, Trade Unionism in Australia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), and Brian Roper, Prosperity for All? Economic, Social and Political Change in New Zealand Since 1935 (Melbourne: Thomson/Dunmore Press, 2005).

[983] Calculated from Industrial Stoppages Report (Wellington: New Zealand Department of Labor, 1970–1980). This figure includes political stoppages, which have been excluded from other statistical series.

[984] See Chris Briggs, ‘Strikes and Lockouts in the Antipodes,’ New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 30(3) (2005).

[985] For the decline in living standards and rise in unemployment, see Tom O’Lincoln, Years of Rage: Social Conflicts in the Fraser Era (Melbourne: Bookmarks, 1993) and Roper, Prosperity for All?

[986] Christchurch Anarchy Group (CAG), ‘Peoples Rights — Self-Management Is the Only Answer’ (leaflet, Christchurch, c.1977).

[987] Ibid.

[988] CAG, Anarchy Information Sheet, 2 (c.1976).

[989] See Maurice Brinton, For Workers’ Power, ed. David Goodway (Edinburgh and Oakland: AK Press, 2004), pp. 81, 85–89, 215.

[990] Richard Bolstad, The Industrial Front (Christchurch: CAG, c.1978), p. 41 and Cornelius Castoriadis, Workers’ Councils and the Economics of a Self-Managed Society (Philadelphia: Wooden Shoe, 1984).

[991] See for instance, Paul Cardan [Castoriadis], Redefining Revolution (London: Solidarity, n.d.).

[992] Richard Bolstad interview with author, May 1996.

[993] Solidarity ‘As We See It,’ in Brinton For Workers’ Power, p. 153.

[994] For an analysis of this shift towards Maoism see Boraman, Rabble Rousers, pp. 56–58.

[995] Richard Bolstad, An Anarchist Analysis of the Chinese Revolution (Christchurch: CAG, 1976) and Cajo Brendel, Theses on the Chinese Revolution (London: Solidarity, 1974).

[996] The CPNZ was one of the few ‘communist’ parties in the ‘advanced’ capitalist world to side with China after the Sino-Soviet split.

[997] Tim Briedis, ‘ “A Map of the World That Includes Utopia”: The Self-Management Group and the Brisbane Libertarians’ (BA Hons. thesis, University of Sydney, 2010), p. 43.

[998] For example, George of the SMG claimed that libertarian socialism, libertarian communism and council communism meant the same thing. George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance, p. 2.

[999] Briedis, ‘A Map of the World that Includes Utopia,’ p. 10; Joe Toscano personal correspondence, May 2010; and Greg George interview with author, June 2010.

[1000] Hamish Alcorn, ‘No Organized Anarchists in Brisbane?’ www.ainfos.ca/99/apr/ainfos00118.html [accessed 01/03/12].

[1001] Compass 6 (September 1971).

[1002] CAG, Anarchy Newsletter (August 1977).

[1003] George interview.

[1004] George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance, p. 13.

[1005] See SMG, Workers’ Councils Democracy, Not Parliamentary (Brisbane: SMG, n.d.), pp. 2,4.

[1006] George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance.

[1007] You Can’t Blow Up a Social Relationship: The Anarchist Case Against Terrorism (Brisbane, Melbourne and Adelaide: Libertarian Socialist Organization, Libertarian Workers for a Self-Managed Society, Monash Anarchist Society and Adelaide Libertarian Socialists, c.1978).

[1008] Greg George, ‘You Can’t Blow Up a Social Relationship,’ Libertarian, 2 (May/June 1976). George’s article was subtitled ‘The Case against Terrorism’ rather than ‘The Anarchist Case against Terrorism.’

[1009] Toscano personal correspondence.

[1010] Briedis, ‘A Map of the World That Includes Utopia,’ p. 62; Briedis personal correspondence; George interview; Toscano personal correspondence; and SMG, Workers’ Councils Democracy.

[1011] Briedis, ‘A Map of the World That Includes Utopia,’ pp. 66–67.

