M. Bakunin, Integral Education

8/6/2019 M. Bakunin, Integral Education

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/m-bakunin-integral-education 1/11

Th e Anarchist Encyclopaedia

Fol io 2, March 1986

better grasped th e

inter-relat ionships of natural

and social phenomena (what we

might term the laws of nature

and of society) wi l l the more

readi ly and more ful ly grasp

the nature of hi s surroundinss?

IT 15

natural that he who knows more

wi l l doninate him who knows

less. And were this disparj- ty

of educat ion and educat ion an d

learning the only one to exist

between two classes, would not

al l the others swif t ly fo1low

unti l the world of me n itsel f

in i ts present circumstances,

that is, unt i l it was aqain

divided into a mass of s laves

and a t iny number of rulers,

th e former labouring away as

they do today, to the advantage

of the lat ter?

Now lre see why the

bourgeois social ists demand

only a l i t t le educat ion for th e

people, a soupcon more than

they current ly receivel whereas

we social ist democrats demand,

on the people's behalf ,

compJ.ete an d integral

educat ion, an educat ion as ful l

as the power of intel lect today

rssN 0267-61 1

permits, so that, henceforth,

there may not be any class over

the workers bv vir tue of

superr-or educat ion andtherefore able to dominate and

exploi t then. The bourgeois

-social ists \^rant to see the

tretent ionof the class systen,

each c1ass, they contend,

ful f i l l ing a specif ic social

funct ion; one speclal is ing,

say, in learning, and the other

i .n manual labour. We, on the

other hand, seek the f inal an d

the utter abol- i t ion of c lasses;

we seek a unif icat i -on of

society and egual i ty of social

and economic provis ions fo r

every indiv idual on this earth.

Th e bourgeois social ists,

whi lst retaining the histor ic

bases of the society of today,

would l i -ke to see them become

less stark, less harsh and more

prett i f ied. Whereas we should

l ike to see their destruct ion.

From vrhich i t fo l lows that

there can be no truce or

compromise, let alone any

coal i t ion between the bourqeois

(n

F.pi

P

€o

h

p,afP.

IlllI

Michael Bakunin

The f i rst topic for

considerat ion today is this -

wi. l l i t be feasib]e for th e

working masses to know complete

enancipat ion as long as the

educat ion avai lable to those

masses cont inues to be i -nfer ior

to that bestowed upon th e

bourgeois, or, in more general

terms, as Iong as there exists

any class, be i t numerous or

otherwise, which, by vir tue of

bir th, is ent i t led to a

superior educat lon and a more

complete j-nstruct ion? Does

no t th e quest ion answer i tsel f?

Is i t not sel f-evident that of

any two persons endowed by

nature with roughly equivalent

intel l igence, one wiI l have th e

edge - the one whose mind \ ,r i l l -

have been broadened by

learnj .ng and who, having th e

IntegralEducation

11 the fol1owing four essays on educat ion publ ished in gggl l te (Geneva) between July and August

1959, Bakunin argues that where there exists di f fer lng degrees of educat ion, class society is

inevi tabl-e. Anarchists, he j.nsists, nust seek equal i ty and, therefore, integral educat ion - th e

same educat ion avai lable for everyone. ' I t is to the interest of both labour and science that

there must no longer be this div is ion into workers and scholars - henceforth there must only be

nen.t

An d that this one wil l feeI,

Ie t us say, a greater l iberty

and, in pract ical terms, show a

greater apt i tude and capabi l i tythan his fel low?



Michael Bakunin

social ists an d us social ist

democrats.

Rrr l -- T hawe heerd it said -

and thj ,s is the argument most

frequently rai .sed against us

an d an argument which the

dogmatists of every shade

regard as j-rrefutabl-e - i t is

impossible that the whole of

mankind should devote i tsel f to

Iearning, for we shoul-d al l di e

of starvat ion. ConsequentlYt

whi le some study others must

labour so that they ca n Produce

what we need to l ive - no t just

producing for their ow n needs,

bu t al-so for those men who

devote themselves exclusivelY

to intel lectual pursuits; aside

from expanding th e horizons of

human knowledge, th e

theseiscoveries of

intel lectuals imProve th e

condit ion of al l human beings'

wj- thout except ion, when aPPIied

to industry, agr icul ture and'

general ly, to Pol i t icaI an d

socj.al l i fe; agreed? And do

not their art ist ic creat ions

enhance th e l ives of everY on e

of us ?

No , not at al l . And thegreatest reproach which we ca n

level against science and the

arts i. s precisely that theY do

no t distr ibute their favours

an d do not exercise their

inf luence, except upon a t inY

fragment of society, to the

exclusion and, thus, to the

detr iment of th e vast major i tY.

Today on e might say of th e

advances of science an d of the

arts, just what has alreadY an d

so properly been said of th e

prodigious progress of

industry, trade, credit , and,

in a word, of th e wealth of

society in the most c iv i l ised

countr ies of th e modern world.

That wealth is quite exclusive,

an d th e tendency is for i t to

become more so each day, as i t

becomes concentrated into an

ever shr inking number of hands'

shunning th e lower echefons of

th e middle cl-ass an d th e Peti te

bourgeoisie, depressing them

into th e proletar iat , so that

th e growth of this wealth is

Social Theory

th e direct cause behind th e

growing misery of the labouring

masses. Thus the outcome is

that th e gulf which Yawns

between the priv i . leged,

contented minori tY an d mil l ions

of workers wh o earn their keeP

by th e strength of their arrns'

yawns ever wider an d that th e

happier th e contented - wh o

exploi t th e PeoPle's labour-

become, th e more unhaPPY th e

workers become. On e has onIY

to l-ook at th e fabulous

opulence of the aristocrat ic,

f inancier, commercial an d

j-ndustr ia l- c l ique in England

an d compare it with th e

miserable condit ion of th e

workers of the same countrY;

on e has only to re-read th e so

naive an d heartrending letter

lately penned bY an intel l igent

an d upright goldsmith of

London, on e Walter Dugan, wh o

ha s just voluntar i lY taken

poison alonq with hi s wife an d

their si x chi ldren, simPlY as a

means of escape from th e

degradat ions of PovertY an d th e

torments of hunger (1 ) - an d

on e wil l -f ind oneself obl iged

to concede that th e much

vaunted civi l isat ion means, in

nater ial terms, to the PeoPle,

only oppression an d ruinat ion.

