Introduction,DavideTurcatoThe most distinctive and universal anarchist principle is the principle ofcoherencebetweenendsandmeans:humanemancipationcannotbeachievedbyauthoritarian means. However, the same principle could also be read in theopposite direction, though this is less frequently done: our ends shouldnot bedisconnected fromour action;our ideals shouldnotbe so lofty as tomakenodifference towhatwedohereandnow.Theanarchistwhosedeedsandwordshave best illustrated both sides of that principle—the “idealist” and the“pragmatist”one—isErricoMalatesta.Malatesta was born on 4 December 1853 in Santa Maria Capua Vetere.

Southern Italy was then still ruled by the Bourbons, whose fall Malatestawitnessedasachild.AsayoungstudentinNaples,headheredtorepublicanism,thepartyofrevolutioninItalianRisorgimento.However,undertheimpressionoftheParisCommune in1871he turned to socialism, the risinggospelof socialredemption,which,inItaly,wasbornanarchist.ThenextyearMalatestahadhisfirstencounterwithBakuninattheSt.Imiercongress,wherethefoundingofthefederalist International marked the birth of the anarchist movement. For thefollowing six decadesMalatesta’s namewouldbe linked to thehistoryof thatmovement.Helivedmostofhisadultlifeabroadasanexileandaworkman,incountries of strong Italianmigration and anarchist presence: France,Belgium,Switzerland,andEgyptin1878–82;Argentinain1885–89;theUnitedStatesin1899–1900; and England,more specifically in London, in 1889–97, 1900–13,and1914–19.Yetforhalfacenturyhewasaprotagonistofallonsetsofsocialstruggle in Italy: theBenevento uprisingof 1877, oneof the first instances ofpropaganda by the deed and one ofmost popular and symbolic events in thehistoryoftheanarchistmovement;thebreadriotsof1898,whichbroughthimtojail and then to forced residence, from whence he escaped in 1899; theinsurrectionary Red Week in 1914, when the Romagna and the Marchesremainedfordaysinthehandsofanarchists,republicans,andsocialists;andtheredbienniumof1919–20,whenthefactoryoccupationseemedtobringItalyonthevergeofrevolution.MalatestadiedinRomeon22July1932,undertheheelofthefascistregime,inastateofundeclaredhousearrest.ThusMalatestawasportrayedbyhisLondonfellow-exilePeterKropotkinat

theturnofthetwentiethcentury:“Malatestawasastudentofmedicine,whohadleftthemedicalprofessionandalsohisfortuneforthesakeoftherevolution;fullof fire and intelligence, a pure idealist, who all his life—and he is nowapproachingtheageoffifty—hasneverthoughtwhetherhewouldhaveapiece

ofbreadforhissupperandabedforthenight.Withoutevensomuchasaroomthathecouldcallhisown,hewouldsellsherbetinthestreetsofLondontogethis living, and in the evening write brilliant articles for the Italian papers.ImprisonedinFrance,released,expelled,re-condemnedinItaly,confinedinanisland, escaped, and again in Italy in disguise; always in the hottest of thestruggle,whetheritbeinItalyorelsewhere,—hehasperseveredinthislifeforthirtyyearsinsuccession.Andwhenwemeethimagain,releasedfromaprisonorescapedfromanisland,wefindhimjustaswesawhimlast;alwaysrenewingthestruggle,withthesameloveofmen,thesameabsenceofhatredtowardhisadversariesandjailers,thesameheartysmileforafriend,thesamecaressforachild.”Malatestaequallycontributed to theanarchistmovementwithhisactionand

his thought, which he could not conceive as separate. His pamphlets FraContadini (Between Peasants), L’Anarchia (Anarchy), and Al Caffè (At theCafé)areamongthegreatestanarchist“best-sellers”ofalltimes,withcountlessreprintsandtranslations.However,histhoughtfoundexpressionaboveallinthemyriadsofarticlesscattered in theanarchistpressaround theworldand in thenumerousperiodicalsheedited:thetworunsofLaQuestioneSociale,publishedin Florence in 1883–84 and in Buenos Aires in 1885; L’Associazione, whichmarked the beginning of Malatesta’s first London exile, in 1889–90;L’Agitazione,published inAncona in1897–98,until thebread riotsbrokeout;La Questione Sociale of Paterson, edited in 1899–1900 while he was inAmerica; La Rivoluzione Sociale, appeared in London in 1902–03, duringMalatesta’s secondLondonexile;Volontà, alsopublished inAncona, in1913–14, until the RedWeek; the anarchist dailyUmanità Nova, in 1920–22; andPensieroeVolontà,editedinRomein1924–26,wellaftertheadventoffascism.Some of these are among the most significant periodicals in the history ofanarchistthought.Inhiswriting,Malatestahastherareabilityofbeingbothdeepandclear.This

isbestillustratedbyanexample.IntheAnarchypamphlet,whichwereprintinthis volume, Malatesta defines anarchy in a single sentence: “Anarchy, incommon with socialism, has as its basis, its point of departure, its essentialenvironment,equality of conditions; its beacon is solidarityand freedom is itsmethod.” In its reference to the standard values of the French Revolution,égalité,fraternité,andliberté, thedefinitionmayseemacliché.Yet,behinditsdeceptive simplicity, it expresses a whole, original conception of anarchism,which rests on the role assigned to each of those standard values.Equality ofconditions means common ownership of the means of production, for therecannot be equality of conditions when a class monopolizes the means of

production.Thus,asocialistsocietyisbeingdescribedhere.Yetsocialismisnotanend-point;itisjustapointofdepartureofanopen-endedprocess.Thebeaconofthatprocessissolidarity.Byassigningthedriver’sseatofsocialevolutiontoan intentionally pursued value Malatesta is expressing a voluntarist view, incontrast tothemarxistemphasisonthedevelopmentofproductiveforces.Andby assigning that seat to solidarity he is rejecting individualism. Finally, byadvocating freedom as a method Malatesta is re-asserting free initiative incontrast to authoritarian socialism. Malatesta is offering no blueprint of thefuturesociety,yethisdefinitionisstronglycharacterizedintermsoftheprocess:heisdescribinganexperimentalist,pluralist,socialistopensociety.Moreover, in defining anarchy in terms of a sentiment and a method—

solidarityandfreedom—thatanarchistsalreadypracticehereandnow,Malatestaispositingcontinuitybetweenthepresentsocietyandthefutureone.Andsincethat sentiment and that method are conscious choices of each individual,Malatesta’s isagradualistviewofanarchy: themorepeoplewill embrace thatsentiment and that value, the more broadly anarchy will be realized. In fact,immediatelyafter theabovedefinition,Malatesta explains that anarchy“isnotperfection, it isnot theabsolute idealwhich like thehorizonrecedesasfastasweapproachit;butit isthewayopentoallprogressandallimprovementsforthebenefitofeverybody.”We see here how coherence between ends andmeansworks bothways for

Malatesta.Whenendsaresoabstractastohavenolinkwithourpresentaction,everybody can safely agree on those ends. Rather,Malatestawrites, “it is themethodwhichabovealldistinguishesbetween thepartiesanddetermines theirhistoricalimportance.”Apartfromthemethod,headds,“theyalltalkofwantingthewellbeingofhumanity.”Therefore,“onemustconsideranarchyaboveallasamethod.”Thedistinctivemethodthatanarchistshavetoofferisthemethodoffreedom.Malatestaexplicitlyintroducedconceptslikeanarchistgradualismonlyinhis

late writings. However, their seeds can be detected much earlier. A deepcoherencepervadesMalatesta’sentireactionandthought,atthesametimethatboth action and thought evolved under the impulse of experience. We haveaimedtocapturebothMalatesta’scoherenceandpragmatisminthiscollection,which differs from previous ones in many respects. Since anthologies ofMalatesta’swritings,suchasVernonRichards’sexcellentLifeandIdeas,usuallyhaveathematicstructure,theytendtogiveaflatandsomewhatfrozenimageofMalatesta’sideas.Instead,foramanwhowasactiveintheanarchistmovementforsixtyyears, the temporaldimension iscrucial.Wehaveadded thatmissingdimensionbygivingourcollectionachronologicalstructure.Ouraimisnot,or

notonly,topresentthe“best”ofMalatesta,buttodocumenthisentiretrajectory.Inthiswayweillustratehowdifferenttacticswereadvocatedatdifferenttimesandmakemature ideas better understoodbyputting them in perspective.Thisinvolvesincludingearlywritings,whichthelateMalatestamightnolongerhavefullysubscribedto,anddocumentingnotonlythe“high”moments,butalsothemore obscure transition phases, such as the years 1894 and 1899, whichconstitutefundamentalturningpointsinMalatesta’stheoryandtactics.Wehavealso aimed to representMalatesta’s full range of writings, from pamphlets tolong theoreticalarticles, tooccasionalbut illuminatingarguments.Allwritingsarepresentedintheirentirety.A prominent criterion in editing Malatesta’s texts has been documentary

accuracy.Articles originally published in English have been reprintedwithoutchanges, aside from the correction of obvious typos.Likewise,whenwe haveusedpreviouslypublishedtranslationsofMalatesta’sarticles,wehavecomparedthem with the sources and amended them only where mistranslations oromissions made the original meaning unrecoverable. Otherwise, we haverefrainedfrommakingstylisticchanges,evenwhenthetranslationswouldhavelikelybenefitedfromthem.Thegreatest asset of this collection is that it is the first one to bebasedon

Malatesta’s complete works, which are in the process of being published andwhosetemporalpartitioniscloselymirroredhere.Traditionally,anthologiesarebasedonMalatesta’slatest,orbestknown,ormostreadilyavailableperiodicals.Instead, we have tapped into Malatesta’s entire production and included keyarticlesthathaveneverappearedbeforeinEnglishorhavebeenlongforgotten.Nearly two thirds of the seventy-eight texts included here have been newlytranslatedandprintedforthefirsttimeinEnglish,whilemanyoftheremainingarticles have never been reprinted after their first and only appearance in theanarchistandsocialistEnglish-languagepressofMalatesta’stime.Weliketothinkofthiscollectionasacontributiontoestablishingthecultural

dignityof the anarchist tradition,whichanarchists themselveshave sometimesunwittingly concurred to downplay by misdirecting their iconoclasm to theirpredecessors. That tradition has in Malatesta one of its best representatives,whoseclarityofthoughtremainshardtosurpass.

I.“WhoeverisPoorisaSlave”:TheInternationalistPeriodandtheExileinSouth

America,1871–89

Until the mid 1880s Malatesta’s activity unfolded under the banner of theInternational,firstasanactualorganization,thenasaprojecthetriedtorevive.For young republicans like Malatesta, socialism meant the discovery of the“socialquestion”:formalequalityandfreedomwereamockeryinthepresenceofmaterial inequality and submission to capitalists.AsMarxhademphasized,economic matters were at the root of all political, religious, and other socialmatters.“Whoeverispoorisaslave”wasonetheyounginternationalists’catchphrases. Malatesta’s own periodical, tellingly titled La Questione Sociale,sported that phrase in its masthead. Long after the International’s demise,Malatesta’s hopes to re-establish itwere still alive.His programof 1884 borewitnesstothiseffortandsummeduphisinternationalistbeliefs.Then,in1885MalatestafledtoArgentinatoescapeaconvictionforcriminalassociation.Thismarked theendofMalatesta’s internationalistperiod.However, theexperienceoftheFirstInternational,informedbythatrelianceonworkers,collectiveaction,and organization that constituted the common denominator of socialists of allpersuasions,wouldimprintforeverhisanarchism.