[1012] SMG, ‘Equal Wages — Equal Power’ (leaflet, Brisbane, 1976).

[1013] George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance, p. 9.

[1014] ‘As We See It’ quoted in SMG, Workers’ Councils, p. 3.

[1015] SMG, Workers’ Councils, p. 3.

[1016] Steve Taylor, The Anatomy of Decision (Auckland: Compass, c.1974), pp. 24, 41.

[1017] George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance, p. 8.

[1018] Gilles Dauve and Francois Martin, The Eclipse and Reemergence of the Communist Movement (London: Antagonism Press, 1997), p. 73.

[1019] ‘Some Provisional Points of Disagreement with the Comrades of the Brisbane S.M.G.,’ Federation of Australian Anarchists Bulletin (1975), in Melbourne Anarchist Archives Volume II (Melbourne: Melbourne Anarchist Archives, 1979), p. 37.

[1020] ‘Decadence: The Theory of Decline or the Decline of Theory? Part Two,’ Aufheben, 3 (Summer 1994), http://libcom.org/library/decadence-aufheben-3 [accessed 01/03/12].

[1021] With the exception of ‘Workers’ Councils, Self-Management and Syndicalism,’ Federation of Australian Anarchists Bulletin (1974) in Melbourne Anarchist Archives, p. 28.

[1022] Taylor, The Anatomy of Decision, p. 41.

[1023] Leaflet Sydney, c. late 1970s, original emphasis.

[1024] KAT 1 (1978), p. 13, 2 (1978), p. 1.

[1025] Grant McDonagh, ‘My Involvement in an Ultra-Leftist Tendency’ (MSS, Nelson: 1981).

[1026] Boraman, Rabble Rousers, p. 122.

[1027] McDonagh, interview with author, July 1996.

[1028] McDonagh, ‘My Involvement.’

[1029] McDonagh, personal correspondence, December 1997.

[1030] McDonagh, ‘Tableau in a Morgue,’ KAT, 5 (1978), pp. 5–6.

[1031] Ibid., p. 5.

[1032] Rosemont in Franklin Rosemont and Charles Radcliffe, Dancin’ in the Streets! (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2005), pp. 61–62, 68.

[1033] Joe Toscano, ‘Carnival Anarchism in Melbourne 1970–75,’ www.takver.com/history/melb/carnival1970_75.htm [accessed 01/03/12].

[1034] Peter McGregor, Cultural Battles: The Meaning of the Viet Nam — USA War (Melbourne: Scam Publications, 1988), p. 16.

[1035] Workers’ Councils (Sydney: Rising Free Reprint, n.d.)

[1036] Auckland Anarchist Activists, Anarchy and the State (Auckland: AAA, c.1976).

[1037] Terry Leahy, ‘Pre-War Anarchists and the Post-War Ultra-Left’ (MSS, Sydney, c.1981), p. 32.

[1038] Anonymous, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_McGregor [accessed 01/03/12].

[1039] Jean Barrot [Gilles Dauvé], What Is Situationism? (Fort Bragg: Flatland, 1991), p. 25, original emphasis.

[1040] Black Mail 2 (1982), p. 15.

[1041] For instance, see McDonagh, ‘Tableau in a Morgue’ and ‘The Year of the Goat,’ KAT, 7 (1978), p. 3.

[1042] McDonagh, ‘Irresponsibility vs Poverty: The Valkay Affair’ (leaflet, Christchurch, 1979).

[1043] McDonagh, ‘The Year of the Goat,’ p. 3.

[1044] Iain McIntyre, Disturbing the Peace (Melbourne: Homebrew Books, 2005), pp. 35–41.

[1045] Andrew Dodsworth, personal correspondence, February 1997, original emphasis.

[1046] Lunatic Fringe, ‘Pre-Moratorium Leaflet (1970),’ www.takver.com/history/melb/maa40.htm [accessed 01/03/12].

[1047] Graeme Minchin interview with author, February 1997.

[1048] Gavin Murray interview with author, June 2010.