And the same holds true fo r

th e modern advances of science

an d th e arts. Huge str idest

indeed, i t is true! But the

greater the advances, th e more

they foster intel lectual

servi tude an d thus, in mater ial

terms, foster miserY an d

infer ior i ty as the lot of th e

people; fo r these advances

merely widen th e gulf which

already separates th e people's

l-eve1 of understanding from th e

levels of the priv i leged

classes. From the point of

view of natural capacity ' th e

intel l igence of the former is ,

today, obviously less stunted,

less exercised, less

lessnd

corrupted by the need to defend

unjust interests, and is ,

consequently, natural ly of

greater potency than the brain

Integral Educat ion

power of the bourgeoisie: but,

then again, th e brain Power of

th e bourgeois does have at it s

disposal the complete arsenal-

of science f i l led with weapons

that ar e indeed formidable. Tt

is very often the case that a

highly intel l igent worker is

obl iged to hold hi s tongue when

confronted by a l-earned fool

who defeats him, not bY dint of

intel lect (o f which he has

none) bu t by dint of hi s

educat ion, an educat ion denied

the workingman bu t granted th e

fool because, whi le th e fool

wa s able to develoP hi s

fool ishness scient i f ical lY in

schools, th e working man's

fabours were clothing, housing,

feeding him and supplying hi s

every need, hi s teachers an d

his books, everything necessary

to his educat i-on.

Even within th e bourgeois

c1ass, as we know onIY too

welI , th e degree of learning

i-nparted to each individual is

not the same. There, too,

there is a scale which is

determined, no t bY th e

potent ial of th e individual bu t

by the amount of wealth of th e

social stratum to which he

belongs by bir th; fo r examPle'

th e instruct ion made avai lable

to the chi ldren of th e lower

pet i te bourgeoisie, whi lst

i - tsel f scarcely superior to{l ^

that which workers manage to

obtain for themselves, is next

to nothing bY comParison wj-th

th e educat ion that societY

makes readi lY avai labfe to th e

upper an d middle bourgeoisie.

What, then, do we find? Th e

peti te bourgeoisie, whose onlY

attachment to th e middl-e class

is through a r id iculous vanity

on th e on e hand, an d it s

dependence upon the bi g

caoital- ists on th e other ' f inds

i tsel f nost often in

circumstances even more

miserable an d even more

humil iat ing than those which

aff l ict the Proletar iat . So

when we talk of Priv i leged

classes, we never have in mind

this poor Peti te bourgeoisie

sophist icated



The Anarchist Encyclopaedia

\,rhich, i f i t d id but have a

l i t t le nore spir i t an d

gumption, would not delay in

joining forces with us to

combat the big and medium

bourgeoisie who crush i t today

no less than they crush the

proletar iat . An d should

societyr s currenteconomic

trends cont inue in the same

direct ion for a further te n

years (whlch \,re do, however,

regard as impossible) \ , /e may

ye t see the bulk of the medium

bourgeoisie tumble f i rst of aI l

into the current circurnstances

of the pet i te bourgeoisie only

to sl ip a l i t t Ie later into th e

proletar iat - as a resuJ-t , of

course, of th is inevi table

concentrat ion of ownership into

an ever smal ler number of hands

- the ineluctable consequences

of which would be to part i t ion

society once and for al l into a

t iny, overweaningly opulent,

educated, rul inq minori ty and a

vast major i ty of j -mpoverished,

ignorant, enslaved

proJ-etar ians.

There is one fact which

should make an inpression upon

every person of conscience,

upon al l who have at heart a

concern for human dignlty and

j ust ice; that i s, for th e

l iberty of each indiv idual amid

and | -hrnrrah : <at-# i na^f

equal i ty fo r al l . That is theal

fact that a1l of the

contr ivances of th e

intel l igentsj-a, aI 1 of the

great appl icat ions of science

to the purposeof industry,

trade and to the l i fe of

society in geneal have thus far

prof i ted no one, save th e

pri .v i leged c.Iasses an d th e

power of the State, that

t i rneless champion of al l

pol i t ical . an d social in iqui ty.

Never, no t oncef have they

brought any benef i t to th e

masses of the people. We need

only l ist the machines an d

every workingman and honest

advocate of the emancipat ion of

labour would accept th e just lce

of what we say. By what power

do th e priv i leged classes

Social Theorv

maintain themselves today, with

al l their insolent smugness an d

iniqui tous pleasures, in

def iance of th e al l too

Iegit imate outragte fel t bY the

masses of th e people? Is it

by some power inherent in their

persons? No - i t i .s solelY

through th epower

of the State,in whose apparatus today their

offspr ing hold, always, every

ke y posit ion (and even evry

lower and middle range

posit ion) except ing that of

soldier and worker. And in

this day and age what is i t

that const i tutes th e principle

underly ing the power of the

State? Why, i - t is science.

Yes, science - Science of

government, science of

admi-nistrat ion and f inancial

science; the science of

f leecing th e f locks of the

people without their bleat ing

too loudly and, when they start

to bleat, the science of urging

si lence, pat ience and obedience

upon then by means of a

scient i f ical ly organised force:

the science of deceiving an d

d .vj-ding the masses of the

people an d keeping thern always

in a salutory ignorance lest

they ever becorne able, by

helping one another an d pool ing

their efforts, to conjure up a

power capabfe of overturning

States I and, above al l ,

mi l i tary science with al l i . ts

tr ied an d tested weaponryrthese

fornidable instruments of

destruct ion which 'work wonderst

(2): an d last ly, the science ofgen j-us lehj-ch has conj ured up

steamships, ra j- lways an d

telegraphy whj-ch, by turning

every government into a hundred

armed, a thousand armed

Briareos (3), giv ing it th e

po! 'rer to be, act and arrest

everywhere at once - ha s

brought about the most

fornidable pol i t ical

central isat ion th e lror ld has

ever witnessed.

Who, then, wi l l deny that,

without except ion, al l of the

advances made by science have

thus far brought nothing, save

Fol io 2

a boost ing of th e weafth of the

priv i leged classes and of the

power of the State, to the

detr i rnent of the welI-being and

l iberty of the masses of the

people, of the proletar iat?

But, we wi l l hear th e

object ion, do not the masses of

:::,;f't."i'r"Isociet ies of byegone centur j-es?

We shal1 reply to that with

an observat ion borrowed from

th e noted cerman social ist ,

Lassal le. In measuring th e

progress made by the workj-ng

masses, in terms of their

po I i t ical and social

emancipat ion, one should not

compare their intel lectual

state in this century with what

i t may have been in centur ies

gone by. Instead, one ought to

consider whether, by comparison

with some given t ime, the ga p

which then existed betvreen

the working masses and the

priv i leged cl-asses having been

noted, th e masses have

progressed to the same extent

as these priv i leged classes.

