What do you think?
Rate this book
Coğrafyanın Anarşist Kökleri: Mekansal Özgürleşmeye Doğru
Coğrafyanın Anarşist Kökleri, özgürlük arayışlarını ve günlük deneyimleri ayaklanma coğrafyalarıyla bağ kurarak tartıştırmaya çalışıyor.
Anarşist coğrafyalar, özerk varlıklar arasında hiyerarşik olmayan bağlantılara izin veren kaleydoskopik mekanlar olarak, yeni bir politik hayal gücü kurar.
“… uzayda deney yapmak, insanlığın gezegendeki yerinin öyküsüdür ve şu anda devam eden organize edici deneylerin yerine geçen durağanlık ve kontrol, hayatta kalmamızın bir sonucudur. Bir şeyi yapmanın belirli bir yolunu destekleyen tekil ontolojik modlar, mekânsallığı geçici olarak birbirine bağlı olan sürekli bir değişmez topluluk olarak anlayamadıkları için coğrafyayı reddederler. Daha da kötüsü, bu tür durgun fikirler genellikle elit bir azınlığın dar görüşlü çıkarlarına uymaktadır ve dolayısıyla kolektif geri dönüşümüzü tehdit etmektedir. İhtiyaç duyulan şey, dünyamızla ve birbirimizle önemli ölçüde yeni ilişkilerin gelişmesidir.”
Son derece ikna edici, sağlam ve orijinal olan Coğrafyanın Anarşist Kökleri'ni görmezden gelmek imkansızdır. Artık bizi devletçiliğe, kapitalizme, toplumsal cinsiyet egemenliğine, ırksal baskıya ve emperyalizme zincirleyen hiyerarşinin çürüyen, arkaik coğrafyalarını kabul edemeyiz.
Bu kitap kışkırtıcı ve kışkırtmaya ihtiyaç duyanları kışkırtacak; çünkü kriz zamanında gerçekten radikal olmanın ne olacağıyla ilgili temel varsayımları kökten değiştiriyor.
Anarşist coğrafyalar, özerk varlıklar arasında hiyerarşik olmayan bağlantılara izin veren kaleydoskopik mekanlar olarak, yeni bir politik hayal gücü kurar.
“… uzayda deney yapmak, insanlığın gezegendeki yerinin öyküsüdür ve şu anda devam eden organize edici deneylerin yerine geçen durağanlık ve kontrol, hayatta kalmamızın bir sonucudur. Bir şeyi yapmanın belirli bir yolunu destekleyen tekil ontolojik modlar, mekânsallığı geçici olarak birbirine bağlı olan sürekli bir değişmez topluluk olarak anlayamadıkları için coğrafyayı reddederler. Daha da kötüsü, bu tür durgun fikirler genellikle elit bir azınlığın dar görüşlü çıkarlarına uymaktadır ve dolayısıyla kolektif geri dönüşümüzü tehdit etmektedir. İhtiyaç duyulan şey, dünyamızla ve birbirimizle önemli ölçüde yeni ilişkilerin gelişmesidir.”
Son derece ikna edici, sağlam ve orijinal olan Coğrafyanın Anarşist Kökleri'ni görmezden gelmek imkansızdır. Artık bizi devletçiliğe, kapitalizme, toplumsal cinsiyet egemenliğine, ırksal baskıya ve emperyalizme zincirleyen hiyerarşinin çürüyen, arkaik coğrafyalarını kabul edemeyiz.
Bu kitap kışkırtıcı ve kışkırtmaya ihtiyaç duyanları kışkırtacak; çünkü kriz zamanında gerçekten radikal olmanın ne olacağıyla ilgili temel varsayımları kökten değiştiriyor.
248 pages, Paperback
Published May 1, 2018
6 people are currently reading
220 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
August 18, 2023
While I recognise that theory can require some wonderfully semantic meandering through language Springer takes this to a new level in this book. His hard to read writing, interspersed with a bamboozling list of names made me both frustrated and a bit disappointed with this book as I had been so excited to read.
Ultimately, Springer is arguing against the dominant neo-liberal and Marxist approaches to geography and instead arguing for an anarchist approach, justifying this through a history of the discipline and an exploration of what and where anarchism can offer something. I picked the book up because I agree, I am certainly closer to being an anarchist than a Marxist. However, I feel Springer inadvertently falls into the trap that he accuses Marxism of where he has an overly deterministic view of the political ideas best suited to emancipating the masses. Rather than using these ideas and approaches as an interesting set of analytical and conceptual tools to engage in the study and betterment of humanity. I have no problem with activist research per se, but I do have a suspicion of claims that only one approach to activist research holds all the answers.