[1049] Englart, ‘Anarchism in Sydney.’

[1050] Frank Prebble interview with author, May 1996.

[1051] Oliver Robb, Anarchy in Albert Park: An Attack on the ‘Work Ethic’ (Christchurch: Christchurch Anarchy Group, 1976).

[1052] Aufheben, ‘Unemployed Recalcitrance and Welfare Restructuring in the UK Today,’ in Stop the Clock! Critiques of the New Social Workhouse (Brighton: Aufheben, 2000).

[1053] Quoted in Englart, ‘Anarchism in Sydney.’ The LSF was formed as a ‘libertarian/syndicalist’ split from the Federation of Australian Anarchists. It did not involve the SMG.

[1054] ‘The Split — A Monash Anarchist Perspective,’ Federation of Australian Anarchists Bulletin (1976) in Melbourne Anarchist Archives, p. 30.

[1055] Briggs, ‘Strikes and Lockouts,’ p. 9.

[1056] SMG, ‘Editorial,’ Federation of Australian Anarchists Bulletin (1975), in Melbourne Anarchist Archives, pp. 31–34.

[1057] See for instance Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism (London: Fontana Press, 1993), pp. 539–558.

[1058] George, Essay Aimed at Discovering Anarchism’s Relevance, pp. 1–2. However, it is doubtful that councilists provided most of the energy.

[1059] ‘“We HaveWays of Making You Talk!” Review Article,’ Aufheben, 12 (2004), p. 59.

[1060] Sandro Studer quoted in ‘We Have Ways,’ p. 60.

[1061] Rosemont, Dancin’ in the Streets!, p. 378, original emphasis.

[1062] Wittgenstein in J. Tully (ed.) Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics (Cambridge: Polity, 1988), p. v.

[1063] Q. Skinner, ‘Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas,’ in J. Tully (ed.), p. 39.

[1064] See A. Callinicos, ‘Toni Negri in Perspective,’ in G. Balakrishnan (ed.) Debating Empire (London: Verso, 2003), pp. 121–143.

[1065] See Callinicos (2003) and Steve Wright, ‘A Party of Autonomy?,’ in T.S. Murphy and A.-K. Mustapha (eds) The Philosophy of Antonio Negri: Volume 1, Resistance in Practice (London: Pluto, 2005), pp. 73–106.

[1066] On Italian Trotskyism, see R.J. Alexander, International Trotskyism, 1929–1988: A Documented Analysis of the Movement (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1991).

[1067] The post-Marxist Ernesto Laclau considers that Hardt and Negri do not sufficiently break with the essentialism of Marxist class politics. For Laclau, revolutionary identity is the product of strategic thinking, that is a form of politics which goes beyond the immediacy of what May terms ‘tactics.’ See David McLellan, Marxism After Marx (Fourth Edition) (London: Palgrave, 2007); S. Newman, The Politics of Postanarchism (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2010). Ernesto Laclau ‘Can Immanence Explain Social Struggles?,’ in P.A. Passavant and J. Dean (eds.) Empire’s New Clothes: Reading Hardt and Negri (London: Routledge, 2004), pp. 21–30; and T. May, The Political Philosophy of Poststructuralist Anarchism (Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994).

[1068] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 350.

[1069] A. Negri ‘Lesson One: From the Factory of Strategy,’ available online at http://antonionegriinenglish.wordpress.com/2010/09/06/lesson-1-from-33-lessons-on-lenin-for-a-marxist-reading-of-lenins-marxism/ (Accessed 20 June 2011).

[1070] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 234.

[1071] Negri, cited in Michael Hardt (2005) ‘Into the Factory: Negri’s Lenin and the Subjective Caesura (1968–1973),’ in Timothy Murphy and Abdul-Karim Mustapha, The Philosophy of Antonio Negri: Volume I — Resistance in Practice (London: Pluto Press, 2005), p. 13.

[1072] K. Marx, The Poverty of Philosophy (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1975).