1.NeapolitanWorkers’FederationNORIGHTSWITHOUTDUTIES.NODUTIESWITHOUTRIGHTS.1

The Neapolitan Workers’ Federation2 recognizes and proclaims the followingprinciples:1.All beings human in nature are equal and, since they all share the same

rightsandduties,therearenorightswithoutduties,nodutieswithoutrights.2. Since labor is a human necessity, there is a duty upon all to labor and

everyoneisentitledtoenjoymentoftheentireproductofhislabor.3.Forthatveryreason,theinstrumentsoflaborandrawmaterialsbelongto

thewholeofhumanityandeveryoneisentitledtomakeuseoftheminpursuitofhisownactivities.34.Everyindividualbornisentitledtobereared,fed,andeducatedtechnically,

comprehensively and equally by the collective to which he has ties, and thatcollective is under a duty to guarantee and uphold his freedom of choice inwhateverareaofexpertise.5. Union, association and federation between individuals and collectives

shouldbevoluntaryandachievedfromthebottomup.6.Tous,theimplementationofthisrepresentstheauthenticEmancipationof

the Proletariat, that being the great—the only goal—towardswhich all of ourefforts should be directed; these, ipso facto, being directed, not at theestablishmentoffreshprivileges,butattheestablishmentofauniversalequalityofrightsandduties.7.Sincethecauseoflaborrecognizesnoborders,hasnofatherlandotherthan

the world, and cannot succeed without the unanimous agreement of all theworld’sworkers,theNeapolitanWorkers’Federation,foundeduponthepreceptsof freedomand autonomy, standswith all those nuclei andWorkers’ Societiesacross theworld thatset themselves thesamepurposeas that forwhich itwasestablished.4

TheFederalSecretary:ErricoMalatesta,student.[ThesignaturesofnineFederationmembers,includingCarloCafiero,follow.]

1ThismottowaspartofthepreambletotheprovisionalrulesoftheInternationalandwasoneoftwosentencesthatMarxhadinsertedthereasaconcessiontothemorallanguageofmembersthatfollowedtheItalianrepublicanGiuseppeMazzini.

2Originallypublishedasanundatedflyeraroundtheendof1871.ThepresenttranslationisfromthereprintinMaxNettlau,Bakuninel’InternazionaleinItalia:dal1864al1872(Geneva,1928).3Thispointandthepreviousone,together,formulatecollectivism,thebeliefinthecommonownershipofthemeansofproductionandtheindividualenjoymentoftheproductsofone’slabor.4AsMaxNettlaunotes,thispointexpressesmembershipintheInternationalinanecessarilyvagueformbecausetheInternationalhadbeenbannedbytheauthoritiesinNaples.Thepointsfromthe

secondtothefifthreflectBakunin’sideas,whiletheotherssummarizeitemsfromthepreambletotheprovisionalrulesoftheInternational.

2.LettertoTheBulletinDeLaFédérationJurassienneComrades,5Inlightofanumberofinaccuraciesandomissionsintheofficialminutesof

theBerneCongress,certainnewspapershavedrawnfromthereportpresentedbyusonthesituationandprinciplesoftheInternationalinItalysomeconclusionsthat do not quite match with the facts.6 We therefore ask you to carry thefollowingstatementinyournewspaper:1.We never said anything that might lead one to suppose that in Italy the

Internationalwassplitintotwobranchessubscribingtotwodifferentschoolsofthought. The vast majority of Italian socialists have rallied around the ItalianFederation’s anarchist, collectivist, revolutionary program, and the few whohave,thusfar,asaconsequenceofintriguesandlies,remainedoutside,arenowallbeginningtoenterourorganization.Wearenotreferringheretoatinygroupthat, being prompted by personal views and reactionary purposes, is out toconduct what it terms “gradual and peaceful” propaganda: these people havealready been judged by the Italian socialists and represent no one butthemselves.2.TheItalianFederationholdsthattheactofinsurrection,designedtoassert

socialist principles throughdeeds, is themost effectivemethodof propagandaand theonlyone that,withoutdeceiving and corrupting themasses, candelveinto the deepest strata of society and draw the cream of humanity into thestruggle,backedbytheInternational.73.TheItalianFederation looksuponcollectiveownershipof theproductsof

laborasthenecessarycomplementtothecollectivistprogram, thecontributionbyalltowardsthemeetingofeachandeveryone’sneedsbeingtheonlyruleofproduction and consumption compatible with the principle of solidarity.8 ThefederalcongressinFlorencehaseloquentlyexpressedtheItalianInternational’sviewonthisissue,aswellasontheprecedingone.

Greetingsandsolidarity.TheItalianfederaldelegatestotheBerneCongress:ErricoMalatestaCarloCafiero

5TranslatedfromBulletindelaFédérationJurassienne(Sonvillier)5,no.49(3December1876).6MalatestaandCafiero,co-authorsofthisletter,hadbeenamongthedelegatesoftheItalianFederationtothecongressofthefederalistbranchoftheInternationalheldinBerneattheendofOctober

1876.ThelettersummarizessomeofthekeyviewsheldbytheItalianFederationatthetime.7MalatestaandCafieroareexpressingherethetacticsthatwouldlatercometobeknownas“propagandabythedeed,”ofwhichtheBeneventouprisingofthenextyearwouldbeanotableexample.8Thisisoneoftheearlieststatementsinwhichthereplacementofcollectivismwithcommunism—“thecollectiveownershipoftheproductsoflabor”—isadvocated.InthemonthsprecedingtheBerne

congresstheissuehadbeendiscussedbyMalatesta,Cafiero,andothersduringconversationsinNaples.Theyhadcometotheconclusionthatthetraditionalbakuninistformulaofcollectivismhadtobeabandonedinfavorofcommunism.ThischangeofperspectivehadbeenapprovedbythecongressoftheItalianFederation,heldnearFlorenceafewdaysbeforetheBernecongress,andthenexpressedatBernebyMalatestaandCafiero.

3.DearComradesatIlotaIhavewatchedtheeffortsyouhavebeenmakingtostepupthesocialistparty’sorganizingandIcongratulateyouuponthem.9Organizationrepresentstheverylife and strength of a party and without it we would not even be able toeffectivelyspreadourprogram,letalonetrytoimplementit.Butitstrikesmethatinofferingabroadoutlineofthesortoforganizationwe

want,youhavemadeaseriousmistakethatmightgenerateeitherfailuretodayorthecertaintyofourbreakingupinthefuture.Out of an excessive love of unity and concord, you would like to see us

organized regardless of differences of opinion regarding aims andmeans, theonlybondbetweenusbeingthesharedaspirationforsomevague,indeterminatesocialism.Ifaparty—especiallyapartyofaction—istothrive, itneedstobeawareof

thegoalitintendstoreachandespeciallythemeansbywhichitintendstoreachit. Otherwise, it is inescapably doomed to remain powerless and to peter outamidstinternaldifferences.Iamcertainlynotreferringtothosesecondarydifferencesofopinionthatare

not indicativeofdefinitivepartingof theways.For instance, there is theviewthat oral propagandamaybemore effective than the printedword, or that thepamphlet ispreferable to thenewspaper,urban insurrectionoverarmedbands,attacksuponpropertyoverattacksupontheperson,theIrishman’sdaggeroverthe Russian’s mine, or vice versa, without there being anything to inhibitmembership of the same organization. These are matters to be resolved indifferent ways depending on circumstances and means that are not mutuallyexclusive and uponwhich, in theworst scenario, a revolutionary can defer tomajorityopinionforthesakeoftheneedforagreement.Butwhenitcomestoprogramsthatare,orarebelievedtobe,incompatible,

howcanyoueveramalgamatethemandbringtogetherfolkwhofromtheword”go”mustbickerandfightwithoneanother?How, for instance, do you propose to organizeme alongside a legalitarian,

whenIbelievethatdrivingthepeopletowardstheballotboxandgettingthemtohopethatparliamentcanbringusreformslikelytomakeourtaskeasier,alreadymeans betraying the cause of socialism? A legalitarian, at best, looks uponuniversal suffrage as a gain that can be a great boost to the socialist party;whereas I believe it is the bestmeans the bourgeoisie has for oppressing andblithely exploiting the people.He sees universal suffrage as a first step in thedirectionofemancipation;Iseeitasthesecrettogettingtheslavetofastenhisownchainsandaguaranteeagainstrevolt,gettingtheslavetobelieveheisthe

master.So howwould you see us united?While hewill be campaigning to secure

suchvoting rights and,whenhegets them, to persuade the people to exercisethem,Iwillbestrivingtopreventvotingrightsbeinggrantedor,iftheyare,toensurethattheballot-boxesareemptyandheldincontempt.Idonotwishtodwelluponthereasonsofeithersidehere.Nomatterwhichof

us is right, itmakes nodifference to the fact that, until such time as one sidewinstheotherover,wecannotseriouslyhopetoseethembeingusefulmembersofthesameorganization.ThisisnotthefirsttimeIhaveadvancedthisnotion.When thevolte-face,which isnowknownby theslickeuphemism“Costa’s

evolution,” came about, Costa did all he could to hide the changes he wasmakingtooursharedprogramandstrovetopreservetheparty’sunity—despitetheshatteredunityaroundtheprogram—byinsistingthatwewereallbasicallyin agreement.Wealertedpeople to thedanger, underlined thedifferences, andtriedtosavetherevolutionaryparty,evenatthepriceofseeingitsranksthinned.Wewere overruled, and instead of there being, as there should be, two co-

existing parties that would spur each other on, what we had instead was,primarily, disorganization, impotence, personality clashes, coolness, and amuddling of things and ideas.Andwherever the party remainedmore or lessunited,asitdidinRomagna,itwasbecauseofbamboozlementanddeceptionsand a change thatwas designed to arrive at an extreme lullaby socialism, andwas swallowed by our comrades at an undetectable snail’s pace,without theirevenbeingconsciousofwhere theywerebeing led.Luckily,we’veseensignsthatmakeushopefulthat,soon,thestalwartsocialistsofRomagna,whoareandhavealwaysbeenrevolutionaries,willcometotheirsenses,seewheretheyhavebeen tricked, and feel all of theoutrage andwonder that theywouldhave feltyears ago, had theybeen told then that “you are to have a representativewhowill sit in His Majesty’s parliament on behalf of the Romagna democraticcoalition,acolleagueandfriendtothebourgeoisie’srepresentatives.”Nowthatenlightenmenthasfinallyarrived,dowewant to travelonceagain

theverytrail thatdidtheItaliansocialistpartysomuchdamage,andcallforasinking of the deep-seated differences between us and build a unity foundeduponadeceitfuloutwardagreement?Thatmight suit someone eager for a seat in the benches ofMontecitorio,10

whothereforeneeds todohisbest tomustera largebodyofvoters,but itwillnotsuituswhoareouttomaketherevolution.Without letting ourselves be deceived by beloved traditions ruined beyond

recoverybytreachery,inpracticetodaythereislessrealdifferencebetweenusandtheaction-orientedrepublicans—withwhomwecantravelatleastthefirst

