A FEW WORDS:
On the Practice of Theory
One of the foundations of the world
in which we live (and to which anarchists want to put an end) is the division
of labor, particularly the division between intellectual and manual labor. Many
anarchists carry this division into their own projects, speaking of theory and
practice as two separate aspects of anarchist activity and, in some cases,
going so far as to proudly reject theory as the realm of intellectual
specialization.
From an anarchist perspective,
revolution is a complete overturning of current social relationships, a total
transformation of existence. It follows from this that, for the individual
anarchist, each project would be an experiment aimed at transforming one�s
relationships with oneself, with other people and with the surrounding world
here and now in terms of one�s revolutionary aspirations. Thus, the development
of an insurrectional project involves the rejection of this division of labor
and the consequent recognition that the development of revolutionary theory is
itself a practice, a fundamental rupture with the normal way of encountering
the world, a transformation of how we relate to it.
As I see it, the basic aim of social
revolution is the reappropriation of life in its totality so that every
individual can determine the course of her existence on her own terms in
association with whom he chooses. Currently, a few people determine the
conditions under which everyone must exist, operating through a network of
institutions, structures and systems that define social relationships �
particularly (but not exclusively) the state and commodity exchange. This
imposition of determined, circumscribed relationships penetrates into the realm
of thought in the form of ideology.
Ideology can be briefly defined as a
predetermined and circumscribed set of flattened ideas through which one views
and interprets the world. Ideological thought may be relatively internally
consistent or utterly incoherent. Marxist-Leninists and religious
fundamentalists tend to see everything through a single, rigid lens, while the
�average� person on the street will have a mish-mash of contradictory
ideologies through which he interprets her experiences. In fact, outside of the
realm of a small minority of �true believers�, a lack of coherence, which makes
action for oneself impossible, is a mark of ideological thinking. But most
significantly, ideological thinking is passive thinking, thinking in terms that
have been determined beforehand by those currently in power, their �oppositional�
competitors or the various opinion-making, consensus-building apparati that
serve them. In this predetermined social relationship, one does not really
think, but merely passively consumes the thoughts that one is offered.
A revolutionary practice of theory
begins with an overturning of ideology. The desire to take back one�s life, to
determine the conditions of one�s existence, requires a new understanding of
the world, what some have called a �reversal of perspective�. This
understanding that distinguishes theory from ideology is the realization that
this world, with is institutional framework and its circumscribed, hierarchical
social relationships, is actually produced by our activity, by our continued
resigned acceptance of the roles and relationships imposed upon us. Once we
realize that our activity creates this world, the possibility of creating a
different world, one based on our desire to be the conscious creators of our
own lives, becomes clear. And so we come to face the task of analyzing the
world in which we live with the aim of realizing our aspiration to
reappropriate our lives and re-create the world on our own terms. This process
of thinking critically about the social relationships that are imposed on us,
the historical processes of domination and revolt and our own actions taken
against this world is theoretical practice.
So the practice of theory already
initiates the process of taking back one�s life, because it is the
reappropriation of one�s capacity to think for oneself. It is not a matter of
opposing a refusal of reason to rationalism, a mere ideological reversal that
plays into the hands of the ruling class. Rather, realizing that rationalism is
the imposition of a single, dispassionate Reason (the Reason of the state and
the market) on all of us, we develop a practice of attacking this single Reason
and the institutions that impose it with the multitude of passionate reasons
that spring from our desires, aspirations and dreams when they escape the logic
of the market and the state. The reversal of perspective through which we come
to see the real possibility of transforming our existence makes thinking
critical, turns reason into a tool of revolutionary desire and transforms
social and historical analysis into weapons for attacking the social order. But
only if we are willing to take up the task of thinking deeply, of reasoning
passionately for ourselves, in short, of creating theory.
Since revolutionary theoretical
practice, from an anarchist perspective, must be the active, critical
overturning of the social relationships of ideology and of intellectual
specialization, since it must be the reappropriation of our capacity to think
for the project of our own liberation, it cannot be the activity of a few
recognized theorists who create ideas for others to consume and act upon.
Rather theory must be made by everyone. This opposes the creation of a single
unified anarchist theory, since this would require the flattening out of all
that is vital, passionate and unique in each individual�s thinking and would
transform theory into a set of doctrines that would put an end to theoretical
activity by providing a final answer, the usefulness of which would cease the
moment it was declared. It also opposes activism and militantism� which separate action from theory,
disdainfully attributing the latter to �armchair intellectuals in their ivory
towers�. This attitude reflects a complete acceptance of the division of labor
imposed by this society, and, therefore, leaves those who take this stance
subject to incoherent, often unconsciously held ideologies � such as
humanitarianism, social obligation, democratic tolerance, political
correctitude, justice, rights, etc. � that send them spinning off into a jumble
of contradictory activities from which the most basic anarchist principles are
frequently missing, an alternative form of the mindless busyness through which
most people carry out the tasks of social reproduction.