For, i f the progess made by

both has been roughly

equivalent, th e intel lectual

ga p which separates the masses

from th e priv i leged in todayrs

world wi l l be the same as i t

ever was; but i f th e

proletar iat ha s progressed

further an d more rapidly than

th e priv i leged, then the ga p

must necessari ly have narrowedlbut i f , on the other hand, th e

worker 's rate of progress ha s

been slower and, consequently,

less than that of a

representat ive of th e rul ing

classes over the same period,

then that ga p wil l have grown.

Th e gulf which separates them

wil l have increased and the man

of pr iv i lege grown more

powerful an d the worker 's

circunstances rnore abject, more

slave l- i -ke than at the date on e

chose as th e point of

departure. f f the two of us

set off f rom two di f ferent



Michael Bakunin

points at the same t ime and yo u

have a lead of one hundred

paces over me and yo u move at a

rate of s ixty paces per minute,

an d I at only thir ty paces per

minute, then after one hour th e

distance which separates us

wi l l no t be just over one

hundred paces, but just over

one thousand nine hundred

paces.

That example gives a

roughly accurate notion of the

respective advances made by the

bourgeoisie an d th e

proletar iat . Thus far th e

bourgeoisie has raced along the

track of c i-v i l - isat ion at a

quicker rate than the

proletar iat , not because they

ar e in te l lectual ly more

powerful than the lat ter

indeed one might properly argue

the contrary case - but because

th e pol i t ical an d economic

organisat lon of society ha s

been such that ' h i therto, th e

bourgeoisie alone have enjoyed

access to learning and science

has existed only for them' and

th e proletar iat ha s found

i. tsel f doomed to a forced

ignorance, so that j. f th e

proletar iat has, nevertheless,

made progress (and there is no

denying i , t ha s ) then that

progress wa s made not thanks

to society, bu t rather in

spite of it .

To su m up . rn society as

present ly const i tuted, th e

avances of sci .ence have been at

th e root of the relat ive

j-gnorance of th e proletar iat ,

just as the progress of

industry and commerce have been

at the root of i ts relat ive

impoverishment. Thus,

intel lectual progress an d

mater iaf progress have

contr ibuted in equal measure

Lowards the exacerbat ion of the

slavery of the proletar iat .

Meaning what? Meaning that we

have a duty to reject and

resist that bourgeois sciencet

just as we have a duty to

rej ect and resist bourgeois

wealth. And reject and resist

thern in this sense - that

Socia1 Theorv

in destroying the socj .al order

which turns i t into th e

preserve of one or of several

c lasses, we must 1ay clairn to

i t as the common inheri tance of

al l the wor]d.

Egal- i te, 31 July 1869

II

We have shown how, as long as

there are two or more degrees

of instruct ion for the var ious

strata of society, there must,

of necessity, be classes, that

is , economic and pol i t ical

pr iv i lege for a sma1l number of

the contented and slavery and

misery fo r the lot of the

general i ty of men.

As members of the

fnternat j-onal Working Men's

Associat ion (IWMA/AfT), we seek

equal i ty and, because we seek

it , we must also seek integral

educat ion, the same educat ion

for everyone.

Bu t i f everyone is schooled

who wi l l want to work? we hear

someone ask. Our answer to

that is a simple one: everyone

nust work and everyone must

receive educat ion. To this,

i t is very often objected that

this mixing of j-ndustr ia l with

intel lectual labour cannot be,

except one or the other suffer

by i t . The manual workers wi l - l

make poor scholars, and the

scholars wi l l never be more

than quite pathet ic workers.

True, in the society of today

where manual labour and

intel lectual- l -abour are equal ly

distorted by th e quiLe

art i f ic ia l isolat ion in which

both are kept! But we are

guite persuaded that in th e

rounded human being, each of

these pursuits, the muscuLar

and the nervous, must be

devel-oped in equal measure and

that far from being inimicaL

each must lean upon, enhance

and reinforce the other. Th escience of th e sage wil l become

more frui t fu l , more useful and

more expansive when the sage is

no longer a stranger to manuaL

labour, and the labours of the

Integral Educat ion

workmen, when he is educated,

wj-11 be more intel l igent an d

thus more product ive than those

of an ignorant workman.

From which i t fo l lows that,

fo r work's sake as much as for

the sake of science, there must

no longer be this div is ion into

workers and scholars and

henceforth there must be onlv

Th e result of th is is that

those me n who are today, on

account of their superior

intel lects, caught up in the

ivory towers of science and

who, once they have establ ished

themselves in this world, y ield

to the need for a thoroughly

bourgeois posit ion and bend

their every invent ion to the

excl-usive use of th e priv i leged

class to which they themselves

belong. These men, I say, once

they becone truly the fel lows

of everyone, fel lows not just

in their imaginat ion nor just

in their speech but in fact, in

their work, wi l I just as

necessari ly convert their

invent ions and appl icat ions of

their learning to the benef i tof al l , and especial ly apply

themselves to th e task of

nakinq work ( the basis, th e

only real and r ightful basis of

human society) l ighter and more

dignif ied.

I t is quite possible and,

indeed, I ikely that dur ing th e

period of fair ly lengthy

t ransit ion

?*-

which wi 1l- ,

natural ly, succeed the great

cr is is of society, th e loft iest

sciences wi l l fa l l considerably

below their current levels.

Equal ly, i t is not to be

doubted that luxury an d

everything const i tut ing the

ref i .nements of l i . fe wi l l have

to disappear from the social

scene fo r quite a long t ime and

wil l not be abl-e to reappear as

the exclusive amusements of a

few, but wi l l have to return as

rdays of digni fy ing 11fe for

everybody, and then only once

society has conquered need j. n

al l of us. Bu t would this

temporary ecl ipse of the lof ty




sci-ences be such a misfortune?

Whatever sci-ence may lose in

terms of subl- ime elevat ion,

wi l l i t not win through the

extensi.on of i ts base?

Doubtless there wi l l be fewer

j- l lustr ious sages, but at the

same t ine there wiI I be fewer

ignoramuses too. There wi l lbe no more of these men who can

touch the skies, but, on th e

other hand, mi l l ions of men wh o

ma y be degraded and crushed

today wil l be able to tread the

earth as human beings: no

demigods, but no slaves either.

Both the slave and the demigods

wil l achieve hunan-ness, th e

one by r is ing a 1ot, the other

by stooping a I i t t1e. Thus no

longer wi l l there be a place

for dci f i nal- i nn - nor fof

contumely. Everyone wil l shake

hands with hi s neighbour and,

once reuini ted, we shafl al l

march with a ne w sprinq in ou r

sEeps, onwards to new

conguests, in the realm of

science as in the realm of l i fe

i tsel- f .