stage along the road (namely, armed insurrection against themonarchy)—thanthereisbetweenusandthosewholull thesocialistsandharnesssocialismintoservingtheinterestsofwhicheverfactionofthebourgeoisiefindsitexpedienttodressitselfinred.AndCostashowedthathewasperfectlywellawareofthesituationwhenhe

was shunned by the socialists in Naples and sought a recommendation fromBovio, happily sitting at a republican banquet alongside the Honourable Mr.Aporti.11Let Costa do what he will: we shall not lift a finger to slow his political

downfall sincewe regardhimasdoomed tosink to thebottomof theslipperyslope.Butletusorganizeourselves.Yes,letusmarshalallofourparty’sresources,butletusrememberthat,asfar

as we revolutionaries, we insurrectionists are concerned, those who upholdparliamentarianismarenotwelcomeinourparty.Itwill,assuredly,bepainfulpartingcompanywitholdcomrades.Itwillaffect

measmuchasanyoneelse,sinceamongmyadversariestherearedearfriendswhowere, for a long time,mycompanions inprison, inexile, inpoverty, andwhowill,Ihope,bemycompanionsonthebarricadesandshareinourvictory.But whenever the talk turns to the interests of the revolution, all

considerationsofpersonalitymustbesilenced.Wereachoutahandtoallwhobelieve, ingoodfaith, that theyservetherevolution’s interestsandweclingtothehopethatwemayseethemfollowtheirhearts.Butourpartyshouldbeourparty and our organization should be our organization. And that organizationshouldbetheInternationalWorkingMen’sAssociation,whoseprogram,hatchedover a long time, rings out today as COMMUNISM, ANARCHY andREVOLUTION.So, comrades, let us close the ranks of that association,which its deserters,

having tried in vain to kill it off, are busy proclaiming dead, because theassociation’s existence is a standing rebuke to their behavior, and because theremorseofabandoningitmaybeprickingtheirconscience.

Yours,EnricoMalatesta129Translatedfrom“CariCompagnidell’Ilota,”Ilota(Pistoia)1,no.9(1April1883).ThebackgroundtothisletterwasthedefectionfromanarchismofAndreaCosta,oneofthechiefmembersofthe

Italian Federation,who in 1879 had started advocating the extension of socialist tactics to parliamentary ones. Costa had a significant following, especially in the Romagna region, and inNovember1882hehadbeenelectedtoparliament.Histacticshadsparkedheateddebatesinpartofthesocialistpress,andIlotawasoneoftheperiodicalsthatconsideredthosetacticslegitimate.Inarecentseriesofarticles,theIlotahadthuscalledfortheunionandjointorganizationofallsocialistforces,despitethetacticaldifferences.

10MontecitorioistheseatoftheItalianChamberofDeputies.11GiovanniBoviowasaphilosopherandrepublicanpolitician,andPirroAportiwasasenatoroftheextremeleft.12ThoughMalatesta’sfirstnamewasErrico,manycalledhimEnrico.Accordingly,articlesandpublishedlettersoftencontainedthelatterspellinginhissignature.

4.TheRepublicOfTheBoysAndThatOfTheBeardedMen

About fifteen years ago,13 this writer was a youngster studying rhetoric andRomanhistory,Greek,Latin,andGiobertianphilosophy.14Despitethebesteffortsofmyteachers,schoolingdidnotmanagedtostiflemy

natureand,inthestultifying,corruptivemodernhighschoolsetting,Imanagedtokeepmymindwholesomeandmyheartunblemished.Bynatureaffectionateandimpassioned,Idreamedofanidealworldinwhich

allwouldloveoneanotherandbehappy.WheneverIweariedofdaydreams,Isuccumbedtoreality,tookalookaroundme,andsaw:here,someoneshiveringfromcoldandhungerandmeeklyseekingalmsintheshapeofacrustofbread;there, somechildrencrying;andoveryonder, somemenmouthingcurses;andmyheartfrozeinhorror.Later, I was more vigilant and realized that a tremendous injustice—a

nonsensical system—wasgrindinghumanity down and condemning it to pain;laborwasdegradedandalmostregardedasdishonorable,theworkingmandyingof hunger so there was food for his idle master’s orgies. As my heart wasswollenwithrage,IwasremindedoftheGracchiandSpartacusandIcouldfeelthespiritofthetribuneandtherebelinsideme.AndasIhadoftenhearditsaidthattherepublicistheverynegationofwhat

wasworryingme,andthatintherepublicallmenareequals;sincewhereverandwhenevertheechoofarebellionofthewretchesandslavesreachedmefrom,itwasintermingledwiththeword“republic”;andsinceweinschoolwereleftinignorance of the modern world so that we might be rendered dolts by thetruncated,phoneyhistoryofancientRome,andwouldneverhavebeenabletofindamodeofsocialcoexistenceoutsideoftheRomanformulae,Icalledmyselfarepublicanand,itseemedtome,thatmadeupforallofthedesiresandwrathswirlinginmyhead.Iwasnotclearastowhatthisrepublicwouldbelike,butIreckonedIknew

and that was enough for me: in my eyes, the republic was the kingdom ofequality,love,andhappiness;itwasthelovingdreamofmyimaginationbecomereality.Oh,howmyheartbeatinmyyouthfulbreast!Iimaginedmyselfnowassome

moderndayBrutus,plungingabladeintothebreastofalatter-dayCaesar;orattheheadofabandofrebels;oratopabarricade,scatteringthetyrant’sacolytes;or I imaginedmyself on a rostrum, thundering against thepeople’s enemies. Imeasuredmyheightandstrokedmylipstoseeifanywhiskershadsprouted;oh,

how I yearned to be grown up and to leave high school and commit myselfentirelytotherepublicancause!That day finally arrived and I entered the outsideworld filledwith selfless

intentions,filledwithhopesanddreams.TherepublichadbeensomuchthestuffofmydreamsthatIcouldnothelp

butscurrytowhereverIhadbeentoldtherewasarepublicanventure,aspirationoryearning;anditwasasarepublicanthatIhadmyfirstsightoftheking’sjails.But then I had second thoughts. I studied the history that I had previously

learnedfrominane,lyingtextbooksandsawhowtherepublichadalwaysturnedout tobe a government like anyother—or evenworse than the rest—and thatunder the republic, asunder themonarchy, there iswretchedness and injusticeandthepeoplearemowndownwhentheytrytoshrugofftheyoke.Ilookedaroundthecontemporaryworldandsawthatcountrieswherethereis

arepublicarenobetteroffthanthoseunderamonarchy.ThereisarepublicinAmerica, and, for all her expanses of free land, for all her super-abundantproduction,therearepeoplestarvingtodeath.Theyhavearepublic,butdespitethe freedom and equality written into the constitution, the poor man has nohuman dignity, and the cavalry uses its clubs or sabres to disperse workersclamoring forbreadand jobs.Theyhave their republic,but thenativepeoplesarereducedtodesperatestraitsandhunteddownlikewildanimals…WhatamIsaying?InAmerica,asinRomeandinGreecebeforeher,wehaveseenthattherepubliciscompatiblewithslavery!There’s a republic in Switzerland, yet there is poverty, the Protestant and

Catholicclergyruletheroost,andonecannotliveinacitywithoutaresidencepermit,andthefreecitizensofSwitzerlandtradetheirvotesforafewglassesofbeer!There’s a republic in France (it had recently been established, then) and it

starteditsexistencewiththeslaughterof50,000Parisians.Itremainsdeferentialtowards the clergy and it sends its troops inwhenever theworkers raise theirheads, to force submission to the bosses and quiet acceptance of theirwretchedness.SoIsaidtomyself,therepublicisnotwhatIdreamtitwas;thehigh-school

student’svague aspirationwas toone thing, but the realitywasdifferent, verydifferent.Myoldestcomrades,theonesIthoughtofasmyteachers,hadindeedsaidthattherepublicsinexistencewerenotrealrepublicsandthat,inItaly,therepublicwoulddeliver justice,equality, liberty,well-being;butIknewthat thesamethingshadbeensaidinFranceprior tothetriumphof therepublic,andIalsoknewthatsimilarthingshadbeensaidandpromisedbyeverysinglepartyneedingthepeople’ssupportinordertoascendtopower…andIwantedtosee

thingsclearly.Thenatureof a society, I reckoned, cannotdependonnamesand incidental

forms,butrathermustdependontherelationshipofeachmemberwiththeothermembersandwiththesocietyasawhole.Neithercouldtheeffectofachangeinsociety be determined solely by the wishes and intentions of the party thatadvocatesit,sinceapartythatacceptsandsubscribestocertainpositionssuffersthe consequences, or it gets caught up in hatching rebellions that come tonothinguntilthatpartymakesupitsmindtochangeitsposition.I began to probe the very essence of modern society, the nature of social

relations, the derivation of public powers, the operation of political andeconomic factors and everything prompted me to conclude that there isessentially no difference betweenmonarchy and republic. So I was no longersurprisedthatrepublicsbearsuchastrongresemblancetomonarchies.Asman’sprimaryneedandtheessentialprerequisiteofexistenceisthatheis

able to eat, it is only natural that the character of a society is determinedprimarily by the manner in which man secures the means of survival, howwealthisproducedanddistributed…Economicfactorsdominateeveryaspectofthelifeofsociety.Under a monarchy, all means of production are in the hands of a few

individuals,andthemasses,whohavenothingbuttheirlaborforce,havetoseekworkfromthosewhoownthosemeans,andmustabidebytheirconditions.Thedistributionofgoodsisbasedonthereciprocalbutunequalneedthatbossesandworkershaveofeachotherandonthecompetitionbetweenthefamished.Andsince the bosses enjoy the benefit of an establishedposition and can fall backupontheirsavings,whereastheworkerneedstoworkonadailybasisinordertoeat,andsince,also,therearegenerallymoreworkersthanthebossesneed,theworkingman’swagesdonotnormallyexceedwhatisstrictlynecessaryforthemostprimitive andvegetative survival.And so, at the endof theday, under amonarchywefinda tinyrulingclass that iscorruptandcorrupting,andontheotherside,theimpoverishedandbrutalizedmasses.Wouldarepublicbeanydifferent?Certainlynot,sincetherepublicpreserves

thefoundationofthepresentorganization—privateproperty—andcannotescapetheconsequencesofthatownershipmodel.But, as the more advanced republicans object, under the republic it is the

peoplethatcommandbymeansofuniversalsuffrage: letusmakeourrepublicandthepeople,shouldtheyseefit,willamendtheownershiparrangements.Butuniversalsuffragecanbefoundunderthemonarchy,too,andthepeopleuseittoendorse their subject status; how on earth could the people acquire theconsciousness and capability they lack today just by sending thekingpacking

andswappingonestatusforanother?Buttherepublichasbeenmadetimeandtime again in many countries, and universal suffrage has not been any moreproductive than it is under themonarchy.Whywould it be any different thistime?Whatdoesitmatterifsomerightisgrantedtothepeople,whenthepeopleare

notequippedwiththemeanstoexerciseit?AsIhavealreadystated,economicfactorsdominateeverything:apeopledyingofhungerwillalwaysbestupidandslavish,and,iftheyvote,willvotefortheirmasters.We need to move beyond republican thinking and instead of accepting the

presenteconomicpositionasourstartingpoint,weneedtomakeafreshstartbyradicallyalteringit,andeffectivelydoingawaywithprivateownership.Thenwewill assureour survival,will allbeequal in termsofwealth,andmaywellbeabletobegintounderstandoneanother.All of these things passed throughmymind and beforemy eyes, andwhat

happens to allmen of feelingwho investigate the laws of human coexistencewithoutpreconceptionshappenedtome:Iwashorrifiedbytherepublic,whichisaformofgovernmentwhosesoleuseis that—likeeveryothergovernment—itsanctionsandchampionsestablishedprivileges…AndIturnedintoasocialist.Selflessyoungsters,whosharethisdreamofarepublicthatwilldeliverpeace

andwellbeing:Thinkagain!Therealrepublic,therepublicoftherulers,isnottheoneIdreamedofatschool.Oncetherepublichasbeenmade,ifyouremainpureandhonest likeyouare today,youwillbegoing to jailorwillbemowndownjustthesameasyouwouldbetoday.Atthatpointyouwillfeelbetrayed,butthatwillnotbetrue:youwillhavereapedjustwhatyousowed.13Translatedfrom“Larepubblicadeigiovanettiequelladegliuominicollabarba,”LaQuestioneSociale(Florence)1,no.3(5January1884).14ThephilosopherandpoliticianVincenzoGiobertiwastheauthorofPrimatomoraleeciviledegliItaliani,publishedin1843,wherehearguedforItaly’ssuperiorityovertheotherEuropeannations.

