THE FIRST OF TWO PLANNED LECTURES BY KROPOTKIN
The Translator explains, “Peter Kropotkin was invited by… [the] editor of Le Temps Nouveaux, to take part in a series of lecture to be held … in March 1986, he chose two subjects: ‘The State: Its Historic Role’ and ‘Anarchism: Its Philosophy and Its Ideal.’ … he explains in his Memoirs ‘The research that I carried out in the course of familiarizing myself with the institutions of the barbarian period and those of the free cities of the Middle Ages, led me to carry out further interesting research on the role played by the State during the last three centuries… I summarized my findings as two lectures…’” As it happens the lectures were never delivered… when he disembarked from the … boat Kropotkin was met by police officers who detained him. He was told that he had been expelled from France and would have to return by the first boat; in the event of any resistance he would be taken into ‘administrative custody.’”
Kropotkin began his first lecture, “In taking the State and its historical role as the subject for this study, I think I am satisfying a much felt need at the present time: that of examining in depth the very concept of the State, of studying its existence, its past role and the part it may be called upon to plan in the future. It is above all over the question of the State that socialists are divided. Two main currents can be discerned in the factions that exist among us which correspond to differences in temperament as well as in ways of thinking, but above all to the extent that one believes in the coming revolution. There are those, on the one hand, who hope to achieve the social revolution through the State by preserving and even extending most of its powers to be used for the revolution. And there are those like us who see the State, both in its present form, in its very essence, and in whatever guise it might appear, an obstacle in the social revolution, the greatest hindrance to the birth of a society based on equality and liberty, as well as the historic means designed to prevent this blossoming. The latter work to abolish the State and not to reform it.” (Pg. 9)
Of ancient human history, he states. “the courageous… also became the temporary leader in the struggles with other tribes or during migrations. But there was no alliance between the bearer of the ‘law’ (the one who knew by heart the tradition and past decisions), the military chief and the sorcerer; and the STATE was no more part of these tribes than it is of the society of bees or ants…” (Pg. 15)
He observes, “Abject poverty, misery, uncertainty of the morrow for the majority, and the isolation of poverty, which are the characteristics of our modern cities, were quite unknown in those ‘free oases, which emerged in the twelfth century amidst the feudal jungle.’” (Pg. 30)
He notes, “In the commune, the struggle was for the conquest and defense of the liberty of the individual… for the right to unite and to act; whereas the States’ wars had as their objective the destruction of these liberties, the submission of the individual, the annihilation of the free contract, and the uniting of men in a universal slavery to king, judge and priest---to the State. Therein lies all the difference. There are struggles and conflicts which are destructive. And there are others which drive humanity forwards.” (Pg. 32)
He suggests, “under the influence of the Christian church… minds became corrupted as the priest and the legislator took over. Man fell in love with authority. If a revolution of the lower trades took place in a commune, the commune would call for a savior, thus saddling itself with a dictator, a municipal Caesar… And he took advantage of the situation, using all the refinements in cruelty suggested to him by the Church or those borrowed from the despotic kingdoms of the Orient.” (Pg. 37) Later, he adds, “With Luther the movement was welcome by the princes; but it had begun as communist anarchism, advocated and put into practice in some places.” (Pg. 40)
He points out, “What had in fact come of Benvenuto Cellini’s art under State tutelage? It had disappeared! And the architecture of those guilds of masons and carpenters whose works of art we still admire? Just observe the hideous monuments of the statist period and at one time you will come to the conclusion that architecture was dead, to such an extent that it has not yet recovered from the blows it received at that hands of the State.” (Pg. 52)
He states, “To give full scope to socialism entails rebuilding from the top to bottom a society dominated by the narrow individualism of the shopkeeper… In every street, in every hamlet, in every group of men gathered around a factory … the creative, constructive and organizational spirit must be reawakened in order to rebuild life---in the factory, in the village, in the store, in production and distribution of supplies. All relations between individuals and great centers of population have to be made all over again, from the very day, from the very moment one alters the existing commercial or administrative organization.” (Pg. 58)
He concludes, “EITHER the State for ever, crushing individual and local life, taking over in all fields of human activity, bringing with it all its wars and domestic struggles for power, its palace revolutions which only replace one tyrant by another, and inevitability at the end of this development there is…death! OR the destruction of States, and new life starting again in thousands of centers on the principle of the lively initiative of the individual and groups and that of free agreement.” (Pg. 60)
This book will interest those studying Kropotkin.