So , far from having an y

misgivings about that ecl i .pse

of science - which wi l l be in

any case only a f leet ing on e -

$/e ought to cal l fo r it with

al l our powers since i ts effect

wi l - ] be to hurnanise both

scholar and rnanual labourer an d

to reconci l -e science and l i fe.

An d we are convj.nced that, once

we have achieved this ne w

foundation, th e progress of

nankind, in the realm of

scj .ence as elsewhere in l i fe,

wiI l very guickly outstr ip

everything that we have seen

and everything we might conjure

up in our imaginat ions today.

But here another quest ion

crops up: wi l l every indiv idual

have an equal capacity for

absorbing educat ion to the same

degree? Let us imagine a

soclety organised along th e

most egal i tar ian I ines, a

society in which chi ldren wi1l ,

f rom birth onwards, start ou t

with the same circumstances

economical ly, social ly and

po1it ica11y, I l rhich is to say

SociaI Theory

the same upkeep, the same

educat ion, the same

instruct ion: among these

thousands of t iny indiv j-duals

wi l l there no t be an inf in l te

var iety of enthusiasms, natural

incl inat ions and apt j- tudes?

Such is th e big argurnent

advanced by our adversar ies,

the bourgeoj-s pure and simple,

and the bourgeois socj-al ists as

wel1. They imagine i t to be

unanswerable. So let us try to

prove the opposite. Wel1, to

begin with, by what r ight do

they make their stand for th e

principle of individual

capabi l i t ies? Is there roorn

fo r th e development of

capabi l i t ies in society as at

present const i tuted? Ca n

there be room fo r that

development in a society which

cont inues to have the r ight of

inheri tance as i ts foundation?

SeIf-evident ly not; for, from

the moment that the r ight of

inheri tance appl ies, th e career

of chi ldren wi l l never be

determined by their indiv idual

gi f ts an d appl icat lon: i t wi l I

be determined primari lyby

their economic circumstances,

by the wealth or poverty of

their famil ies. Wealthy bu t

emptyheaded heirs wiI l receive

a superior educat ion; th e rnost

intel l igent chi ldren of th e

proletar iat wi l l receive

ignorance as their inheri tance,

just as happens at present.

So, is it not hypocr j_t ica1,

when speaking no t only of

society as i t is today bu t even

of a reforned society which

would st i l l have as i ts

fundaments pr ivate property

ownership and the r i .ght of

inheri tance - is 1t not sordld

sophistry to talk about

indiv idual r ights based on

indivldual capabi l i t ies?

There is such a lot of

talk today of indiv idual

l iberty, yet what prevai ls is

no t th e individual person, no r

the indiv idual i. n general , bu t

the individual upon r,rhom

priv i lege 1s conferred by his

social posi t ion. Thus what

Fol io 2

counts is posit ion and class.

Just let one intel l igent

indiv idual from the ranks of

th e bourgeoisie dare to take a

stand against the economic

pr iv i leges of that respectable

class an d yo u wil l see how much

these qood bourgeois, forever

pratt l - ing about indlv idual

l j .berty today, respect h -s

I i herfv as an individual!

Don't ta lk to us about

indiv idual abi l i t ies! Is i t

not an everyday thj-ng for us to

see the greatest abi l i t ies of

working men and bourgeois

forced to give way and even to

kowtow before the crass

-! . . - i r i r - . ^. !L ^ heirs to theLuI/rurLI vr

golden calf? Indivi .dual

l iberty - no t pr iv i leged

l iberty but hurnan l iberty, an d

th e reaf potent ial of

indiv iduafs - wi l l only be able

to enjoy fuI1 expansi.on in a

regime of conplete equal i ty.

When there exists an equal i ty

of or ig ins fo r aII men on this

earth then, and only then (with

safeguards, of course, fo r th e

superior cal ls of fe l lowship or

sol idar i ty, which is and evershal l remain the greatest

producer of al l social

phenornena, from human

intel l igence to mater ial

wealth) only then wi l l one be

able to say, with more reason

than one can today, that every

indiv idual is a sel f-made man.

Hence our conclusion is that,

if lndlv idual talents are to

prosper and no longer be

thwarted in br inging forth

their fu l1 frui ts, the f l rst

precondit ion is that al-1

indiv idual pr iv i leges, economic

as wel l as pol i t ical , musL

disappear, which is to say that

al l c lass dist inct ions rnust be

abol ished. That requires that

pr ivate property r ights an d th e

rights of inherl tance must go ,

an d equal l ty must tr iurnph

economical ly, pol i t ical ly an d

socia1Ly.

Bu t once equal i ty ha s

tr i .umphed and is wel l

establ ished, \di l l there be no

longer any di f ference j. n th e



Bakunin

an d degree of

of th e various

There wi l l be a

not so many as

today, PerhaPs, but there

always be di f ferences. of

there ca n be no doubt.

is a Proverbial truth

wiI l probably never cease

be true - that no tree ever

forth two leaves that

e exact ly ident ical . Ho\, t

more wi l -1 this be true of

me n being much more

creatures than

But such diversi ty '

r f rom const i tut ing an

is , as the German

Feuerbach ha s

noted, on e of th e

of mankind. Thanks to

, th e human race is a

whole wherein each

being comPlements th e

an d ha s need of them; so

this inf in i te var iat ion in

beings is th e verY cause

d chlef basis of their

an lmPortant

in favour of equal i tY.

Baslcal ly, even in todaY's

if on e excePts tw oof men - men of

an d idiots - an d

on e abstracts

conjured uP

through th e

of a thousand social

such as educat ion,

nstruct ion, economic an d

status which create

no t merelY within

ach social stratum, bu t in

lmost every familY unit ' on e

concede that f rom th e

point of v iew of intel lectual

gi f ts an d moral energY th e vast

major i ty of men are verY much

al ike or r at least, are worth

about th e same - weakness in

on e regard being alrnost alwaYs

counterbalanced by an

equivalent strength in another,

so that i t becomes imPossible

to sa y whether on e man chosen

from this mass is much th e

superior or the infer ior of hi s

neighbour. The vast major i tY

of me n ar e no t ident ical bu t

equivalent an d thus equa1.

Soclal Theorv

Which means that th e f ine of

argument pursued by our

adversar ies is l-eft with

nothing but the geniuses an d

the idiots.

