A. The social and economic structures that human beings create and use are to a large degree determined by environmental factors. In nature, there are no morals or ethics, just consequences. Species that ignore or are not able to adapt to environmental change, sooner or later become extinct. Human beings capacity for survival is intrinsically linked to our ability to directly change the environment to suit us. Capitalism hasn�t always been the dominant ideology human beings have used to manipulate the environment. Hunter gatherer societies relied on a significant degree of cooperation and the common ownership of resources to survive. The displacement of hunter gatherer societies by sedentary agricultural communities that have unlimited access to resources, both through their geographical location and their use of war to steal resources from neighbouring communities, coupled with the development of trade between communities that didn�t have all the resources to meet their daily needs, have seen people adopt capitalism as their preferred method of social, cultural and economic organisation.
Capitalism is able to expand and prosper while it has access to unlimited resources. Globalisation marks the final phase of capitalist evolution, transnational corporations now dominate all aspects of economic life around the planet, greedily devouring finite resources to create ever increasing profits for a minority. A rapidly increasing world population, that is living much longer than it did in the past, is now faced with a dilemma of its own making. As finite resources fail, we as a species face an uncertain future. Capitalism, as an economic system, can no longer provide the intellectual and physical infrastructure that is able to satisfy people�s needs. Capitalism can only survive if technological developments allow the human race to escape the restrictions of planet Earth and give it the power to devour other planets, initially in our solar system, eventually in the rest of the galaxy to create the ever increasing profits it needs to survive. Capitalism as a political, social and economic force could temporarily survive through the creation of gated cities whose monopoly on the use of force allows them to exploit an increasingly impoverished world population. This scenario would only be a passing phase as the technology of mass destruction is increasingly becoming available to more and more people.
Human beings may, because of impending environmental catastrophe, be faced to adopt social forms of organisation that force them to work cooperatively and force them to hold resources in common to meet the challenges that a rapidly shrinking resource base pose. As the current crisis deepens, the options available to people will become more and more stark. They�ll face two choices, they can live in increasingly barbaric world where a monopoly on the use of force allows a small minority to dominate life or they can create and reclaim structures and organisations that replace capitalist forms of organisations. These structures would give everybody the opportunity to be involved in the quest to find a resolution to the problems faced by the human race and they�d allow the community to use the �commonwealth� to satisfy real, not manufactured, human needs. That�s why the 21st century is the �Anarchist� century.
#
Q. HOW SECURE IS AN ANARCHIST SOCIETY?
A. Security is a fundamental human need. Access to food, water, shelter, company, health care and education is secondary to the need for a secure environment. Historically, individuals and communities have traded their rights, liberties and freedoms for security. The State is a little bit like the goon who walks into a corner shop, looks around and says to the shopkeeper �nice shop you�ve got there�. As long as the shopkeeper is willing to pay protection to the goon, he will keep the other goons away. Irrespective of how onerous the State�s demands are, people are willing to pay the price if the State can protect them from their neighbours and outside forces. An anarchist community understands that security is more than just protection. Security encompasses access to the necessities of life, the ability to be involved in the decision making processes and protection. Life in an anarchist community is much more secure than any other society. People have access to the common wealth because they are part of that community not because of what they do or own. They do not have to worry that illness, disabilities or misfortunes will erode the security they have. The biggest security worry anarchist communities have is the relationships they enjoy with surrounding communities.
Direct involvement in the decision making processes, and the fact that everyone in the community has access to the �commonwealth�, increases individual security within an anarchist community. External threats are a little more difficult to deal with. Isolated anarchist communities face the greatest external threat. The best way an anarchist community can deal with an external threat is by encouraging the development of anarchist movements in neighbouring communities. The more prominent an anarchist presence in a neighbouring community, the less likely that community will pose a direct threat to its anarchist neighbour. An anarchist society is able to provide far more security for individuals and groups within that community than any other type of social or political structure. The greatest threat an anarchist community faces is from hostile neighbours; whether it grows and prospers is linked to the growth of an anarchist movements within neighbouring communities. The greater the anarchist presence, the less likely it will have to face an external threat.
Q. WHAT RELATIONSHIP DO ANARCHISM AND DIRECT DEMOCRACY HAVE?
A. Anarchism and direct democracy are not interchangeable concepts. Direct democracy is a mechanism by which people involved in a decision make that decision. You can have a society based on direct democratic principles that is competitive, capitalist and authoritarian. Anarchists have always had an interest in direct democracy because it�s less likely that people who are directly involved in making decisions about how they live, are likely to make decisions that strip other people of their inalienable rights. Direct democracy in a society where the means of production, distribution, exchange and communication are held in the hands of a monopoly is easily able to be exploited and manipulated to suit the interests of those who hold power. A society based on direct democratic principles shares power among everyone not just one particular group.
An anarchist society - a society without rulers, is based on the principles of people having the power to be directly involved in the decisions concerning them and on their ability to use the common wealth for the common good. You can make all the decisions you like, but if you don�t have access to the resources to make them a reality, nothing happens. Involvement in struggles that promote direct democratic principles, raises question about how decisions are made, who makes decisions, how decisions can be coordinated in communities that are not willing to let rulers dictate how they live and who are not willing to give representatives a signed blank cheque to make decisions on their behalf.
Although direct democracy and anarchism are not interchangeable, they are interconnected concepts. The struggle for direct democracy is essentially a struggle to put power back into the hands of the people. The struggle for anarchism is the struggle to put both power and wealth back into the hands of everyone not just a minority. The struggle for direct democracy is interconnected to the struggle to create an anarchist community.
index