[1073] K. Marx, ‘The Holy Family,’ in D. McLellan (ed.), K. Marx: Selected Writings (Second Edition) (Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2000), pp. 145–169.

[1074] K. Marx, ‘On Bakunin’s Statism and Anarchy,’ in David McLellan (ed.), Karl Marx: Selected Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 607. See also Engels’ letter to Cuno of 1872, where Engels writes: ‘Bakunin maintains that it is the state which has created capital, that the capitalist has his capital only by the grace of the state. As, therefore, the state is the chief evil, it is above all the state which must be done away with and then capitalism will go to blazes of itself.’ F. Engels, ‘Letter to Theodore Cuno in Milan in 1872,’ in Marx-Engels: Selected Correspondence (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1975), p.257.

[1075] M. Bakunin, Statism and Anarchy, M. Shatz (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) p. 142.

[1076] See E. H. Carr, Michael Bakunin (London: London, 1937). See also A.W. Gouldner, ‘Marx’s Last Battle: Bakunin and the International,’ Theory and Society (Vol. 11, No. 6, 1982) pp. 853–884.

[1077] V.I. Lenin, (1901) ‘Theses on Anarchism and Socialism,’ available online at http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/dec/31.htm (Accessed 18 April 2011).

[1078] V.I. Lenin, (1905) ‘Socialism and Anarchism,’ available online at http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/nov/24.htm (Accessed 18 April 2011). Stalin, writing in 1906–1907, took seriously Lenin’s line of critique. Thus he wrote that: ‘Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends […] This is a great mistake […] We believe that anarchists are the real enemies of Marxism.’ J. Stalin ‘Anarchism or Socialism,’ available online at http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm (Accessed 23 May 2011).

[1079] V.I. Lenin, (1912) ‘The Italian Socialist Congress,’ available online at http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1912/jul/15b.htm (Accessed 18 April 2011).

[1080] V.I. Lenin, What Is to Be Done? (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1947); One Step Forwards, Two Steps Backwards (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1947).

[1081] V.I. Lenin (1922) ‘Letter to Congress,’ available online at http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/congress.htm (Accessed 22 May 2011).

[1082] V.I. Lenin (1917) The State and Revolution, available online at http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ (Accessed 22 May 2011).

[1083] R. Luxemburg ‘Organizational Questions of the Social Democracy’; and ‘The Mass Strike, the Political Party and the Trade Unions,’ in M.A. Waters (ed.), Rosa Luxemburg Speaks (New York: Pathfinder Press, 1970), pp. 112–130 and 153–218 respectively.

[1084] See Hardt, ‘Into the Factory’; David Bates (2009) ‘Reading Negri,’ Critique, 49 (31/3) pp. 465–482.

[1085] A. Negri, ‘Workers’ Party Against Work,’ in T. S. Murphy (ed.), Books for Burning: Between Civil War and Democracy in 1970s Italy (London: Verso, 2005) pp. 51–117.

[1086] A. Negri ‘What to Do Today withWhat Is to Be Done?, or Rather: The Body of the General Intellect,’ in S. Budgen, S. Kouvelakis and S. Žižek (eds.) Lenin Reloaded: Towards a Politics of the Truth (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2007), p. 301.

[1087] A. Negri, (2008) Reflections on Empire (Cambridge: Polity, 2008), pp. 145.

[1088] Negri, Reflections on Empire, pp. 144–145.

[1089] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 350.

[1090] Ibid., p. 294.

[1091] Ibid., p. 413.

[1092] A. Giddens, The Third Way (Cambridge: Polity, 1998).

[1093] M. Hardt ‘The Common in Communism,’ in C. Douzinas and S. Žižek (eds.) The Idea of Communism (London: Verso, 2010), p. 131.

[1094] A. Negri ‘Communism: Some Thoughts on the Concept and Practice,’ in Douzinas and Žižek, The Idea of Communism, p. 159.

[1095] Ibid., pp. 158–159.

[1096] Ibid., p. 161.