As \ ,re know, i-diocy is a

psycholoqical and social

aff l ic t ion. Thus, i t should be

treated no t in th e school-s but

in the hospitals and one is

ent i t led to expect that a rnore

rat ional system of social-

hygiene - above al l , one that

cares more for the physi.cal am d

moral wel l -being of the

individual than th e current

system - wi l l some day be

introduced an d that together

with a new society organj-sed

along egal i tar ian I ines i t wi l -1

eventual ly eradlcate from the

surface of the earth this

aff l lct ion of idi .ocy' such a

humil iat ion to the human race.

As for the men of genius, on e

should note f i rst of al l that,

happi ly or unhappi ly ' according

to onets main point of view,

such men have not featured in

th e history of mankind excePt

as the extremely rare

except i-ons to al l ofthe rules

known to us' and one cannot

organise to cater fo r

except ions. Even Sor i t is

ou r hope that the soclety of

th e future wi l l be abl-e to

discover, through a truly

pract ical popular organisat j -on

of i ts col lect ive assets th e

means by which to render such

geniuses less necessary, less

int imidat ing an d more truly the

benefactors of us a1I. Fo r we

must never lose sight of

Voltairers great dictum: 'There

is someone with more wit than

th e greatest gTeniuses, an d that

is everyonet. so i t is merely

a quest ion of organising this

everyone for the sake of th e

ful lest l iberty rooted in th e

most complete economic,

pol i t ical and social equal i ty,

and one need no longer fear the

dictator ial anbit ions an d

despotic incl inat ions of the

men of genius.

As for turning out such me n

of genius through educat ion,

Integral Educat ion

one ought to banish the thought

from oners mind. Moreover, of

al l th e me n of genius we have

known thus far, none or almost

di qn l r r rod l -hai r

genius whi le ye t in their

chi ldhood, nor in their

adolescence no r ye t in thei .r

ear ly youth. only in theirmature years did they ever

reveal themselves geniuses an d

several were not recognised as

such unt i . l af ter their death

whereas rnany supposedly great

men having ha d their praises

sung whi le youths by better me n

have f inished their careers in

th e rnost absolute obscuri ty.

So it i -s never in the chi ldhood

years, nor even j. n th e

adolescent years that one can

discern an d determine the

comparat ive excel lences an d

shortcomings of men, nor the

extent of their talents, no r

their inborn apt i tudes. A11 of

these things only become

obvious and are governed by the

development of the individual

person and, just as there ar e

sone natures precocious an d

some very sfow - although th e

latter are by no means infer ior

and, indeed, are often superior

- so no schoolmaster wi l l ever

be in a posit ion to specify in

advance the career or nature of

th e occupations which hi s

charges wi l l - choose once they

attain the age when they have

th e freedom to choose.

From which i t fo l lows that

society, disregarding an y real

or i .magined dif ferences inapt i tudes or abi l i t ies an d

possessed of no means of

determining these in any event

and of no r ight to al lot th e

uture career of chi l -dren owes

fhem al l , without a single

except ion, an absolutely equal

educat ion an d instruct ion.

Egal i te, 14 August 1869

II I

At every level there must be

equal instruct ion for al I ;

consequently that instruct ion

must be integrated, whi.ch is to

e



Anarchist EncycloPaeadia

that it should PrePare each

of whichever sex, as

for a l i fe of brainwork as

a l i fe of labour so that

of thern md Y i. n equal

becme rounded human

Posit ive Phi losoPhY (4),

dethroned rel ig ious

an d th e reveries of

from their LordshiP

th e mind, al- Iows us an

into what scient i f ic

must be in th e t ime

come. It wit l have as it s

th e knowledge of nature

d it s crownj.nq glorY wil l be

Th e idea1, ceasing

be th e Iord, the ravisher of

as it is in every

an d rel ig ious

wj. l I henceforth be

other than th e ult imate

d most beaut i fu l expression

the real world. Ceasing to

a dream, i t wi l l i tsel f

a real i ty.

Since no mind, however

is caPable of

al l of th e

of al l of th e

an d since a generalwith al l of th e

is absolutelY vi- tal to

thorough develoPment of th e

teaching wi l l natural lY

divided into tw o Parts: th e

Part which wiI I imPart

e basic PrinciPles of al l of

" sciences without excePtion

wel l as a famil iar j - tY - real

than suPerf ic ial - with

e sciences as a whole; an d

e sPecial ised Part, which

of necessitY, be divlded

into several grouPs of

facult ies, each on e

special is ing in a certain

number of th e branches of

learning which ar e bY their

very nature reciProcaI lY

cornplementarY in a special vtay.

The f irst , or general Part

wi l t be comPulsorY fo r al l

chi ldren: i t wi l l r i f i "e may

use the exPression, const i tute

th e humane education of their

spir i t , taking over ent ire lY

from metaPhYsics an d theologY

whilst at the same t irne Placing

Social- TheorY

th e chi ldren at a suff lc ient lY

advanced Poj-nt so that once

they reach adolescence theY

wil l be in a Posit ion to select

knowledgeablY

special isat ion which best sui ts

their indiv j-dua1 disPosit ions

an d tastes.

It wi l f no doubt cone to

pass that in select ing their

special ised area of study

adolescents, inf fuenced bY solne

secondary considerat ion,

internal or external, wi l l

occasional lY make mistakes an d

that they ma Y at f i rst oP t fo r

a special i tY an d fo r a career

which ma y wel l no t be those

best matched to their

apt i tudes. But, s ince we ar e

al l unhypocri t ical an d honest

advocates of th e freedom of th e

indivi i lual an d since, in the

name of that freedom we abhor

with 'al l ou r hearts the

principle of author i tY as wel l

as aI I possible manifestat ions

of that div ine an d anti--human

principle; an d since we desPise

an d condemn, from th e very

depths of love we bear freedom'

th e authori tYof th e father as

wel l as of th e schoolmaster -

f inding th e on e everY whit as

depraving an d degrading in that

ou r everydaY exPerience Proves

that th e Pater-famil ias an d

th e schoolmaster, desPite their

obl igatory an d Proverbial

wisdom - an d indeed because of

it - er r regarding th e

abi l i t i .es of their chi- l -dren

even rnore so than th e chi ldren

themselves, an d in view of the

thoroughly human, irrefutable

an d inescapable law which saYs

that every ma n in a Posit ion of

povrer never lets sl iP the

chance to abuse hi s Power; an d

since, in

arbi trar i ly

determining

(these pater

famil ias and schoolmasters)

what their chi ldren's future is

to be , theY give greater

credence to their own

inclinations than to an y

natural aptitudes on th e Part

of their charges. In short t

since mistakes made bY desPots

ar e always more noxious and

Fol io 2

harder to rePair than those

made by f ree nenr \'7e hold

unf l inchinglY an d without

quest ion, desPite al l of f ic ia l ,

th e off ic ious, paternal and

pedantic overseers in th e

world, that th e chi ldren must

be free to select an d determine

their ow ncareers.