5.TheEconomicQuestionThe greatest discovery of this centurywasmade by the International when itproclaimed that the economic question is fundamental in Sociology, and thatothermatters—political,religious,etc.,—aremerelyitsreflections,perhapseventheshadowsitcasts.15Indeed, in the past, lacking this key, all political problems (in the broadest

sense, encompassing everything related to the existence of society) wereinsoluble,indeed,unfathomable.In Greece, for instance, in order to deliver the greatest well-being to the

people,theysoughtthebestgovernment,or“thegovernmentofthemost.”Butintheend,itturnedoutthatgovernmentisalwaysgovernmentbythefewandnotby the best either but by scoundrels—whether monarchist, aristocratic, ordemocratic, itwas still despotic or, to use amodern term, the business of thehaves.Romecameclosertothetruth,whenitlookedforthephoenixofsocialwell-

beinginequalityofcircumstanceforallcitizensoftheState.Theagrarianlawsthat were proclaimed twenty-seven centuries ago from atop the Campidoglio,plus the social and slavewars show that therewas somevague inkling of thetruth:thateconomiccircumstancesaretherealyardstickofthecivilandpoliticalstatusofamanoraclass.Buthavinganinklingisonethingandunderstandingandannouncingitisquiteanother;thefirstbeingaglimmerandtheotheralight.Thevaguenessoftheideawasmirroredinthevaguenessofthesetofdemandsthatwentbythenameof“primitiveChristianity”;andtheweaksunbeamsweresoonswallowedupbythedarknessoftheMiddleAges.There,too,thestrugglesforpoliticalpowerflaredup:theeconomicquestion

resurfacedtimidlyintheCommunes,butfedintopettyinternecinestrifeandwasnot the banner of widespread social upheaval. Democracies, aristocracies,tyrannies—here again we have the terms designed to solve the enigma. Andcenturiesmore of experience, right up until our own day, up until the Frenchrevolution, up until 1860, up until almost today, have borne out the principlethat: all established governments, founded as they are upon inequalities ofcircumstances, are despotic and monopolise the national wealth; that thepoliticalquestioncannotberesolved,noranyother issueof interest tosociety,unlessthereisaresolutionoftheeconomicquestion.Thistruthisthebigadvanceonthepresentcenturyandthecompendium,the

quintessenceof theoreticalandpractical socialism, thekey to the resolutionofall the problems that tax our brains and torment our hearts; it has burst forthfromthreesourcessimultaneously:fromtheworkers’painfulexperiencesofthe

freest forms of government; from study of the relations between Capital andLabor, which is to say, Economics; and finally from the brand new positiveapproachoftheSocialSciences.ThereforeitrepresentsthehingeofScienceandmodernhistory; it hadbrought a far-reaching revolutionof ideas, and lays thegroundworkforanolessgrandioseoneintherealmoffacts.Let us get used to expressing all social problems that may crop up as the

economicquestionandreducingthemtothisformula:Economic inequality is the source of all moral, intellectual, political, etc.

inequalities.Inotherwords,letustrytotalkwithprecision,for,asCondorcetsays,Science

isawell-madelanguage,andweshallbeontherightroad.Weofferafewexamples:

TheEmancipationofWomanWoman’semancipationisa topic thathasbeendebatedoverandoveragain tothe point of exhaustion, seriously and for a laugh, with varying degrees ofsuccess, albeit with no outcome, not even a theoretical one. Some argue thatwomanisborn inferior toman, liketheslaveto themaster;otherswant toseeherbecomehisequal.Physiology,history,anthropology,etc.havebeeninvokedbyoneandall,andnothinghascomeofitall.If,instead,ithadbeensaidthat,“Thematterisanentirelyeconomicone.With

feudalismgone,withtherebeingnomoredowriesandestates;withwithdrawalintoaconventnolongeranoption;withpropertysojeopardizedthatinordertosurviveeveryonehastorelyuponhisownresources—thatis,uponhislabors,ifheisaworker,orhisindustry,ifheisacapitalist—bywhatrightisawomantobe told:youarebarred from laborand from industry,youarebarred from lifeandareaburntofferingtosomeoldprejudice,orrathertosomelawgoverningtheallocationof functionswithinthefamily that isbettersuitedtoother times,other institutions, other circumstances?” If it hadbeenput like that, and if theconclusion drawn from that was that woman today should go out to work,choosing, as anyman does, whatever work she had the greatest aptitude for,wouldagenuinesolution to theproblemnothavebeenarrivedat?Would thatsolutionnothitthenailonthehead?Doesthewomen’sproblemnotleadbacktothemen’sproblem,thatis,tothequestionoflabor—whichshouldbeincumbentuponusallandshouldbesharedbyeveryone—whichistosay,totheeconomicquestion?Letusstress,however,thattodaytheeconomicquestioncanberesolvedonly

theoretically; work by all and for all is still an aspiration of Science andHumanity; inpracticewehavecompetition,which is tosay,civilwar between

workers,man versuswoman, adult versus child, and capitalist versus all.Oneman’smeatisanotherman’spoison;yourdeathismylife.Hence,theresistancetotheeconomicemancipationofwomankind;hencethecurrentimpossibilityofanysuchemancipation.Theemancipationofwoman,asofman,canonlycomeaboutinanewsocialorder.ReligiousMattersWecomenowtoanequallyimportantmatter:thereligiousquestion.Contrarytowhatitmightappear,thistooisaneconomicquestion,anditispreciselybecauseofitsnothavingbeenexaminedfromthatanglethattheapostlesofFreethoughthavefailedthusfar.Theirtheorieshavemadenoinroadsamongthemasses,anddespite thewranglesbetweenStateandChurch—which theycouldandshouldhave turned to their advantage—and themodern Sciences’general consent infavorofFreethought,theyhavenotmanagedtosnatchasinglesoulawayfromtheSatan in theVatican,norwrestedasmuchasoneyardofground from therule of Pope and cardinals. The religious question is, as we have stated, aneconomic one. In actual fact, a religion has two component parts: theory andorganization.Thephilosophicalandmoraltruthsthatmakeupareligion’stheoryarenotupfordebate;theymaybethetruthortheymaywellbeerrors,butsincethetruth,likeanyhumanmatter,isforeverbetteringitself,thatwhichistrueatone point in time, or thatwhich is suited to the thinking and expression of agiventime,nolongersuitsinadifferentone.TheRomanChurchitselfhashadtoadoptadifferentlanguagebetweenonecenturyandanotherand,likeitornot,an encyclical today iswritten differently from aBull from the first or secondChristian eras. So it is not the theory that makes up the Church, but theorganization.The organization of the Church, and of every church from every age, is a

perfectfitforthatofGovernments.Wehavethesamehierarchy,thesametop-to-bottom descending order—at the top, the power, the wealth, the enormousstipends;downbelow,debasement,passiveobedience,meagerlivesandmeagerstipends.The difference betweenChurch andState lies solely in theway theyextractfromthepeoplewhatisneededtofeedandsustaintheirhierarchy.Theybothextractitfromthepeople,onebymeansoflessercoercion thantheother;onebymeansofsuperstition,theotherthroughtheuseofforce.Inotherwords,GovernmentandChurch,meaningtherulinganddominantclasses,haveadoptedthe following rationale: The people, they have said to themselves, can bedivested of their possessions in two ways; either through threats or throughpersuasion,or rather, through the threatofearthlypunishmentsor the terrorofother-worldlypunishments.Thesetwomeanscannotbeusedbythesamepower

atthesametime.SotheChurchsaidtotheState:Letusdividethetask;youcanenjoythedominionofforce,leavingthesafer,quieterdominionoffraudtome;asforyou,Opeople,renderuntoCaesarthatwhichisCaesar’s,andtoChristthat which is Christ’s, and never weary of giving. Besides, the Church hasalways told the State: I shall unfailingly uphold your rights through mypreaching and my excommunications, my encyclicals, in short, my moralarsenal; and, if need be, youwill putmy enemies—Albigensians, Arnalds ofBrescia, GiordanoBrunos, and such like—to the stake. Ours is a redoubtablepartnership.Theyhavesaidthisandtheyhavedelivered.TheChurchhasusurpedhalfof

theworld,theotherhalfhasbeenseizedbytheState.AnanecdoterecountedbyWashington Irving in his biography of George Washington comes to mind:IrvingspeaksofcertainnativeAmerican tribes tornbetween theEnglish (whothey described as their “fathers”) and the French (who nominated themselvestheir“brothers”).Onedaythesepoornativessentthemessagetorepresentativesof the twopowers thatwent something like this: It isallverywellyourbeingfathersandbrothers;butthemomenteitherofyoutriestotakehalfofourland,what is left to us who are doomed to live surrounded by “fathers” and“brothers”?WhichiswherethePeoplestandtodaywhereChurchandStateareconcerned. Of course, once Church and State had seized everything, theyfinished up squabbling between themselves about who should have the lion’sshare.TheChurcharguedthattheStatewasindebtedtoitfortheobedienceofthe populace, and this was the truth. The State argued that the Church wasobligedto it for its toleranceandfor itsoccasionalarmed favors,and thiswasverytrue.HereagaintheknotlinkingChurchandStatecouldnotbeunravelled,itinvolvedtithes,patronage,cardinals’caps,etc.,until theybothrealized that,justlikethestomachandthelimbs,theyneededeachother,andsotheypatchedthingsup,soastocarryontheiroldtricksatthepeople’sexpense.And note too that the soil is not the only thing that they have prettymuch