[1097] To the extent at least that Blond maintains that ‘state socialism’ undermined a working-class capacity for ‘self-help’ and self-organization — a capacity which had been particularly strong in the nineteenth century. For Blond, of course, the working class ought still to know its place. For Negri, statism stifles revolutionary capacity. See P. Blond, Red Toryism (London: Faber and Faber, 2010), especially Chapter 5.

[1098] Hardt and Negri, Empire, pp. xii–xii.

[1099] A. Negri, The Porcelain Workshop (Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e), 2008), p. 22.

[1100] M. Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Volume One (London: Allen Lane, 1979), p. 137.

[1101] Hardt and Negri, Empire, pp. 23–24.

[1102] Newman, The Politics of Postanarchism, p. 62.

[1103] Michel Foucault, cited in J. Bernauer and M. Mahon, ‘The Ethics of Michel Foucault,’ in G. Gutting (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Foucault (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), p. 153.

[1104] Newman, The Politics of Postanarchism, p. 93. E. Laclau and C. Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (London: Verso, 1985). A brief word of caution against Newman’s reading of Laclau and Mouffe, for Laclau and Mouffe do not, I think, fall prey to the type of state reductionism which Newman suggests. Gramsci — on whom Laclau and Mouffe draw heavily, if critically — formulated his concept of the ‘integral state’ to move beyond a liberal understanding of sovereignty. And Laclau and Mouffe take this line of thought further, arguing for a discursive ‘anti-essentialist’ understanding of power, where power is an effect of discursive practices which permeate every aspect of the ‘impossible object’ called ‘society.’ This involves a rejection of the base-superstructure ‘metaphor,’ and any a priori understanding of power, whether this emphasizes ‘the state’ or ‘the economy.’ This said, I would argue that the political project of ‘radical democracy’ emerging from Laclau and Mouffe’s thought, in the end, is radical in name only, for the authors reject all types of large-scale social transformation, or meta-narrative of human emancipation.

[1105] Newman, The Politics of Postanarchism, p. 178.

[1106] Hardt and Negri, Multitude, p. 54.

[1107] See K. Weeks ‘The Refusal of Work as Demand and Perspective,’ in Murphy and Mustapha, The Philosophy of Antonio Negri, pp. 109–135.

[1108] K. Marx, Grundrisse (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973).

[1109] Negri, ‘Workers’ Party Against Work (1973),’ p. 75.

[1110] Hardt and Negri, Multitude, p. 54.

[1111] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 61.

[1112] Hardt and Negri, Multitude, p. 351.

[1113] Ibid., p. 136.

[1114] Ibid., p. 347.

[1115] Ibid., p. 106.

[1116] E. Laclau, On Populist Reason (London: Verso, 2005), p. 143.

[1117] Stallybrass writes: ‘Before Marx, proletarian [prolétaire] was one of the central signifiers of the passive spectacle of poverty. In England, Dr Johnson had defined proletarian in his Dictionary (1755) as ‘mean; wretched; vile; vulgar,’ and the word seems to have had a similar meaning in France in the early nineteenth century, where it was used virtually interchangeably with nomade’. Staylbrass, cited in Laclau, On Populist Reason, p. 143.

[1118] See H. Draper, ‘The Principle of Self-Emancipation in Marx and Engels,’ R. Miliband and J. Saville (eds.) The Socialist Register (London: Merlin, 1971), pp. 81–109; C. Johnson ‘The Problem of Reformism in Marx’s Theory of Fetishism,’ New Left Review, 119 (January–February 1980), pp. 71–96.

[1119] See E. Mandel, Late Capitalism (London: New Left Books); N. Poulantzas, Classes in Contemporary Capitalism (London: New Left Books, 1975).

[1120] Poulantzas, Classes in Contemporary Capitalism, especially chapters 3, 4 and 5.

[1121] K. Marx, Capital: Volume One (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1976).

[1122] P. Hayes, ‘Utopia and the Lumpenproletariat: Marx’s Reasoning in “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,’” The Review of Politics, 50/3 (1988), p. 447.

[1123] Laclau, On Populist Reason, pp. 143–144.