Should theY rnake a mistake'

th e very mistake which theY

wiII have made wil l - Prove an

effect ive educat ion fo r them in

subsequent t imes, an d tb e

broad-based educat ion which

they wiI l a lreadY have received

wil l have enl ightened themr so

that they wiI I f ind i t easy to

redirect along t ines dictated

by their ow n natures.

Like ful l lJror^tn men,

chi ldren to o learn onIY from

personal exPerience an d never

by th e mistakes of others.

In a systen of integrated

educat ion, scient l f ic an d

theoret ical instruct ion must

necessari ly go hand in hand

vt i th lndustr ia l or Pract ical

training, onlY thus wi l l th e

rounded human being be arr ived

at ; a rounded human being wh o

understand an d knows.

Para1le1 wlth scient i f ic

training, this industr ia l-

training wi l l be divided into

two stages; a broadbased

training, whj.ch should give

chi ldren a broad samPle an d

introductory pract ical

experience of aI 1 manner of

industr ies, except ing none, as

wel l as an overal l not ion of

what underPins civ i l isat ionmater ial ly an d of th e range of

human labouri and, th e second

phase, the sPecial ised, when

th e students ar e sPl i t uP into

more special ised inter-rel-ated

groups.

Th e broadbased training

should equiP adolescents to

make free choice of th e

special ised area of industrY

and, within this th e sPecif ic

industry which theY feel most

attracted to . Once theY have

moved on to th e second Phase of

industr ia l t raining theY ca n

begin their f i rst ser ious



Michael Bakunin

apprent iceship experiences

under th e supervis ion of their

instructors.

Side by side with such

traininq in the sciences an d

industr ies there wi l l a lso be a

need fo r pract ical training' or

rather a succession of

experiences of a moral i tY which

is not div ine bu t human.

Divine moral i ty is founded upon

tvro imrnoral . pr inciples

respect for author i ty an d

contempt for mankind. BY

contrast, human moral i ty is

rooted only in the contempt fo r

author i ty and respect fo r

freedorn and humanity. Divine

moral i ty deems work a

degradat ion, a punishment;

human moral i ty sees in work

th e supreme condlt ion of human

happiness an d human dignity.

Of necessity, div ine moral i ty

culminates in a pol i t lcs which

recognises r ights only fo r

those who, by vir tue of their

economic, their Pr iv i leged

economic circumstances, ca n

l ive without having to work.

I luman moral i ty concedes rights

only to those wh o l- ive bYworking: i t recognises th e fact

that it is through work that

ma n becomes human. Th e

educat ion of chi ldren which is

f ounded upon au.t.horitY must

henceforth yield t 'o educat ion

based on th e ful- Iest freedom.

Posit ively speaking' what we

mean by freedom is the ful- I

development of al l of th e

facult ies of which ma n is

possessed and, in a negative

sense, th e complete

independence of the wi l l of th e

individuat vi s a vls hi s

fel Iows.

Ma n is not and never shal1

be free of th e laws of nature

vi s a vi s th e laws of

society: laws, which for the

purposes of science are thus

divided into two tYPes, belong

in real i ty to onlY on e and the

same type for they are al l -

Social Theory

so that one could onlY defY

them by taking one's ow n l i fe.

But i t is inportant to

dist inguish between these

laws and the

Integral Educat ion

concerned, l i fe renoved from

al l society and every human

inf luence ( in other words

absolute isolat ion) rnean death

intel lectual ly, moral ly and

mater ial ly also. Sol idar i ty is

not the product bu t th e sire of

indiv idual i ty an d th e human

personal i ty cannot be conceived

and cannot develop except in a

society of human beings.

Th e su m of prevai l ing

social inf luences as expressed

by th e sol idar ist ic or overal l

consciousness of a human group

of whatever size, ' , te cal l

publ ic opinion. An d wrich of

us doe not know th e al l

powerful effects of PubIic

opinion upon every indiv idual?

^' ^"?n th e mostl l c r i l l [JouL

draconi,an restr ict ive t-

legis lat ion is as nothing

beside it . So, i t is publ ic

opr-n]-on which

par_exce1lence, the educator

of men; from which it fo l ]ows

that i f one is to in ject

noral i ty into indiv iduals on e

has to i .nject it f i rst of al l

j -nto society i tsel f - on e ha s

to humanisej- ts publ ic

oPinion,it s publ ic conscience.


IV

To make me n moral, we said, on e

has to make their social p

context rnoral . Social ism, {

which has as j- ts poundati-on

posit ive science, rejects out

of hand the doctr ine of free

wi l l an d holds that what, in

men, \ ,ve Inay cal- I v ice or

vir tue, j- s who1ly th e resu1t of

th e combined inf luences of

nature an d society. Naturer in

th e form of ethnographic,

physiological and pathological

factors, conj ures uP th e

facult ies an d disposit i .ons

whj-ch vr e term natural , and the

manner in which society 's

organised ca n either develop

these, arrest their develoPment

or distort it . Every

indiv idual r without

except ion, is, at every instant

of his l i fe what nature and

equal ly naturet s

inescapable laws

represent th e f iundat ion an d

condlt ion of al l l i fe, so rnuch

naturaf

author i tar ian t arbit rary,

pol i t ical , rel ig ious, cr iminal

and civ i l laws which priv i leged

classes throughout history have

laid down - always in the

interests in their exploi tat ion

of Lh e labouring massesr their

sole airn having been to

restr ict th e freedom of these

masses. Such laws, behind th e

pretext of an al leged moral i ty,

have always been the sirens of

th e nost thorough-going

immoral i ty. Thus, we

advocate, reluctant bu t

ineluctable obedience to a1 I

th e laws which const i tute,

independently of an y man's

wi l I - tha vFrv l i fesblood of

nature and of society: but the

most absolute independence

possible for each individual

with regard to al l - pretent ions

to command on th e part of al l

human wil lsr col lect ive or

i-ndiv idual, who would foist

upon others no t an y naturalinf luence but their ordinance,

their despot ism.

As for the natural

inf luence which men wield over

on e another, this is Ye t

another of those features of

t i fe in a society against which

al l revolt would be as fut i le

as i t woul-d be imPossible.

Such inf luence is the very

mater ial , intel lectual an d

moral foundati-on of human

sol idar i ty. The indiv idual

human beingr a product of

sol idar i ty, which is to say a

product of a society, whi le he

is unable to evade thraldorn to

naturets Iaws, can, under th e

inf luence of feel ings emanating

from

especia l ly

outside himself ,

f ron others'

conpany, react against i t to a

degree but wi l l not be able to

escape them wiLhout moving

immediately to a dif ferent

sol idar ist i .c mi l leu an d

exposing himself to ne w

inf luences. For, where man is

1aws,

which




society, between thern, have

made of him.