carvedupbetweenthem.TheChurchhasasystemofleviesverymuchliketheState’s.Frombirthtodeath,itisforeverpesteringyouforpennies;penniesbeingafigureofspeech,forinfactitsleviesareprettysubstantial.Itishardtobelievewhat theChurch levies voluntarily from the faithful under a hundreddifferentnames—Mass charges, alms, funeral charges, death duties, parish funds, StPeter’s pence, etc. The Church ismade up of the faithful, their offerings andvows.Ontheproceedsofallthesevoluntarylevies,whichwepaytotheClergy,they live a life of idleness and keep their… housekeepers. They charge usmillions even for the making of saints; and the lifestyles of Monsignors andCardinalsareknowntoall.TheChurchhasthisgoingforit:thatitmanagesto

milk thepoorestpeople; in itsview, there isnot apauper,bankrupt, orbeggarexemptfromcontributing. Itusurps thepauper’salms; andmarries theutmostarrogancetothebasestdegradation;itisabrazenmendicant,themostirksomeandrepugnantsortofhumanbeing.In short, Church policy can be summed up by the Archbishop of Seus’s

famousdictum:TheClergy’scontributionisprayer,soitmakesalivingoutofpraying.TheChurch is theclass of thosewho have ducked out of their laborobligationsinordertodevotethemselvestoGod;asifthebelievers’God,havingsentencedalltolabor,hasmadeanexceptionforthisoneclass.Thereligiousquestionthereforealsoboilsdowntothe issueoflabor,or the

economicquestion.Thelaborsofthepriestareonaparwiththoseoftheusurer,the stock-broker, the collector of State taxes; the priest being nothing but acollector of ecclesiastical taxes. In any case, any man can serve as his ownpriest.Theclasscomprisedofthosewhododgeworkusingthepretextofprayer,istheonethatneedsabolishing:lettheworkerswholaborsomightilygivesomethoughttothis:that,forwantofthetimetopray,theyareindangerofgoingtohell.EducationEducation is talked about. ThePalermoCongress didwell to declare:hewhodoesnothaveenoughtoliveon,isinnopositiontogotoschool.16Thenagain,thestruggleforsurvivalmeansthateverynewstudent,everyeducatedworker, harms the rest. Reserved for the would-be ruling class,education has to be a monopoly; how else, other than a littledifference in cleverness,without politics, laws, and official Science,etc., being shrouded in secrecy, can millions of workers be held atbay?We shall be instructed, and that instructionwill reflect our callings andwe

shallhelponeanothertounderstandandinvestigateoncetheeconomicquestionhasbeenanswered.Wearealwaysaround.RighttoCombineStrikes,ortherighttocombine.Thequestionisthis:howisitthatworkers,whoarethemajority,cannotbringthebossestoobedience,usingtheirownweaponsagainstthem,andthusgrapplingwiththemontheeconomicterrain?FromMillcomestheanswer:“Aproperty-owner,landlord,manufacturingboss,andmerchantcan,generally

speaking, survive for a year or two on monies he has saved up, withoutemployingasingleworker.Mostoftheworkerscouldnotsurviveaweek,very

fewofthemamonth,andhardlyanyofthemayearwithoutwork.Inthelongrun, theemployercannomoredowithout theworker than theworkerwithouttheemployer,buttheemployer’sisnotsopressinganeed.”Besides,thebossesusetheweaponsattheirdisposalinordertobreakorcorrupttheworkingman.Workers’ unions are faced by employers’ unions; and the victory goes to thedeepest pockets. Mill himself says that “when it comes to sorting out majorissues, small assets do not do the job” and it requires large ones if the socio-economicquestionistoberesolved.PoliticallibertyanduniversalsuffrageFreedomofthepress,ofassembly,ofassociation,andallthepoliticalfreedomsintheworld—UniversalSuffrageincluded—cannotdothetrick.Thefactsshowasmuch:butwhatisthereasonforthis?Thosewithnounderstandingofsocialissuesshrugtheirshouldersandsaythatthefaultliesinthosewhodonotknowhowtomakeuseofthem.No,thefaultlieswiththemastheypersistingazingatthemoon in the bottom of thewell.Freedom between less than equals is theconsecrationofthewhimoftheoneatthetop.Aslongasitsuitshispurpose,thelatter will exercise freedom, only to renege upon it as soon as it serves thepurposesofhisadversaries.UniversalSuffrageisasnare;itmaybethePeoplethatdotheelecting,butthepersonelectedistheboss,theSovereign.Nomatterwhatclasstheymaybedrawnfrom,thedeputiesmakeupadiscreteclass,whichistheclassofthosewholiveoffthebacksofthePeople.Theirinterestsflyinthefaceof thoseof thepeoplefromwhomtheyreceivetheirmandates.Hencethetalkofdisloyalty,betrayal,etc.Emptyverbiage:todate,everydeputyhasturnedtraitor,andeveryoneofthemwill!Inequalityofeconomiccircumstances—thatistheworminthebudofeveryfreedom.GovernmentWecomenowtodwellsomewhatuponGovernment.Be it absolute, constitutional, or republican, it is always an East India

Company;oneclasscommands,theotherobeys;oneenjoysalifeofleisureonthe exertions of other people, and the other is whipped from pillar to post,without so much as a crust of bread to call their own. Here too, behind thesemblance of a political question, under the veil of unusual verses, there isnothing, and nothing lurks but the economic question of working versus notworking,eatingversusstarvingtodeath.Government consists in levying taxes from the people and sharing the

proceedsaroundthemembersoftherulingclass.Weknowthateverytaxhitsthepoorman;thelandtaxispaidbythetenant,

the farmer, the consumer; indirect taxes are paid by the consumer. And the

pooreroneis,themoreonepays;thusthepoormanusesmoresaltandpaysthesamelevyonpoorqualitywineastherichmanpaysonbetterqualitywines,etc.Inshort—alltheeconomistsconcedeasmuch—thepooreronegets,theheavierthe tax take. Furthermore, being deputies, civil servants, etc., the ruling classenjoyscertainprivilegessuchas, say, reduced rail fares, freeuseof the trams,etc.;whereasthepoormanpaysmorethananyoneelse.Now, if one adds up the levies that the State demands year after year, the

Public Purse, the assets stripped from private owners, the pious works itadministers, its Private account, and the Banks it operates or runs, the sumswouldnumber in thebillions.Andthenwearesurprisedbypeoplestarving todeath!Thisiswhatitdemands;letushavealookathowitsharesit!Letustakea

look around us:who lives likeCroesus or like Sardanapalus?A few bankers,deputies,afewofficials.Otherwisewecanonlylamentthegeneralpauperism.AMinisterisinfactadeputyonagloriousstipend,whocancalluponafew

million in unforeseen and extra-ordinary expenses, who can give out or takeawayjobs,whocannegotiatewiththeStockExchangeandwin,whocreamsoffapercentagefromeverybigStatecontract,andfinally,uponsteppingdownfromhispost,becomesawealthyproperty-owner.The deputy in the Chamber is a potential Minister, a key figure in the

conclusionofbigdeals.Taketherailwaycontracts,say:theCompanywillmakebillionsatthenation’sexpense,buteverydeputyhashisownshareportfolio;so,by voting for the Contracts, he lines his pockets, meaning that he turns thatNation to his personal profit. So, nomatter how scandalous theymay be, theContractswillbepassed;justthewaytheTobaccoRegulations,thelawsontheNationalBankpassedandsoonandsoon!Everyoneof these laws,wenote,sawbillionssiphonedoff.AndthedeputyhasafootholdintheCivilService,canexpeditemattersand

advancehisownprofessionattheexpenseofothers(oneneedonlythinkofthedeputieswhoarelawyers),and,asinthecaseofprovincialandtowncouncillors,cancomeupwithawayofmakingalivingdespitenotliftingafinger.Puzzling!Yetthisisthefactofthematter.Then again, in his constituency, the deputy is a king in octodecimo; he can

appoint anddismissprefects, allocateposts, fix thecitybudget,buyuppublicandprivateassets,buildhimselfacastle.Allhailthenewfeudallord!Wehaveprettymuchstatedwhatcivilservantsare:theclienteleofministers

anddeputies andof theStategenerally.Theyaremanyand theynoisilychanthomilies and hymns to theKing andHomeland.They are theState’spoliticalelectoralarmy.

ThearmyandthepoliceandthebencharethehandofGovernmentandoftheruling class, ready to lash out and command obedience from any who mightrebel.Thefactthat,inordertoclingon,theGovernmentneedssomuchsupportand

all this expense is really very telling. But that is the way things are:Governments cost a packet and for every one pocketed by the Minister, orBankerorDeputy, thepoor tax-payercoughsupa thousandbecausehehas topaythetax-collector,thecivilservant,thecopperandtheexecutioner,andalltherestaswell.Lestwegoon too long, letusconcludewith thisquotation fromProudhon:

“Analysisand thefacts,”hesaid,“demonstrate: that the taxofassessment, thetaxuponmonopoly,insteadofbeingpaidbythosewhopossess,ispaidalmostentirely by those who do not possess; that the tax of quotite, separating theproducerfromtheconsumer,fallssolelyuponthelatter…finally,thatthearmy,thecourts, thepolice, the schools, thehospitals, thealmshouses, thehousesofrefugeandcorrection,publicfunctions,religionitself,allthatsocietycreatesforthe protection, emancipation, and relief of the proletaire, paid for in the firstplace and sustained by the proletaire, is then turned against the proletaire orwasted as far ashe is concerned; so that theproletariat,which at first laboredonlyfortheclassthatdevoursit—thatofthecapitalist—mustlaboralsofortheclassthatflogsit—thatofthenonproducers.”17ThisiswhereouranalysisofthefunctionsofGovernment,whichistosaythe

politicalsystemthroughtheprismoftheeconomicquestion,takesus.Government by all, an administration-government, a government free of

extortion,ambushes, injustices,privileges,withsomemadewealthyandothersimpoverished, a non-governing government, or the mere distribution andperformanceofworkanddistributionofgoods,suchanun-government isonlyfeasible once the economic problem has been resolved through collectiveownershipofthelandandworkersjoiningforces.Thepoliticalproblemtoocanbetracedbacktotheeconomicone.PunishmentandWarNow we can speak of punishment—another problem that defies resolutionwithoutaturnofthekey,economicreasoning.Crime is either rebelliousness on the part of the oppressed against the

oppressor,or thechildofpoverty,or is siredbypovertybywayof ignorance.Owenhasexplainedthisverywell:thesolutiontotheeconomicproblemisalsothesolutiontotheproblemofcrime.Theissueofwarcanalsobebrokendownlikethis:equalityofcircumstances

betweentheclassesleadstoequalityofcircumstancesbetweenpeoples,andthatequalityofpeoplesleadstoanendtowars.Todaythesearewaged,asLeopardihadit,inpursuitofsugarorcinnamon;foratradingpre-eminence,forindustrialexploitation;aswitnessTunisia,Egypt,andMorocco.TheRepublicans,Costa,andUsWe could keep this up for some time. All problems confronting Science andmodernLifeareconnected in the same fashion: theeconomicquestion.A realGordianknotthatweneedtocutthroughwiththeswordof…18Meanwhile,thewordisthatthepoliticalquestionandtheeconomicquestion

march hand in hand, and that there aregovernments that can also “foster thespreadofsocialistideas.”Sosaytherepublicans;sowritesCostainL’Avanti!The republicansneed to admit that theyhavenounderstandingwhatever of

current social problems and that they still cling to the old litany of God,Homeland, Liberty, and Family. But Costa purports to be still a socialist yetrenegesuponSocialism’sgreatestconquest,itsmostpreciousdiscovery,itsfirstandlastword?!!Artfullydonethoughitmaybe,thetravestyingofthesocialistprogramme is

nolesscompleteinCosta’sprogramme.Weneedtolooktoourrealprinciplesand the sacred source of socialism; that is where we need to return and bebaptizedagainifweareseriousaboutrecoveringfromtheleprosyofpoliticismthatdampensourardorandsapsourstrength.15Translatedfrom“Questioneeconomica,”LaQuestioneSociale(Florence)1,no.13(29June1884).16AUniversalWorkers’CongresshadtakenplaceinPalermoin1882,ontheoccasionofthesixthcentennialoftheSicilianVespersmovement.17ThepassageistakenfromSystemofEconomicalContradictions:orthePhilosophyofMisery,chapter7,section1.WehaveusedBenjaminTucker’stranslationof1888.18Thesentenceisprobablyleftincompletetoavoidcensorshiporlegalproceedings.