[1124] F. Engels, ‘Preface to The Peasant War in Germany,’ in Marx and Engels: Selected Works (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1968), p. 229.

[1125] K. Marx and F. Engels, The Communist Manifesto, in D. McLellan (ed.) Karl Marx: Selected Writings (London: Penguin, 2000), p. 254.

[1126] Marx in Hayes, ‘Utopia and the Lumpenproletariat,’ p. 449.

[1127] M. Bakunin, Marxism, Freedom and the State, K. J. Kenafick (ed. and trans.) (London: Freedom Press, 1990), p. 48.

[1128] See, for example, Laclau, On Populist Reason, p. 146.

[1129] Newman, The Politics of Postanarchism, p. 38.

[1130] See S. Newman, From Bakunin to Lacan (Plymouth: Lexington Books, 2007), p. 28.

[1131] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 30.

[1132] D. Bell, The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society (New York: Basic Books, 1999); M. Castells, The Rise of the Network Society, Volume 1 (Second Edition) (London: Blackwell, 2000).

[1133] Laclau and Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, p. 4.

[1134] Hardt and Negri, Multitude, p. 106.

[1135] Ibid., p. 107.

[1136] Ibid., p. 135.

[1137] Ibid., p. 134.

[1138] M. Hardt and A. Negri, Commonwealth (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), p. 40.

[1139] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 157.

[1140] Ibid., p. 129.

[1141] See D. Byrne, Social Exclusion (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999); W. J. Wilson, The Truly Disadvantaged (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1987).

[1142] Hardt and Negri, Empire, p. 215.

[1143] Ibid., p. 215.

[1144] T. Eagleton, After Theory (London: Penguin, 2003), p. 2.

[1145] See, for example, E. O. Wright, Class Counts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

[1146] Cornelius Castoriadis, ‘Marx aujourd’hui. Entretien avec Cornelius Castoriadis,’ Lutter! 5 (May–August 1983), pp. 15–18; quotation 18. Original translation by Franco Schiavoni for the January 1984 issue of the Australian magazine Thesis Eleven, amended and corrected by Castoriadis himself for Solidarity. A Journal of Libertarian Socialism no.17 (Summer 1988), pp. 7–15. Available online: http://www.rebeller.se/m.html (accessed 12 June 2012). I would like to thank the editors of this site, Tankar från rebeller, for permission to reproduce this quotation as an epigraph. (All other translations from the French are by David Berry.)

[1147] Simon Tormey, Anti-capitalism (Oxford: Oneworld, 2004).

[1148] Léon Crémieux, ‘Mouvement social, anti-mondialisation et nouvelle Internationale,’ Contretemps 6 (February 2003), pp. 12–18.

[1149] ‘“Walking, We ask Questions”: An Interview with John Holloway,’ by Marina A. Sitrin in Perspectives on Anarchist Theory (Fall 2004), available online: http://www.leftturn.org/?q=node/363 (accessed 26 July 2010).

[1150] The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capital (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 225. See also ‘Andrej Grubaäc: Libertarian Socialism for the Twenty-First Century’ in Sasha Lilley, Capital and its Discontents. Conversations with Radical Thinkers in a Time of Tumult (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2011), pp. 246–257.

[1151] Philippe Corcuff and Michael Löwy, ‘Pour une Première Internationale au XXIe siècle,’ Contretemps 6 (February 2003), 9.

[1152] For a detailed analysis, see Saku Pinta, Towards a Libertarian Communism: A Conceptual History of the Intersections between Anarchisms and Marxisms (Unpublished PhD thesis, Loughborough University, 2012).

[1153] See Part I of David Berry, A History of the French Anarchist Movement, 1917–1945 (Oakland, CA: AK Press, 2009).

[1154] Otto Rühle, ‘The Revolution Is Not A Party Affair’ (1920), Marxists Internet Archive, http://www.Marxists.org/archive/ruhle/1920/ruhle02.htm [19 November 2011]. Voline, The Unknown Revolution, 1917–1921 (New York: Free Life Editions, 1974 [first published in 1947, in French]).