This book is not casual reading, nor does it advertise itself as such, but this is a wasted opportunity in communicating the message. Even as an academic book it is so obtuse it doesn't offer very much despite making broad calls for changes in the discpline.
Ultimately, Springer is arguing against the dominant neo-liberal and Marxist approaches to geography and instead arguing for an anarchist approach, justifying this through a history of the discipline and an exploration of what and where anarchism can offer something. I picked the book up because I agree, I am certainly closer to being an anarchist than a Marxist. However, I feel Springer inadvertently falls into the trap that he accuses Marxism of where he has an overly deterministic view of the political ideas best suited to emancipating the masses. Rather than using these ideas and approaches as an interesting set of analytical and conceptual tools to engage in the study and betterment of humanity. I have no problem with activist research per se, but I do have a suspicion of claims that only one approach to activist research holds all the answers.
This book is not casual reading, nor does it advertise itself as such, but this is a wasted opportunity in communicating the message. Even as an academic book it is so obtuse it doesn't offer very much despite making broad calls for changes in the discpline.
July 11, 2019
I found this book at a leftist bookstore in Seattle. I purchased it because I love reading about geography and connecting geography to anarchism fascinated me enough to pick it up and purchase it.
From the get go, I decided to approach this book as I did The Communist Manifesto, which I read for an honors class in college because as with philosophy of any kind, the purest form is not attainable in my book as there are quality parts to the philosophies; so, a mixture is best in my book. Prior to reading this book, I will admit that my thought of anarchism was linked to the stereotypical belief of it being “down with the state and structure and violence.” That has changed because as extremists exist within all groups whether that group is political, religious, or something else.
What I found is that I can agree with the concept of mutual aid, the need for a horizontal system as opposed to a vertical/hierarchical system, the importance of acting in the here and now to make changes in our culture, and the dangers of violence to get what we want because even when it is for the greater good, it still is a means of domination. Dissent is something that is valuable and needs to be respected, heard, and considered.
Another component that really stuck with me is the fact that when we are born, we haven’t learned the way of our hierarchical world based on competition, division, and more, which does show that the current system is not innate, but learned.
Equality exists at birth because the world hasn’t “taught us” its ways yet (I am ignoring the environment provided by the parents) and at death when everything that life “taught us” is stripped away.
From the get go, I decided to approach this book as I did The Communist Manifesto, which I read for an honors class in college because as with philosophy of any kind, the purest form is not attainable in my book as there are quality parts to the philosophies; so, a mixture is best in my book. Prior to reading this book, I will admit that my thought of anarchism was linked to the stereotypical belief of it being “down with the state and structure and violence.” That has changed because as extremists exist within all groups whether that group is political, religious, or something else.
What I found is that I can agree with the concept of mutual aid, the need for a horizontal system as opposed to a vertical/hierarchical system, the importance of acting in the here and now to make changes in our culture, and the dangers of violence to get what we want because even when it is for the greater good, it still is a means of domination. Dissent is something that is valuable and needs to be respected, heard, and considered.
Another component that really stuck with me is the fact that when we are born, we haven’t learned the way of our hierarchical world based on competition, division, and more, which does show that the current system is not innate, but learned.
Equality exists at birth because the world hasn’t “taught us” its ways yet (I am ignoring the environment provided by the parents) and at death when everything that life “taught us” is stripped away.
April 10, 2017
See full review here: http://marxandphilosophy.org.uk/revie...
I thought the earlier essays were better than the ones in the second half. I'm not very into Springer's promotion of "post-structuralist anarchism," insofar as that's how one could define his project. He definitely does draw from the classical anarchist tradition as well, though, especially P. Kropotkin and Reclus. It seems that there are tensions between these tendencies in Springer's thought.
I thought the earlier essays were better than the ones in the second half. I'm not very into Springer's promotion of "post-structuralist anarchism," insofar as that's how one could define his project. He definitely does draw from the classical anarchist tradition as well, though, especially P. Kropotkin and Reclus. It seems that there are tensions between these tendencies in Springer's thought.
July 26, 2018
Ce livre est intéressant, mais il manque de synthèse. Trop de redites. J’aurais également apprécié un plus grand apport de la géographie dans ce livre qui porte avant tout sur l’anarchisme.