It is only because of th is

natural ineluctabi l i ty (and

soclal ineluctabi l i tyr too)

that stat ist ical science is

possible. Stat lst ical science

is not content merely to note

and enumerate socialphenomenal

i t a lso seeks to discover their

bearing upon and correlat ion

with the manner in which

society is organised. Criminal

stat ist ics, for instance,

record that in a single country

or a single town over a period

of 1 0, 20 , or 30 years ( an d

sometimes longer, unless some

nol i f icel or social cr is is

i .ntervenes to alter the tenor

of the society), the very

same cr imes or offences wi. l I

reappear year after year after

year on roughly the same scale.

An d - this is even more

remarkable - the manner in

which they are committed wi l l

be repeated alrnost as often in

on e year as 1n another. Fo r

instance, the nunber of deaths

by poison, kni fe or f i rearm, as

wel l as th e number of sulc ides

by this method or that, ar e

al-most constant. Which leads

th e renowned Belgian

stat ist ic ian Quetelet to make

this memorable pronouncement:

I Society fosters cr imes;

lndiv iduals rnerely carry them

outr .

This regular repet i t ion of

the same social phenomena would

not take place if ment s

inte I Iectual and moral-disposlt ions as wel l as their

acts of wl l l were founded upon

fre choice. To pu t i t another

way, al l th is talk of free wi. l - I

is nonsense. Either that or i- t

means that the indiv idual

deterrnines hi s ow n course

spontaneously and by himsel- f ,

removed from al l outside

inf luences, be they natural or

social . But i f such were the

case with al l me n sult ing

themselves, the world would be

over-run by the most

unmit igated anarchy: aI I

sol idar i ty between man and man

Social Theory

would become impossible, and

aI1 these mil l ions of wi1Is,

thoroughly independent one frorn

another, some runing counter to

others, would natural ly tend to

destroy one another and might

even end by doing just that,

unLess there was, above them,

th e despotic wi l l of div ineProvidence wh o 'shows them the

wa y whi lst they seether an d

who, by obl i terat ing them a1l

at once, foists div ine order

upon their human confusion.

we also f ind aI1 th e part isans

of the principle of free wi l l

inevj- tably dr iven by th e force

of logic into grant ing th e

existence and impact of a

divine Providence. This

underpins every theological and

metaphysical doctr ine, a

magnif icent system which ha s

long held human conscience in

thral l and one which, seen from

a distance in abstract

medi- tat ion or in the l iqht of a

rel ig ious and poet j- c

imaginat ion, does j.ndeed seem

to be resplendent in harmony

an d grandeur. I t is j us t

fortunate that the histor ic

real i ty which ha s corresponded

to thls system has always been

horr i f ic and that the system

itsel f cannot stand up to

scient i f ic cr i t ic i -srn.

Indeed, we know that for as

long as div ine law has held

sway on earth the vast rnajor i ty

of nen have been brutal ly and

pit i lessly exploi ted, an d

tormented, and oppressed and

decimated: we know that eventoday the name of theorlogical

or metaphysical di .v ini ty is

st1II c i ted by those who seek

to naintain the masses in their

s lavi .sh condit ion: and i t coul-d

no t be otherwise, fo r th e

instant i t is admitted that a

div ine wi l l holds sway in th e

world and governs nature an d

soci.ety, one effect ively makes

a nonsense of mant s freedom.

of necessity, mant s wishes

avai l nothing against th e

divine wi l l . What does that

inply? It impl ies that in

attempting to defend th e

Fol io 2

abstract, metaphyslcal or

f ict i t ious freedom of ma n an d

free wi l1, one is forced to

deny his real f reedom. Against

a background of div ine

omnipotence and div ine

omnlpresence, man is but a

sIave. Th e freedom of

everynanhaving

been dispel ledby div ine providence, al l that

remains ls pr iv i lege, which i .s

to sdy, special ent i t lements

awarded by th e grace of God to

this or that j -ndiv idual, th is

or that hierarchy (5), this or

that dynasty, th is or that

class.

Simi lar ly, div ine provi .dence

makes a1l science impossible,

which means that dlv ine

providence is , quite simply,

th e negation of hurnan reason,

or rather, before one can

acknowledge div j .ne providence

on e ha s to abdicate one's

common sense. Th e moment on e

accepts that the world is

governed by div ine wi l l , on e

need no longer l -ook fo r an y

natural interre 1a ionshi p

between phenomena, bu t look

instead for a seri .es of

displays of that supreme wil l

whose decrees are and forever

must remain, as Holy Scripture

says, inaccessib le to human

reason lest thev lose their

divine naEure. Divine

providence is not just the

negat ion of a l l human logic, i t

is a negat ion of logic as such,

for aI1 logic holds impl ic i t a

natural necessity, and this

necessity would be contrary todlvine l iberty: so it is, f rom

the human point of view, th e

tr iumph of nonsense. So, those

who would be bel ievers must

renounce both liberty and

science an d allow themselves to

be exploited and lashed by

those upon whom God has

bestowed privi lege: an d one has

to say with Tertu l l ian - I

bel ieve because of i. ts

absurdity, adding th is (which

is as logical as the foregoing)

And I desire in iquity.

For ourselves, who freely

renounce al l the joys of the



world and demand the

tr iumph of mankind

this earth, we humbly

that rr e understand

of div ine logic an d

we shal1 content ourselves

logic, founded as i t

upon experience an d

of interrelat ionships

natural as wel l as of social

Th e accumuiated, correlated

d consldered experience which

know as science, shows us

sovereign r/r i l l is an

invent ion which

the face of the very

of things; what is

the wiI I is merely th e

of the exercise of a

faculty, just as

strength i. s only th e

of the exercise of our

consequently both are

eqaual measure th e product

social and natural l i fe,

of th e physical an d

i.nto which

is born an d

background they

le t us say it

- every man, at every

of his l i fe, is th e

of the combined impact

an d society, f rom

it c lear ly fol lows that

we stated in our preceding

quite true: Lo make

n moral f i rst make their

moral.

And there is only one way to

those surroundings rnoral -

effect the tr iumph of

i .e. , the ful lest(6 ) fo r each 1n the

of the most f l -awless

al l . Inequal i ty of

r ights (and

of l iberty fo r

is i ts necessary

- THAT is the vast

iniqui ty which gives

to al l indiv idual

but establ ish

one and al l the others wi l l

sh .

fn view of the tardiness of

men of pr iv i lege in

themselves to be rnade

or (and it amounts to the

SociaI Theorv

same thing), to be made equaI,

we very much fear that just ice

wi l l see no tr iumph lest i t be

by means of social revolut ion.