6.ProgramAndOrganizationOfTheInternationalWorkingMen’sAssociation

TotheInternationalists19

Dearcomrades,20Wehavetriedtosumupourassociation’sfundamentalprinciples,theidealsofwhichitdreams,andthepathsbywhichitmeanstoreachthem.Wethinkwehavefaithfullyinterpretedyourideasandyourintentions.Inany

event,wehopethatthisbrief,hurriedexpositionofourswillbesuchastosparkalivelyexchangeamongyouregardingthestillcontroversialmattersthatmustbetheobjectofthedeliberationsofforthcomingcongresses.Shouldyouwishtopassontousyourobservations,weshalltaketheseinto

account ina second,morecomprehensive,moremethodical edition,whichweshould like tobeacollectiveeffortwitheachofusbringinghis expertiseandexperiencetoit.Dependuponourdevotiontothecommoncause.

TheeditorsofthenewspaperLaQuestioneSocialeINTERNATIONALWORKINGMEN’SASSOCIATION

Charter(London,28September1864)21

Considering:That the emancipation of theworkersmust be conquered by theworkersthemselves;That the struggle for the emancipation of the workers means not a

strugglefornewprivileges,butforequalrightsanddutiesforall;Thattheeconomicalsubjectionofthemanoflabourtotheownerofthe

rawmaterialsandthemeansoflabourliesatthebottomofservitudeinallitsforms:political,moral,andmaterial;That theeconomical emancipationof theworkers is therefore thegreat

endtowhicheverypoliticalmovementoughttobesubordinate;Thatalleffortsaimingatthatgreatendhavehithertofailedfromthewant

of union and solidarity between theworkers of themanifold divisions oflabouranddifferentcountries;That theemancipationof labour isneithera local,noranational,buta

worldwideproblem, embracing all civilizednations anddepending for itssolutionontheirconcurrence,practicalandtheoretical;Thatthepresentrevivaloflabourinthemostindustriouscountries,while

it raises a newhope, gives solemnwarning against a relapse into the olderrors, and calls for the immediate combination of the still-disconnected

movements;ForthesereasonsThe International Working Men’s Association has been founded. This

Association and all societies and individuals adhering to it acknowledgetruth, justice, andmoralityas thebasis of their conduct towards allmen,without regard to colour, creed, or nationality, and consider their duty toclaim the human and citizen’s rights not only for the members of theAssociationbutforallthosewhofulfilltheirduties.Norightswithoutduties,nodutieswithoutrights.

PreliminariesThe InternationalWorkingMen’sAssociation,was formed in1864 inorder to“afford a central medium of communication and co-operation betweenWorkingmen’sSocietiesexisiting indifferentcountriesandaimingat thesameend; viz., the protection, advancement, and complete emancipation of theworkingclasses,”andfromtheoutset,acknowledgednoprogrambutthegeneralonesetoutinthechartercitedabove.22It was a vague, incomplete program that identified rather than resolved

problems, thatdidnot fix theAssociation’spositionvisàvis theSociety fromwhichitarose,andwassilentonthematterofmethodsofstruggleandmeansofaction.Itlaiddowntheprinciples,butdidnotsetouttheirconsequences,whichthebulkofitsmembersmaywellneverevenhaveanticipated.At first glance, it might have seemed that this Association was merely a

larger-scale repetitionof theWorkers’Societies that, formanyyears,hadbeenlooking to cooperation, lawful resistance or laws protective of labor for theemancipation of the worker, without rebelling against the politico-socialconstitutionsoftheirseveralcountriesandwithoutstrayingbeyondtheconfinesofthebourgeoisworld.Andindeedthatappearedsomuchtobethecasethat,intheInternational’sbeginnings,whiletheFrenchgovernmentwastryingtodrawitintoitsorbitandmakeitaninstrumentofinfluenceandcorruptionintheranksof the impoverished classes, the International also received plaudits andencouragement from many influential members of the Republican party. But,later, once its program began to be expounded and to entail practicalconsequences, these were among its bitterest enemies and most ferociouspersecutors.Compared to many organizations and political parties of the time, the

International seemed, to casual observers, rather harmless and even anti-revolutionary.Since then, those organizations andparties have either vanishedwithouta traceorproven themselvespatentlybourgeoisandreactionary,while

the International has increasingly been enriching its program with all of thefindingsof social science andhashoisted its redemptive colors everhigher. IthastakentheleadofRevolutionandbecomeaforetasteofthenewcivilizationthatmustsproutfromtheruinsofthisoldbourgeoisworld.What is the secret behind the International’s success?What lies behind the

vastpowersofexpansionandassimilationthat, inafewyears,haveturnedtheInternationalintotheterroroftheprivilegedandthehopeofproletarians?TheInternationalwasbornspontaneouslyfromthewombofthepeople,and

evenasitansweredthemostheartfeltneedsandthemostancientinstinctsoftheoppressed masses, it was, from the outset, founded upon exclusively humaneprinciples, upon a realistic philosophy that probes the true nature of humansociety and espouses ideals consonant with nature’s laws of existence andgrowth. It carried within, in germ, the whole of the philosophical and socialrevolutionencapsulatedinitsprogramtoday.Acknowledging that theworker’s economic dependency upon the owner of

rawmaterialsandoftheinstrumentsoflaboristheprimecauseofallservitude,the International, right from inception, took as the foundation of its programsociology’smostimportanttruth,theveryfoundationofsocialism,whichisthatthe economic question overshadows every politico-social issue, and that theeconomicemancipationofworkersistheonlywaythatjusticeandthecommongoodcantriumph.Affirming that the emancipationof theworkers shouldnot tend to establish

freshprivilegesbutrathertoabolishallclassruleandestablishequalrightsandduties for all, the International recognized that the real and completeemancipation of the working class is not achievable unless the whole ofhumanity is set free, and so it mirrored the feelings of solidarity that haddevelopedinmen’sheartsdownthroughtheages,despiteathousandobstacles.Andbyvirtueofitsuniversalism,aswellasitsdeclarationthatallareentitledtobe treated in accordance with the principles of truth, justice, and morality,withoutdistinctionsastocreed,color,andnationality,itextendedsuchsolidaritytoallpeoples.Affirming that the emancipation of the workers must be the workers’ own

doing, theInternationalshowed that itunderstood thatnorulingclasshaseversurrendered its privileges, no matter howmuch a proper understanding of itsown interests might prompt it to do so—it never develops any suchunderstandingbyitself—andforesawalltherevolutionaryneedsthatcomplicateresolutionofthesocialquestion.So—thankstoafewtruepreceptsandtotheinstinctsofthelaboringclasses,

sowidely represented in its ranks—within a short time, the initially timorous

Internationalhasturnedintothefearsomeanti-parliamentary-revolutionary-anti-religious-anarchist-communist International,whichintendstostandinthefrontrankofprogressandisbentondestroyingthewholesocialedificeoftoday,fromthe foundations up, so as to raise an architecture of peace, freedom andwell-beingupontheruins.In this pamphlet we shall not be rehearsing the stages through which the

International passed prior to its espousal of the plainly socialist, revolutionarycharacterthatisitsdistinguishingfeaturetoday,forsuchscrutinywouldtakeusfarbeyondwhatwehaveinmindtodo;weshalltrymerelytosetout,inbrief,theconclusionsatwhichtheInternationalhasarrivedthusfar.ProgramDiscounting anymetaphysical notion, any other-worldly purpose, anymissionimposeduponmanbyachimericalGod; focusingupon thepurposeofhumanlife here on earth, the latter cannot, as we see it, be anything other thanhappiness,whichconsistsofthefullandoptimumdevelopmentofourfaculties;of achievement of the greatest well-being with the least quantum of painpossible.Society(itselftheconsequenceofthesearchandneedforwell-being)canhavenopurposeotherthansatisfyingtheaffectiveinstinctsgrowinginsideourbrainsandtheincreaseinandassuranceofourhappiness,ofwhichitis,inanyevent,anessentialpre-requisite.Itrequiresonlyasuperficialglanceathumanity’scurrentcircumstancestosee

howsociety,aspresentlyconstituted, is illequippedtoaccomplishitspurpose.Humanity is divided into two large parts, the larger of which seems fated tolabor, obey, and endure the greatest woes so as to afford the other a life ofidleness and of meddling in other people’s wishes and dignity. Poverty,ignorance, corruption, prostitution, disease, criminality, an uncertain future,untimelydeath,wars,outrages,hatreds—thesearebutafewofthefeaturesthatcharacterizethecurrentfaceofthehumanconsortium.What lies behind such a ghastly circumstance? What remedies would the

Internationalseektoapplytoit?There is nothing that is outside of nature, nothing that cannot be made to

conformtonaturallaws.Manisthehighestorganizedstatethusfarattainedbymatter, the loftiest creature in theanimalhierarchy,but thatdoesnot stophimbeinganaggregationofmaterialatoms—stillananimal—and,assuch,subjectto all the laws of chemistry and biology. Shaped by slow evolution under thedominionofnaturallaws,inthemidstofthethousandvagariesofthestruggletosurviveagainsthisenvironmentingeneralandtheotheranimalsinparticular,itis thanks to the spectrum of natural laws thatwe can fathomhis past and his

future.Itisonthebasisoftheverysamespectrumthatwecanglanceaheadintohisfutureanddiscovertheconditionswhereinhemayachieveahigherdegreeofcivilizationandthewell-beingtowhichheaspires.Scarcely had he arrived in this world than man, had to fight for his very

survival;he foughtothermenaswellas the restofnature,and itwasabrutalkill-or-be-killedbattle.Later,manrealizedthatthehelpofanothermanwasofathousand timesmore service to him than thatman’s death, andno longerwasbattleintendedsomuchtoexterminateone’sadversaryastobringhimtoheel;to reduce him to a slave and beast of burden. This new,wiser,more humanecharacterinman’sstruggleagainsthisfellowmanwasthefactorthatdeterminedthehighdegreeofcivilizationattainedbyman. It is,however, the reasonwhysuch civilization is founded upon the subjugation and impoverishment of themajorityofmenandisfatedtosupuponhumanbloodandtears—untilsuchtimeas the strife betweenmen is effectively ended and that civilization has as itsfoundation genuine, complete solidarity of the human race in the struggle tobendnaturetoitsneeds.Man’sstruggletosubjugatehisfellowmanhashadtwochiefconsequences:

propertyandauthority.Propertyarosewhen,atdaggersdrawnwithalltherest,eachmanseizedwhateverportionofwealthhecould;thosewhowerenotstrongenough or favored enough to claim their part of the lootwere set towork onanother’sbehalf,and,lackingthematerialsandinstrumentsoflabor,theyhadtoendure the conditions imposed by whoever held those materials and thoseinstruments. The entitlements he had awarded himself were passed on to hisoffspring or his friends and he helped divide humankind into two castes: onecaste of haves, bornwith an entitlement to livewithoutworking; the other ofproletarians whose lot from birth is wretchedness; subjection; exhausting,unrewarded toil; and it is only the odd one, in very rare instances andexceptionalcircumstances,whomanagestoascendtoamorehumanelifeand,sometimes, to property. Authority began with man’s brutal oppression ofwoman, child andweaker fellowman, and culminated in the establishment ofgovernments,whereby,throughregulation,socialprivilegesandsocialinjustices—firstandforemost,propertyrights—areenshrinedandchampioned.Property and authority—wedded to religious beliefs, grown out of the

ignorance and fearful imagination of primitive man back when he was firstteeteringonthebrinkofconsciousthought—havethesourceoftheirdurabilityin the interests of the privileged and in the brutalization caused byimpoverishment.Wedded to the sentiments of hatred and the racial, national,religious, commercial, familial rivalries, spawned by the antagonistic interestsand innuendoes of priests and tyrants, property and authority can be found in

everyaspectofsociallifeandaretherootcausesofallthewoeswehavebeendeploring.Aswehavealreadystated,ifthesewoesaretobebanished,wemustalterthe

principlebywhichhumanrelationshipsarepresentlyregulated;theprincipleofstrifemustbereplacedbytheprincipleofsolidarity.Manyhavetriedandtrystill,allinvain,tobanishorlessenthosewoeswith

political changes and moralizing, but along came socialism to provide theexplanationfortheirlackofsuccessandtopointthewaytoeffectiveremedies.Justas,innature,organicformsderivetheiroriginsandbasicsustenancefrom

inorganicmatter, so, in the social world (which is nothing but the continuingdevelopmentofnaturalforms),politicalinstitutionsandmoralsentimentsderivetheirraisond’êtrefromeconomicconditions.Ifheistosurvive,manneedssustenanceaboveallelse.Themannerinwhich

hesuccessfullyfindsfood,thegreaterorlesserroughnessofthestrugglethatheisobligedtowage,thegreaterorlessereaseofhisvictory,itsgreaterorlessercomprehensiveness, his more or less suitable sustenance, and every othermaterialconditionofexistence,dominateman’sphysiologicalexistenceandthushisentiremoralandsocialexistence.Andjustasworkistherequisitemeansforacquiringsustenance,andjustas

workrequiresmaterialsandtools,so,ifasocietyistobetransformed,workingconditions above all have to be transformed along with the logistics of rawmaterialsandtheinstrumentsoflabor.Ina societywhere themeansofproductionare in thehandsofa few, those

deprivedofthemarenecessarilyobligedtoabidebytheconditionslaiddownbythefewwhohavethepowertoprovideorwithholdwork,andareinapositiontobestowordeprivethemofalivelihood.What is thepointofwriting freedom,equality,andpopular sovereignty into

statutes when a fetter much tougher than any convict’s—hunger—hitches thefree and sovereign people to the chariot of the fewwho are blessed with themeansofhavingtheirwishescarriedout,theproperty-owners?Truefreedomisnottherightbuttheopportunity,thestrengthtodowhatonewill—andfreedom,intheabsenceofthewherewithalforexercisingit,isanatrociousirony.Whatisthepointofpreachingbrotherhoodandloveofone’sneighborwhen

theproletarianhas to fight for acrustofbreadand isobliged, eachandeveryday,tocompeteforitwithhisneighbor?What is the point of preaching science when poverty dulls wits, and the

chimericalhopeofparadiseistheonlythingmakingthisearthlyhellbearable?If all are to enjoy freedom and know happiness, if solidarity is to stand in

placeof strife, theprimarynecessity is forprivateownership tobedoneaway

with;andthatistheessentialtaskthattheInternationalhassetitself.Onceallofnature’sbountybelongstoeverybodyandonceeachofushasthe

right and thewherewithal to apply his efforts to rawmaterials, then solidaritywillhaveachanceofsuccessinthisworld,andmanwillbereleasedfromthethree terrifyingnightmaresgrindinghimdown:economicsubjection,authority,andreligion.Authority, which is to say political power, will be rendered useless and

impossiblesince,withsheerbruteforcebeingnowpowerlesstoimposeitselfinanylastingway,therewillbenowayanymoreforafewmentobendthemassestotheirwill.Religionwillvanishsincesciencehasnowbanishedmetaphysicalphantoms

onceandforall,andreligionwillnolongerhavetheignoranceandwoesofthemassesuponwhichtofuelitscontinuedexistence.

***Thus property lies at the heart of the social question and it need only beabolished for theway to be opened to all human progress.However, politicalauthoritystandsguardoverproperty—andinordertoreachtheproperty-owner,onehastowalkoverthebodyofthegendarmewhodefendshim.So political power and property need to be tackled and destroyed

simultaneously. Doing away with property without abolishing government isimpossible,andif thegovernmentweretobebroughtdownwithoutproperty’sbeingtouched,itwouldswiftlyberesuscitatedunderitsolddesignationorsomenewerone.And such a simultaneous abolition should be effected swiftly, by way of

revolution. Staged abolition is not feasible, since property, in accordancewiththeprinciple that the stronger alwaysgrows stronger still, tends, as a resultofcompetitionor abetted by the spreadofmachinery, to become concentrated inthehandsofaneverdecreasingcircleandtogrowevermoreoppressive;and,nomatter how altered, political power, established by and for property-owners,neverabdicatesitsessentialmission,namely,toactindefenseofproperty.

***With the government overthrown and the property expropriated by means ofrevolution,howandbywhomwillthenewsocietybeorganized?Notbymeansofuniversalsuffrage,forthegreaternumberofthepeople,still

being ignorant, still under the moral sway of the priest and property owner,wouldnot,couldnotconceiveofasocietyoffreeequals.Andbecauseuniversalsuffrage, which is in theory the subjection of theminority to themajority, inpractice,bytheverynatureofthemechanismitself,producesanoutcomethat,

evenwhenithasnotbeentamperedwith,doesnotrepresenttheinterestsnorthewishesofthevoters.Not bymeans, either, of the dictatorship of a single or of several persons,

because one or more individuals may well organize a brand new dominion,thoughnotasocietycateringfortheinterestsandenthusiasmsofmulti-facetedhumannature;becauseprivilegedpower isby itsveryessenceacorrupterandwouldspewoutthefinestmen;because,whenitcomestorevolution,startingbyenforcingobediencetobrandnewrulersisnottherightapproachforanenslavedpeople;and,finally,becausethebetterpartofthepeoplewouldneitherseeknorcountenancedictatorshipofanysort.Soallthatremainsistheunfetteredactionofallthethoughtfulheadsamong

the people, the spontaneous initiative of all men of good will, the activeintervention of the parties that have made the revolution. That is theInternationals’favoredapproach.

***Informed by these principles, let us briefly examine the main problems theInternationalmustgrapplewithinitsreformingendeavors,andsetitssolutionsalongsidethecurrentstateofaffairs.RELIGION.—Qua belief in an immaterial being, creator and ruler of all

things,religionoughttowitherawayalongwitheverycultthroughwhichmen’signorance and priests’ cunning have manifested themselves. The Internationallookstosciencetoensuresuchwitheringawayonceitspropagationisfreedofobstructions in the form of the poverty of the masses and the interests ofgovernments. Itwillobserve themostutter respect for freedomofconscience,butwilldoeverythingitcantoensurethatthepoisonofreligionisnotinjectedinto theminds of children; itwill bring about the destruction of anything thatmightupholdthehabitofworshipinthepeople;itwillwageawartothedeathon the Church and priest who may attempt, through their guile, to hold thepeople under the yoke of religion; and above all, it will highlight thecontradiction between the people’s true interests and those of the peddlers ofreligion.MORALITY. — Human morality and the International’s morality have

nothingtodowiththereligiousandbourgeoismoralitythatteachesrulershiptosomeandsubjection toothers,andanarrow,anti-social selfishness tooneandall.Truemoralityisthescienceofwhatisgoodforhumanity,whatmostbenefitseach and every one of us; and it advances and changes as social scienceprogresses.If, as we shall attempt to show, the revolution is the sine qua non of

humanity’s well-being, the first principle today, the premier moral duty is tocooperatewhole-heartedlywiththeadventofthesocialrevolution.Inthewakeoftherevolution,itshallbeamoraldutyincumbentuponallto

display love and respect for one’s fellow men, to protect the weak and thechildren,towork,toconsidertheinterestsofsocietyineveryindividualaction—inshort,everythingthatscienceandexperiencehasormaydemonstrateusefultomen.SOCIETYAND SOVEREIGNTY.— Society, which has thus far been the

forcible submissionofmen to a common regimen, organized in serviceof theinterestsoftherulingclasses,oughttobetheunsolicitedoutcomeoftheneedsandgratificationsthatweallderivefrombeingassociatedwithoneanother,andshouldhave,asitsgoal,greaterwell-beingandincreasedfreedomforallhumanbeings.Sovereignty,creditedthesedayseithertoanointmentbyGodortoamajority

amongthepeopleand,throughthem,theirchosenrepresentatives,andwhich,inpractice, belongs always to whoever has secured themselves a privilegedposition, by force and property, is by nature vested in every individual and isinalienable.Likeanycommontyrant, themajoritymayhavemighton itsside,butitcertainlyhasnomorerightthananysingleindividual.Therefore it is only through the unanimous agreement of us all, through a

harmony of interests and sentiments, and, at worst, through freely arrangedcompacts and by virtue of the law of nature, under which solidarity is theessentialpreconditionforfreedom,thatthesovereigntyoftheindividualcanbereconciledwithsocialpeace.GOVERNMENT.—Isthecollectionofpersons,delegatedorotherwise,who

holdthesumofsocialforcesintheirhandsandimposetheirwilluponeachandeveryone,on thepretenceofmakingprovision forpublicservicesandoverallsecurity.In a harmonious society founded upon solidarity and the greatest possible

satisfaction of everybody’s needs, in a society where the smooth running ofpublicaffairsisaconditionofthesmoothrunningoftheprivateaffairsofeachofus, andwhere thereareno lordlings toprotect andnomasses tobeheld incheck,thereisnoreasonforgovernmenttoexist.Thosegovernmentalfunctionsgenuinely necessary or useful and that the government wields to the almost-exclusiveadvantageoftherulingclasses,canbewieldeddirectlybysocietyforthebenefitofall,since thegovernmentcanonlywield themif itcandrawthenecessarystrengthandcapacitiesfromwithinsociety.Social organization should not be imposed by one or more men who hog