[1155] Vanguard: A Libertarian Communist Journal, edited by Sam Dolgoff et al., was published in New York, 1932–1939.

[1156] As Maximilien Rubel points out ‘The terms “socialism” and “communism”’ may be used interchangeably ‘as there is no distinction between society and the community, so social ownership and communal ownership are equally indistinguishable. Contrary to Lenin’s assertions, socialism is not a partial and incomplete first stage of communism.’ Maximilien Rubel and John Crump (eds), Non-Market Socialism in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (London: MacMillan Press, 1987), 1.

[1157] See Kevin B. Anderson, Marx at the Margins: On Nationalism, Ethnicity, and Non-Western Societies (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2010); Teodor Shanin (ed.), Late Marx and the Russian Road: Marx and ‘the Peripheries of Capitalism’ (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983).

[1158] See Marcel van der Linden and Wayne Thorpe (eds), Revolutionary Syndicalism: An International Perspective (Aldershot: Scolar, 1990); Ralph Darlington, Syndicalism and the Transition to Communism: An International Comparative Study (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008); Vadim Damier, Anarcho-Syndicalism in the 20^th Century (Edmonton: Black Cat Press, 2009); Wayne Thorpe, ‘Uneasy Family: Revolutionary Syndicalism in Europe from the Charte d’Amiens to World War I’ in David Berry and Constance Bantman (eds), New Perspectives on Anarchism, Labor and Syndicalism: The Individual, the National and the Transnational (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010), pp. 16–42.

[1159] Quoted in Franklin Rosemont, Joe Hill: The IWW & the Making of a Revolutionary Workingclass Counterculture (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 2003), pp. 19.

[1160] For the IWW and autonomist Marxists see Steve Wright, Storming Heaven: Class Composition and Struggle in Italian Autonomist Marxism (London and Sterling, Virginia: Pluto Press, 2002), pp. 176–196.

[1161] Rudolf Rocker, Anarcho-Syndicalism (London and Sterling, Virginia: Pluto Press, 1989), pp. 137.

[1162] Vadim Damier, Anarcho-Syndicalism in the 20^thCentury, p. 23.

[1163] John Gerber, Anton Pannekoek and the Socialism of Workers’ Self-Emancipation 1873–1960. (Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers and Amsterdam: International Institute of Social History, 1989), pp. 198.

[1164] On Solidarity, see Maurice Brinton, For Workers’ Power. The Selected Writings of Maurice Brinton (Edinburgh: AK Press, 2004), ed. David Goodway. Brinton’s writings can be found both on the Libcom website (http://libcom.org/tags/maurice-brinton) and on the Marxists Internet Archive (http://www.Marxists.org/archive/brinton/index.htm).

[1165] ‘Editorial’ in Solidarity Aberdeen 3 (1969), pp. 1–2.

[1166] Michael Albert & Robin Hahnel, Looking Forward: Participatory Economics For The Twenty First Century (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1991); see also their Unorthodox Marxism. An Essay on Capitalism, Socialism and Revolution (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1978).

[1167] Le Monde, 15 November 1969.

[1168] Matthew Wilson, Rules without Rulers: The possibilities and limits of anarchism (Unpublished PhD thesis, Loughborough University, 2011).

[1169] Paul Thomas, Karl Marx and the Anarchists (London: RKP, 1980).

[1170] Donald Clark Hodges, The Literate Communist: 150 Years of the Communist Manifesto (New York: Peter Lang, 1999), pp. 113. Daniel Guérin often referred approvingly to the argument in favor of a synthesis of Marx and Bakunin by H.-E. Kaminski in his Bakunin. La vie d’un révolutionnaire (Paris: La Table Ronde, 2003 [1938]).

[1171] C. Wright Mills, ‘Letter to the New Left,’ New Left Review 5, September-October 1960, http://www.Marxists.org/subject/humanism/mills-c-wright/letter-new-left.htm [20 November 2011].