Thls is outsi-de ou r br ief

today, but we shal l assume th e

task of annunciat ing this

truth. which is, moreover, al l

to o obvious - thatunt i l such

t i .me as his social environment

becomes moral, moral i . ty in the

individual wi l l be irnpossible.

Three things are necessary

i f rnen ar e to be made mora1,

which is to Sdyr ar e to be

complete men in the ful lest

sense of the word - a healthy

bir th, a rat ional an d

integrated educat ion

accompanied by an upbringing

based on respect for work,

reason, egual i ty an d l iberty;

and a social envi-ronment

wherein each lndividual 1n

enjoying compl-ete l iberty wj- I1

rea11y be the equal of af 1

others both by r ight an d in

Does such an envirnoment

exist? No. Consequently, it s

foundations must be laid. If ,

in the environment which does

no t exist on e were to manage to

f ind schools whlch woul_d offer

their pupi ls instruct ion an d

educat ion so perfect as to defy

our imaginat ion to concej.ve of

better, would those schools

suceed in creat ing me n wh o were

just, free an d moral? Again

no , because when they left th e

school they would enter into a

social environment governed by

altogether contrary pr inciples,an d since society is always

stronger than indiv lduals, it

would soon overwhelrn and

demoral ise them. Furthermore,

the very foundation of such

schools is impossible in todays

circumstances. Fo r social l i fe

embraces everything an d

permeates th e schools as wel l

as family l i fe and the l ives of

al 1 the indiv iduals wh o compose

th e society.

Teachers, tutors an d parents

are al l members of the sane

society and are al l more or

less brutal lsed or demoral ised

fntegral Education

by it. Horrr could they impart

to their charges that which

they are lacking in themselves?

The proper way, the only proper

way to teach morality is by

example an d since socia l ist

morality is the very opposite

of current moral i ty, th e

teachers, who are more or lessin the grip of the lat ter,

would pract ice before their

pupils th e very opposite of

what they would be preaching.

So, socia l ist educat ion is

impossib le througrh th e schools

j ust as i t is impossib le

through the family of today.

But integrated education is

similar ly impossj.b le: the

bourgeois cannot understand

that their chi. ldren should

become workers, and the workers

are bereft of the wherewithal

that would give their children

a scient i- f ic educat ion.

I am amused by those f ine

bourgeois Socia l ists who are

al-ways tel l ing us: 'Let us

f irst educate the people. then

t.ye shal l emanclpate themr.

Instead, we say: Let the people

emancipate themselves f irst ,

and then they wil l look after

their own education. Whi is to

educate the people? You,

perhaps? But you do no t teach

then, you jusL poison them by

attempt ing to inculcate then

with al l the rel ig ious,F

histor ical , pol i t ical , \b

j ur id ical and economic

prejudices which guarantee your

exlstence, but which at the

same t ime destroy theirintel l igence an d emasculate

their r ighteous indignat ion an d

drain them of al l resolve. You

let the people be crushed by

their dai ly work and by their

misery an d then yo u sa y to

them: 'Educate yourselves! I

We should l i1e to see yo u an d

your chifdren educate

yourselves after th ir teen,

fourteen or sixteen hours of

bruta l is ing to i l with misery

and an uncertai.n tomorrow as

your only reward.

No , gentlemen, fo r al l ou r

reverence for the l-ofty issue

't 0




of integral educat ion, we

declare that at th ls moment i t

is no t th e nost irnportant

issue for the people. The

primary issue is that of

economic emancipati.on, which

necessari ly br ings with it

an immediate concomitant

pol i t ical emancipat ion - an d

only fol lowing that comes th e

intel lectual an d moral

emancipat ion of the people.

This being So rre f u11y

subscri-be to the resol_ution

adopted by the Brussels

^^---^--^c I

vvrrY!EoD

-.

,867:

'Recognising that for th e

moment it is not possible to

organise a rat ional system of

educat ion, th e Congress urges

it s var ious sect ions to

organise study courses which

wouLd fol low a programme of

scient i f ic, professional, an d

industr ia l educat i .on, that is a

programme of in tegral

educat ion, in order to redress,

as far as is possible, th e

inadequacy of present-day

educat ion among vrorkers. ft

is , of course, understood that

a reduct ion in workinq hours is

rssN 0267-61 1

Th e Anarchist Encyclopaedia

c/ o CambridgeFree

press

Unit 6

25 Gwydir Street

Cambridge CB 1 2L c

Social Theory

to be considered an

indispensable prerequisi te. I

Yes. Of course th e workers

wi l l do al l wj. th in thelr power

to provide themselves with

th e educat ion in th e present

situat ion. But, without

let t ing thernseLves be 1e d

astray by th e siren songs ofthe bourgeois an d bourgeois

Social ists, they should above

al l concentrate their efforts

upon th e solving of th e great

problem of econornic

emancipation which must be the

mother of

emancipat ions.

al l other


Notes:

( 1 ) Th e letter in quest ion ha d

been printed in th e precedinq

issue of Egal i te.

(2 1 A reference to th e

statement by General De Fai l ly

on the da y after th e batt le of

Mentana (3 November 1867): 'The

chassepots have worked wonderst

a quote which appears in a1l-

of the rnemoirs.

( 3 ) Briareus. In classic

Fol io 2

legend a huge monster with 1 00

arms an d 50 heads.

(4 1 rn referr ing to 'posi t ive

phi losophyr Bakunin r. las no t

thinking of posit iv ism or

Comtism, th e f laws of which he

thoroughly exposed in th e

Appendix publ ished in Volume

II I of Gui l laumers Oeuvres( Cons iderat ions ph i losophi.ques

sur ]e fantome divin, su r 1e

monde real et su r Lrhomme).

he ha s in mind scient i f ic

phi losophy general ly which

rel ies upon observat ion an d

experience.

( 5 ) Bakunln seems to be

employing th e word hierarchy in

it s etymological sense ofI pr iest ly government |

.

( 6 ) We stated earl ier that we

understand j. iberty to be , on

th e on e hand, th e ful lest

possible development of al l th e

natural- facult ies of each

individual and, on th e other,

hi s independence vis_a_vj-s,

no t th e laws of nature an d

society, bu t a1 I th e laws

imposed by other hurnan wi1ls be

they col lect ive or

indiv idual. (Bakuninrsnote)

Documents

M. Bakunin, Integral Education