power andwield it in the name of God or of the people, but ought to be an

expressionofthewishesofall(ratherthanofthemajority),theoutcomeoftheexpansion and reconciliation of human interests and sentiments, starting fromthe equal entitlement of all to rawmaterials and the instruments of labor.Nomoreauthority,therefore,butratherspontaneousorganizingfromthebottomup,alteringwitheveryshiftininterestsandwhimhappeningwithinthesociety;nomore delegation of powers, but rather delegation of functions; no moregovernment,but,rather,ANARCHY.WOMAN.—The subservienceofwoman toman ranksamong thegreatest

injustices we have inherited from past ages; it is offensive to the spirit offraternity and human fellowship and contrary to the true interests of manhimself,sinceheisnotgoingtobeabletoachieveahighercivilizationnorenjoyanyassuranceofprogressandsocialpeaceaslongasonehalfofthehumanraceis tobedeemed inferior—andenslaved—and,at that, theveryhalf towhich itfalls, on physiological grounds, to be the primary educator of upcominggenerations.Forwomen,theInternationaldemandstheverysamefreedomandguarantees

ofunhindereddevelopmentas itdoes formen—inshort, thecompletest socialequality,andwhenittalksoftherightsofman,thatwordismeanttoapplytoallhumanbeings,regardlessofsex.If differences between the faculties of man and woman persist even after

equality of circumstance has been achieved, they will give rise to differingfunctionsandnevertodifferingrights.HOMELANDANDHUMANITY.—Thedividingupofhumanityintosuch

awidevarietyofhomelands isalsoaby-productofthestateofstrifeinwhichthehumanracehasbeenlivingandstilldoes.TheInternational,whichwantsallmendutyboundtothinkofthemselvesasbrothersandtobeheldtogetherbytheclosebondsofmoralandmaterialsolidarityandtoenjoytheworldincommonastheirsharedinheritance,yearnstoamalgamateallhomelandsintoonesharedhomeland, the world; and to banish from men’s hearts the sentiment ofpatriotism,thisbeingtheexclusiveoratanyratepreferentialloveforthelandorthepeoplewhere and intowhomonewasborn, the claim to anentitlement inone’shomelandtomorerightsthatthosebornelsewhereandwhichboilsdowntoindifference,rivalry,andhatredvisàvisotherpeoplesandthustocontentionandwar.Initially, the homeland was restricted to the tribe and the city. With the

establishment of modern states, with the concentration of powers, with thedemolition of communal independence, the homeland has swollen to vastterritorial units, fashioned more or less on a whim depending on geography,language, andgovernments.Thusbloated, thehomeland ismore artificial, but

certainlynomorejustifiablethanthecommunalhomeland.Thosewishingtoreconcilethenotionofhomelandwiththecomprehensively

humanoutlookthathasbeguntoprevailinscience,saythatthehomelandisthelinkbetweentheindividualandhumanityandisneededforthedivisionoflaboramongmen.Rather, patriotism is a serious impediment to brotherhood amongmenandfliesinthefaceofarationaldivisionoflaborbeingappliedacrossthefull range of soil and climate conditions around the globe.Work in theworldmustbedividedupaccording to thenatureof thesoilandclimate, theeaseofcommunicationsandoutlooksofmen,andsuchdivisionsdonotcoincidewiththe political and national divisions that homelands represent. The division oflabor should vary in accordance with fresh discoveries, new roads, newproduction processes, new consumer needs,whereas the homeland remains orshouldremainrelativelystuckbetweenthehillsandseasmarkingitsboundaries.Division of labor renders one country mutually dependent upon another andpatriotismclaimsthateachindividualcountrycansurvivebyitselfandforitself,since, intheeventofwar, itneedstobeabletosurvivewithoutlookingtotheforeigner.Divisionof labor requires complete reciprocation, andpatriotism,ofnecessity, arouses rivalry, since either the division into homelands stays as amerelygeographicaltermwithnoaddedpolitico-socialimplications,ormenwillalwaysbestrivingtosecuregreaterbenefitsforthecountrieswheretheyenjoygreaterrightsortowardswhichtheyfeelgreateraffection.The homeland not only does not bring the individual closer to humanity, it

detacheshimfromit;itisnotthespontaneousagglomerationgeneratedbyreal,pertinentaffectionsandneeds,butisanaggregationspawnedbyconditionsthatno longer obtain, that is foisted upon man from his very birth; it is the pastoppressingthepresentandthefuture.The Internationalwants to see allmen amalgamated into one huge, organic

whole—humanity—so itdeploresand tries to render impossiblestrifebetweenpeoples. An Internationalist, compelled by circumstances to take part in suchstrife,isnotguidedbytheinterestsofhisnativeland,butbytheinterestsofthewholeofhumanityandsideswiththisorthatcampdependingontheextent towhich he reckons that the cause of revolution, emancipation, and humanprogresswillbeadvancedordisadvantagedbyitsvictory.BACKWARDRACES.—Theso-calledcivilizedpeopleseitherabandonthe

barbarousorsavagepeoplestotheirowndevicesormaketheirlivesmiserable.In the view of the International, however, it should be incumbent upon the

mostadvancedpeoples,oncethesehaveliftedthemselvesoutofpoverty,tobringcivilizationtothebackwardraces,demonstratingthroughtheiractionsthattheyarethelatter’sfriendsandmakingthemtastethebenefitsofwork,affluence,and

freedom. And such a duty is also self-interest since, due to the barbarouscircumstancesofsomanystrainsofhumanity,abottomlesswelloflatenttalents,whichmaywellbedifferentfromourownandwhichmightenrichourcommoninheritance, is left untapped; much of the earth’s surface remains effectivelysterile,andcivilizationisforeverthreatenedbyaterrifyinginvasionthatmightdragitbackintobarbarism.PROPERTY.—As we have already said, private ownership is to be done

awaywith,asitsabolitionandthatofallallegedrightsderivingfromit(rightsofinheritance, etc.) are the pre-requisite for the triumph of solidarity in humanrelations.Letusnowsayafewwordsabouttheorganizationalarrangementsthataretotaketheplaceoftheprivate-ownershipsystem.The International has long been collectivist; that is, itwanted the land, raw

materials,theinstrumentsoflabor,inshort,everythingmanusesinthepursuitofhisactivitiesandproduction,tobecollectiveproperty,witheveryoneentitledtotheuseof theminhiswork,andfor theentireproductof labor—except foraquotientsetasideforgeneralcosts—tobelongtotheworker,behealoneor inpartnership.Hencetheformulatoeachaccordingtohislabors,or,whichamountstothe

samething,totheworkertheentireproductofhislabors;—lethimthatworkseatandhimthatdoesnotworknoteat,exceptforthoseunabletowork,inwhichcase the incapacitatedwouldhavea right to receivefromsociety themeans tosatisfytheireveryneed.Butcollectivismisopentomanyseriousobjections.It is, in economic terms, wholly based upon the principle of the value of

products being gauged by the amount of labor they require. Now that sort ofdefinitionofvaluecannotpossiblybedeterminedonceonetriestotakeaccountnotonlyofthetimeelementorofsomeotheroutwardattributeoflabor,butalsothe overallmechanical and intellectual effort it demands. Furthermore, just asvarious patches of dirt are more productive or less productive, and theinstrumentsof labornotallequallygood,soeachpersonwould try tofind thebestsoilorinstrumentsbytryingtoreducetheworthofthoseworkedbyotherpeople, just as he would try to talk up the value of his own products anddownplay those of the others asmuch as he could.And so the distribution oftoolsandexchangeofproductswouldwindupbeingconducted inaccordancewiththelawofsupplyanddemand,whichwouldimplyarelapseintoout-and-outcompetition,areversiontothebourgeoisworld.But above all else, collectivism is flawed in its moral foundation. Like

bourgeois-ism, it is founded upon the principle of strife, except that it tries torestore equality between strivers at the starting point.Where there is striving,

there must necessarily be winners and losers, and whoever scores the firstvictory gains certain advantages that almost always guarantee him furthersuccesses. Collectivism is impotent when it comes to bringing about thatrevolution, that thoroughgoing moral transformation in man, following whichthe individualwill not do andwill not bewilling to do something thatmightharm others, and therefore it is untenable. It is incompatible with anarchy; itwould require some regulating, moderating authority, which might well thenbecome oppressive and exploitative, and it would lead initially to corporateownershipandthen,later,backtoprivateownership.For these reasons the International has decided, virtually unanimously, to

embrace a broader,more consistent solution, the only one that allows for thecomprehensive expansion of the solidarity principle: COMMUNISM.Everything belongs to everyone, everything is exploited for the benefit of all;eachofusoughttodoonbehalfofsocietyallthathisresourcesallowhimtodo,andeachisentitledtoinsistthatsocietymeetallofhisneeds,insofarasthesumofproductionandsocialforcesallow.Butifitistobefeasible,communismrequiresahugemoralimprovementin

the members of society, plus a highly developed and deep-seated sense ofsolidarity that the thrust of revolutionmaywell not be enough to bring forth,especially if, in the early days, the material conditions that encourage itsdevelopment (to wit, such an abundance of production that each person mayhave his needs met in full without detriment to others, plus a workingarrangementsuchasensuresthatthisisnotburdensome)maynotbeinplace.Suchcontradictions canbe remedied through the immediate implementation

of communismonly in those areas and to the extent that circumstances allow,whilecollectivismisappliedtotherest,butonlyonatransitionalbasis.Intheearlystages,amendedbytheenthusiasmofapeoplebentuponanewwayoflifeanddrivenbythemightythrustofrevolution,collectivismisnotgoingtohavetime to make its damaging effects felt. However, lest it then relapse intobourgeois-ism,it isgoingtohavetomakearapidevolutioninthedirectionofcommunism.Anditisherethatactionbyaconsciouslycommunistparty,actionbytheInternational,willbeofcrucialimportance.The International is going to have to lobby for communism everywhere,

highlightingtheadvantagesdeliveredwhereveritmayhavebeenintroducedandtryingtobringundercommonownershipasmanythingsasitmay,and,aboveall, to call for communism’s immediate and wholesale implementation (inadditiontothoseareaswhereitalreadyapplies,suchaswater,ordinarystreets,lighting,publiccleansing,etc.)inrespectofhousing,education,careofthesick,therearingofchildren,andinstaplefoodstuffs,andthenextenditgraduallyinto

everysphereofproduction.WORK.—Work, as it is the primary necessity of human society, is also

men’sfirstduty.Itistoberegulatedinaccordancewiththeneedsthataretobesatisfied and the resources available and is to bemade as comfortable and asattractiveaspossibleandsharedinsuchawayastointroduceasmuchharmonyaspossiblebetweensocialusefulnessandpersonalinclinationsandpreferences—to the extent where such work may no longer be the satisfaction of thephysiological need to be active and exercise the organs. All useful labor isequally noble and entitles the laborer to have his needs met. Brainwork, thegreatestdelightofmanandthethingthatelevateshimsomuchhigherthanhisnatural surroundings, ought not to be the privilege of a caste. Everyone hasbrawn aswell as brain, and all should laborwith brain and brawn alike; andsocietymustseetoitthateveryonehastheopportunitytodevelopandexercisealltheirfaculties.Oncemanuallaborisnolongerlikeachain,towhichthemassesarebound,

and no longer oppressed and scorned, care will be taken to simplify itsprocesses,not,as ispresently thecase, in the interestsofcapitalistproduction,butintheinterestsofthelaborerhimself.Theusageofalltoolscanbebrokendown toa fewbasicprinciples, anda sm