The Murray Bookchin Reader

by Murray Bookchin, Janet Biehl

This collection offers an overview of the thought of Murray Bookchin, today's foremost social theorist and political philosopher of the libertarian left. Best known for introducing ecology as a concept relevant to radical political thought in the early 1960s, Bookchin was the first to propose, in the body of ideas that he has called social ecology, that a liberatory society would also have to be an ecological one. His writings span five decades and a wide range of subject matter.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Philosophy, Ecology, Audiobook, Anarchism, Utopia

Hardcover

First published October 1, 1997

About the author

Murray Bookchin was an American libertarian socialist author, orator, and philosopher. A pioneer in the ecology movement, Bookchin was the founder of the social ecology movement within anarchist, libertarian socialist and ecological thought. He was the author of two dozen books on politics, philosophy, history, and urban affairs as well as ecology. In the late 1990s he became disenchanted with the strategy of political Anarchism and founded his own libertarian socialist ideology called Communalism.

Bookchin was an anti-capitalist and vocal advocate of the decentralisation of society along ecological and democratic lines. His writings on libertarian municipalism, a theory of face-to-face, assembly democracy, had an influence on the Green movement and anti-capitalist direct action groups such as Reclaim the Streets.

Reviews

[Katie]

This book is a good primer for anyone who wants to know more about Bookchin and his philosophy, or for someone who has read Bookchin in the past and wants to refresh their memory.

The excerpts cover the full span of Bookchin's writing career, reaching as far back as the 1960s. I found some of the older works to be a little dated. But overwhelmingly, most of the texts are relevant to our current political and ecological situation, which goes to show how foresighted Bookchin was for his time.

Janet Biehl's introductions to each section are a highlight. She obviously knows Bookchin's works inside and out, and she does a fantastic job of contextualizing and summarizing the excerpts.

I came to this book knowing almost nothing about Bookchin. Now, I feel like I have a comfortable knowledge of his ideas on social ecology, anarchism and his later philosophy of Communalism. I also now know which of his books of his I would like to read in the future. In all, I would recommend this book to anyone looking to expand their knowledge of political and social theory.

[Hayden Kesterson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This collection is very good at dispelling unproductive or even reactionary aspects of anarchism (deep ecology, disjointed theory, and what he calls "lifestyle anarchism") and it contains a number of terms that are useful when trying to think about how society might become more ecological. Where it falls apart is when Bookchin turns to Marxism. His fundamental misunderstanding of what the terms "proletariate" and "bourgeoisie" mean makes for an incredibly frustrating thread of Bookchin's thought. He also disparages poststructural thinkers with an obvious lack of knowledge about their work. Both of these misunderstandings make sense considering the often unproductive or reactionary work of academics that have used the banners of Marxism and Poststructuralism in the past, however in rejecting Marx's fundamental tension or the insights of how meaning is made offered by poststructuralists his theory loses a lot. I need to read some Hegel to understand a lot of what he's saying in the more philosophical sections, something I think it'll take me a while to feel up to. His insights into society as an ecological and historical formation are incredibly valuable, but his theoretical and practical shortcomings leave me incredibly frustrated about how to go about bringing such an ecological society into being.

[Ursula Wren · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't enthralled by Murray Bookchin's writing. I don't agree with him on every point, but I take his work to be the most realistic and well thought out revolutionary agenda that is currently in the canon of anarchic political theory. In my mind, it's a framework to build upon and adapt to our time - whenever that next revolution comes. Bookchin never professed to be a purist, anyway.

[— · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very abridged selection of Bookchin's essays, from various books, with semi-cumulative subject matters. His best work is in his structural defense of libertarian communal living, as well as (some of) his work on dialectics. I say some of because I remain disposed to the work that attempts to rebuke Adorno, Horkheimer, and Foucault. This facet of Bookchin's body of criticism will likely not endure. In spite of all that, I still recommend this one, with some luck we'll get to see his politico-theoretical vocations rise to the forefront of discourse between proponents of decentralization. Whether Bookchin's dialectic will ever manifest is less likely to be witnessed in a lifetime.

[Mitchell Stern · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some of Bookchin’s critiques of other strains of left-libertarian thought don’t resonate as much. But overall the vision of social ecology and libertarian municipalism presented in this reader is quite positive and thoroughly expounded upon.

[Subvert · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the last year Bookchin’s writings found a lot of new interest again due to the PKK’s leader Öcalan claiming him as his main inspiration with Bookchin’s libertarian municipalism being central to the revolution in Rojava. Personally I have been wanting to read Bookchin for longer time and especially after reading some brilliant essays of him slamming the mystical ‘deep ecology’ this summer I decided I really should start seriously reading Bookchin. And what better way to start with this book which gives a good idea of the all the things Bookchin wrote about in over five decades.