May 24, 2025
I have no doubt that Springer is a good human being: his dedication and acknowledgements demonstrate that. But this work has many, many flaws. I'd be pleased to learn that he has developed further in his thinking since this book.
1) Springer spends far too much time critiquing Marxist geographers and not nearly enough time considering the arguments of "neoliberals" and "right-wing libertarian anarchists." Just because you disagree on endpoints (or, possibly, even the existence of "endpoints," although stating that Marxists view socialism as an "endpoint" is a gross oversimplification, if not outright fabrication) doesn't mean that making a temporary coalition with them against capitalism should should be avoided out of hand.
2) "Pre-figurative" and "predetermined" may be different words, but a) prefiguring _is_ predetermining something (come away from poststructuralism a little bit into the material world, please)... what do "figures" do (or what are they?)?; and b) "Pre-" _does_ imply process, but it is just as tautological as any other progression. Saying you are "prefiguring" anarchism means you blieve that eventually anarchism will exist at some larger scale than the merely personal. That's equivalent to having an "endpoint."
3) What happened to Occupy or all the anarchist actions at the WTO meetings anyway? What lasting change came from them? From where I am, the world sure looks a lot different from 2012 or 1999: it's a lot more grim. I'm not sure that a series of random people doing the equivalent of spraypainting fraffiti on walls or destroying the occasional surveillance camera will somehow magically overthrow the state or capitalism. That utopian thinking reminds me of a _Far Side_ cartoon where the scientist inserts "A miracle occurs here" in the middle of his equation.
4) The last point indicates part of the problem with this kind of call to "action" _without_ scale. In order to combat a large-scale system like capitalism or the state, people _need_ to organize at scale for the simple reason that people collectively are a lot stronger than single individuals alone, particularly if they are operating against those systems single and without an overall plan.
5) Finally, why is Springer an academic if he is an anarchist? Academia is one of the worst hierarchies in the world, with the (possible) exception of governments.
This kind of call to action is harmless simply because it can never amount to meaningful change if applied; in fact, it's tempting to view it as a cover for complicity with capitalism and libertarian neoliberalism.
1) Springer spends far too much time critiquing Marxist geographers and not nearly enough time considering the arguments of "neoliberals" and "right-wing libertarian anarchists." Just because you disagree on endpoints (or, possibly, even the existence of "endpoints," although stating that Marxists view socialism as an "endpoint" is a gross oversimplification, if not outright fabrication) doesn't mean that making a temporary coalition with them against capitalism should should be avoided out of hand.
2) "Pre-figurative" and "predetermined" may be different words, but a) prefiguring _is_ predetermining something (come away from poststructuralism a little bit into the material world, please)... what do "figures" do (or what are they?)?; and b) "Pre-" _does_ imply process, but it is just as tautological as any other progression. Saying you are "prefiguring" anarchism means you blieve that eventually anarchism will exist at some larger scale than the merely personal. That's equivalent to having an "endpoint."
3) What happened to Occupy or all the anarchist actions at the WTO meetings anyway? What lasting change came from them? From where I am, the world sure looks a lot different from 2012 or 1999: it's a lot more grim. I'm not sure that a series of random people doing the equivalent of spraypainting fraffiti on walls or destroying the occasional surveillance camera will somehow magically overthrow the state or capitalism. That utopian thinking reminds me of a _Far Side_ cartoon where the scientist inserts "A miracle occurs here" in the middle of his equation.
4) The last point indicates part of the problem with this kind of call to "action" _without_ scale. In order to combat a large-scale system like capitalism or the state, people _need_ to organize at scale for the simple reason that people collectively are a lot stronger than single individuals alone, particularly if they are operating against those systems single and without an overall plan.
5) Finally, why is Springer an academic if he is an anarchist? Academia is one of the worst hierarchies in the world, with the (possible) exception of governments.
This kind of call to action is harmless simply because it can never amount to meaningful change if applied; in fact, it's tempting to view it as a cover for complicity with capitalism and libertarian neoliberalism.
August 31, 2019
Either this book is too big-brained for me or this person just likes to name drop authors. Interesting read, I don't agree with a lot of his opinions on organizational structures, violence (or his proposal for a lack there-of) or his critique on Marxism on geography. Although it is an interesting critique. And I know noting about political geography. So a grain of salt with my opinion is needed. I like his talk about scale, agonism, and radical democracy. In a perfect world I'd check out every author he names, but the last 70ish pages is his bibliography. I'll come back to this one day
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews