Dialoghi sull'Anarchia

by David Graeber, Alberto Prunetti (Translator)

Conversazioni con Mehdi Belhaj Kacem, Nika Dubrovsky e Assia Turquier-Zauberman
Prefazione di Stefano Boni

In queste conversazioni, avvenute poco prima della sua prematura scomparsa, Graeber ci lascia un ultimo geniale mosaico del mondo contemporaneo, in cui miscela sapientemente riflessioni politiche, sapere antropologico ed esperienze militanti. In un fitto dialogo attento a ridisegnare una genealogia anarchica che non si esaurisce nella «cultura atlantica», i tre interlocutori interrogano Graeber non tanto sulla storia o i fondamenti del pensiero libertario quanto sull'importanza di uno sguardo anarchico per interpretare il mondo. Ne esce, come sottolinea Stefano Boni, una visione originale – elaborata sul campo da un pensiero-azione in continua trasformazione – che impedisce il formarsi di una teoria «forte» dell'anarchia intesa come destino o identità. Ed è precisamente la forma dialogica, rivendicata da tutti gli interlocutori, la modalità che consente di costruire questa visione non autoriale ma collettiva, l'unica in grado di far emergere pensieri che nessun individuo da solo potrebbe mai avere. E in definitiva, ci dice Graeber, l'anarchia è proprio questo.

Genres: Politics, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Anthropology, History, Anarchism, Economics

248 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2020

About the author

David Rolfe Graeber was an American anthropologist and anarchist.

On June 15, 2007, Graeber accepted the offer of a lectureship in the anthropology department at Goldsmiths College, University of London, where he held the title of Reader in Social Anthropology.

Prior to that position, he was an associate professor of anthropology at Yale University, although Yale controversially declined to rehire him, and his term there ended in June 2007.

Graeber had a history of social and political activism, including his role in protests against the World Economic Forum in New York City (2002) and membership in the labor union Industrial Workers of the World. He was an core participant in the Occupy Movement.

He passed away in 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Reviews

[Jake Platt · Rating 5 out of 5]

this book fucking owns

[Shannon Kim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ok. WOW.

[Iek]

Poh. Overdadig, prikkelend, rijk en filosofisch. Als ik het allemaal had begrepen, zou ik het misschien vijf sterren hebben gegeven. Nu blijft het bij twee rode pepers: best wel pittig.

[Jan D · Rating 3 out of 5]

Due to the topic somewhat similar to "Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology". The interview format has a nice flow, ideas are brought in, discussed and build upon.
Favorite quote: (by ATZ) »A big reason we were able to control the environment the way we did was by conceiving of it as dead, so in the end it does die. «

[Eddie · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a cracking read. A lot of the philosophy and theory went over my head but the discussion was always followable. It's always interesting watching some fantastic minds must together on their shared knowledge and experience. A gripe I had is about half way through the book when they start talking about electrons and the second law of thermodynamics, someone (Assia I think) says they should have invited a physicist along. Probably. Fantastic book nonetheless.

[Colin Lavery · Rating 4 out of 5]

Graeber articulates his own reasons, connected to anarchist philosophy, for formatting a high-level text about anarchy as a dialogue, but I personally was grateful for the way the other speakers help mitigate the more esoteric parts of any particular speaker's points.

[Johnsonk5 · Rating 2 out of 5]

Occasionally very insightful but generally speaking I felt like this was a bit of an intellectual echo chamber.

[Duncan McGuire · Rating 5 out of 5]

Love this book. Takes serious ideas and explores them in a not so serious way wirhout being facetious somehow. Has stream of consciousness style dialectics, anarchism, and anthropology; all things that float my boat. I really wanted to understand more about anarchism that is actually applicable beyond idealistic claims, and this book did that for me I think. The book also takes anarchism beyond the dogmatism that is so prevalent in theory. The chapter on Graebers’ concept of “play” was really captivating. When when parts of the book got esoteric, Graeber and the others recognized this and made sure to lightheartedly explain in laymen’s terms the ideas they’re attempting to dissect. The book being literally a conversation between Graeber and other academics allows the ideas put forward to be unbound and free for interpretation, the words are just a conversation, and the difference between conversation and a book is that we know that in conversation we sometimes say silly things sometimes we say things were really proud of. This relieves the reader of the pressure to take theory in an “all or nothing” that readers feel. Or maybe that’s just what I feel when reading the usual wordy “historical” theory. Conversational text also appeal to my add brain in opposition to prose. I can’t wait to read more David Graeber and impress my anthro proffs with my sweet new understanding of “anthro-anarcho” ideas.

[Stoffia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Graeber est celui qui se rapproche le plus, pour moi, d'un maître à penser. Je ne me suis pas encore remis de son décès, survenu beaucoup trop tôt, l'an passé.

Il était donc certain que j'allais me procurer son livre posthume. "L'anarchie, pour ainsi dire" a un format étrange. À mi-chemin entre une conversation entre collègues et une entrevue académique.

Le côté informel est satisfaisant parce qu'il permet d'entendre Graeber s'exprimer naturellement sur des sujets qui sont en périphérie de ses champs de recherche habituels. On le voit formuler en direct sa pensée, parfois avec maladresse, pour répondre à des questions spontanées.

Mais c'est aussi frustrant, parce que cela nous fait réaliser toutes ces recherches qu'il ne pourra jamais mener à terme, ces lectures dont sa mort nous prive, ces intuitions dont on ne verra jamais l'aboutissement.

Bref, un bon bouquin, un bel hommage. Mais si vous n'êtes pas déjà un inconditionnel de Graeber, ne commencez pas ici.

[Sean · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an aspirational level of clarity and erudition that I would like to have in my conversations. The dialogic format works well and despite needing to look things up left and right most concepts were explained simply. I'm looking forward to following the threads set out in this book (Spinoza, Piaget+Marx, Jean-Luc Nancy, Vygotsky, Carole Clover on slashers, and more - makes me think I should compile a bibliography/topic list when I read). I suppose that's a criticism too, you'd need a hefty tome to really follow any of the sections or ideas to comprehensive conclusions. I love the aspect of returning to play as it's coming up in my life in all sorts of ways lately. Sad to think DG isn't around. It seemed like he truly put thought to action.

[Sean · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not so sure if this was the best entry point to the work/thought of David Graeber but it was pretty enjoyable nonetheless. I found the dialogic element here to work both for and against this book. On one hand it made it much easier to read, in a way that headier stuff rarely is. Then on the other hand, in presenting the large amount of ideas present here as a dialogue they ultimately cant reach the necessary point of being truly fleshed out in a way that makes them persuasive, nothing seems conclusive.

Ultimately if nothing else it was really thought provoking, though I remain unconvinced by anarchism as a coherent societal structure.

[Nishant · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is nearly nothing as simple and as radical as this book. Graeber is always conversational in his communiques and his three other friends facilitate that process here to enable him present the best summary of his ideas and theses, which is super helpful for anyone interested in an intellectual conversation as enjoyable as a tv talk show, irrespective of the amount of theory they have read before or the kind of “leftist” they are. A MUST READ.

[Benjamin Shafii · Rating 3 out of 5]

a discussion with 3 people who seem to have a distaste for simple worlds and appear to want to show of their intellect interlaced with interesting bits of unknown history and concepts

[Sofia Cimballa · Rating 5 out of 5]

The dialogic form worked brilliantly on many levels. Great length. Very awesome overall, some parts much more awesome than other parts