Now that I have finished I am not really sure yet what my next Bookchin book should be. There’s a lot in Bookchin that I like. I think it might actually be my favourite anarchist philosopher. I am convinced by his ‘social ecology’ philosophy and I like his defense of rational reason and progress. I very much agree with the need for some kind democracy which many of the more individualist (lifestyle) anarchists disavow. We will always rely on some kind of community and we can never do away with politics, so pursuing and practicing direct democracy is not something we can do away with. I have not really read into the debate on Bookchin’s polemical lifestyle anarchism essay and I think ‘lifestyle anarchism’ may have its uses and is not necessarily opposed to social anarchism, but I do share the dislike for many anarchist tendencies to insulate themselves in their own subcultural ghetto’s and not wanting to engage with regular society.

The selected essays make me want to sometime read The Ecology of Freedom and the Philosophy of Social Ecology. But although I find ontological and epistemological discussions interesting, I am not sure how important it actually is to have coherent philosophical underpinnings. Do we really need to consciously adapt one in order to know what kind of future we want to strive for and how to go about getting there? But if so, Bookchin’s philosophy of social ecology seems good to me. I liked reading his defense of the dialectic. Never having read or being taught about Hegel, Marxist dialectical reasoning often confused me, but I really liked the discussion on dialectical naturalism in the selected essays and it was made quite clear to me. I liked the evolutionary and dialectical viewpoint on on how second nature derives from first nature, which then gives humanity the moral responsibility to transcend both first and second nature to a new domain of free nature through working towards an ecological society. As Bookchin argues, this provides an objective ethic that can guide us through the ecological crisis

To move on to the more practical part of Bookchin’s thinking, I am like many people looking for new concepts and ideas that help us fight for a better future. I am looking for a ‘program’ or thinkers that provide a sense of direction and I have not yet found anything that I can fully subscribe to. It is for that reason that I am very interested in libertarian municipalism (or democratic communalism) as a theory for social change. His argument is that on the local level, through the municipality, people can become political again and activated rather than the isolated individuals of market society and representative democracy. It focuses on the assembly rather than mere referenda, as we humans are social beings (and the isolation of the voting booth does not bring forth our genuine desire). Genuine independence and individuality is dependent on community support systems and solidarity. Furthermore, libertarian municipalism politicizes the economy as a municiplized economy puts its management in the hands of the community, while traditional syndicalist demands of collectivization and workers control still keeps the door open for the reprivatization of the economy, as they would still be based on contractual and exchange relationships with other collectivized enterprises. And new technology renewable energies can provide power in a decentralized way. Economic autarky is not possible though and should also not be looked for, as interdependence between communities and regions is an asset, culturally as well as politically. Electoral activity would primarly be educational activity, in order to enter the public spheres and no matter how local the level may be, it gives space to interact with larger amounts of people. Bookchin suggests that electoral success (even though he says electoral wins is unlikely in the short term) could, although unlikely, allow a popular assembly to acquire legal power. But even without legal power, popular assemblies can exercise an enormous moral power. The idea is precisely to establish a dual power that can in the long run replace state power. Bookchin then also different conception of power than for example Holloway: “Power that is not retained by the people is power that is given over to the state. Conversely, whatever power the people gain is power that must be taken away from the state”, although this seems a bit simple to me and does away with complexities of power, of for example corporations or even more impersonally; the power of capital.

I hoped for a bit more practical and concrete suggestions on ‘what is to be done’. I am still a bit unsure about the suggestion of local electoral activity and perhaps that is worked out more in other Bookchin books that I should start reading. But still I like the libertarian municipal agenda, and could see how it would work and grow when movements spread out over different regions adopt libertarian municipalism as a long-term agenda. I can see how it could lead to relatively peaceful break with state and capital. But it would take an enormous amount of organizing of a similar scale as the communist movement at its height in many countries in the 20th century. Because without it it’s hard to see how we can really municiplize the economy without the existence of a power vacuum due to economic collapse or war as in Syria.

[Connor · Rating 2 out of 5]

Plenty of deep philosophy that really goes nowhere and doesn't really have an outlet. Ahistorical accounts of revolutions. Not my cup of tea. I think I'll stick with David Graeber and Abdullah Ocalan instead.

Huge slog to read through with a few great insights sprinkled in.

[Rufus Johnson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Didn't finish, I'm sure it was revolutionary in its day but today it's all pretty obvious stuff. Capitalism is bad for us and bad for nature (which is the same thing). Rinse, repeat.

It was very forward thinking for its time though and I'm impressed that Murray saw it coming.

[William · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is, in my view, the best introduction to the ideas of the american anarchist Murray Bookchin.

[Corvus]

Something wrong with my audiobook files causing repetition, gotta return to this one

[Charlie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yes