It's Kropotkin's birthday!

154 posts / 0 new
Last post
Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Feb 7 2008 16:23
Anarcho wrote:
It is hard to take seriously someone who maintains that it was Kropotkin's politics which are to blame when those politics have not been read.

Look at the my first comment on this in this thread:

Devrim wrote:
but I also think that it is a mistake to believe that his decision came out of thin air. I doubt Kropotkin's did either.

At no point did I say that he definitely came from his politics. I speculated on where it came from. In my opinion it must have come from his politics.

Anarcho wrote:
I have already indicated where I think his madness came from. It was not from his communist-anarchist politics, but rather his personal preferences for things French and dislike for things German.

So what you are saying was that it was his chauvinism. Something that I don't think is acceptable in anarchist politics.

Anarcho wrote:
I can assure you that his actions in 1914 were the total opposite of his pre-1914 position and politics.

So it is now a chauvinism that developed suddenly.

Anarcho wrote:
As for what century, well, I was not aware that the scientific method became irrelevant in the 21st century.

I was talking about the phrase scientific socialism, not the scientific method.

My basic theses here is that Kropotkin ended up siding with the bourgeoisie. I think we are agreed on that. The question is why. I still maintain that it is probable that there was a political root to this. Anarchist, however, on the whole don't re-examine the politics, and tend to put things like this down to 'mistakes', or in your case personal idiosyncrasies.

While you harp constantly on about 'the vast majority of communist-anarchists' who didn't follow his lead it isn't really the point. In my opinion they took a class position. Kropotkin is the person who people are celebrating here.

Devrim

Anarcho
Offline
Joined: 22-10-06
Mar 4 2008 10:29
Devrim wrote:
At no point did I say that he definitely came from his politics. I speculated on where it came from. In my opinion it must have come from his politics.

And has proved absolutely no evidence to support it....

Devrim wrote:
Anarcho wrote:
I can assure you that his actions in 1914 were the total opposite of his pre-1914 position and politics.

So it is now a chauvinism that developed suddenly.

Why do I bother? Obviously it did not develop "suddenly", as I noted his love of France and dislike of things Germans can be found throughout his live. They were in contradiction to his stated internationalism and were obviously not obvious enough, at the time, to cause concern. But they were there (for example, his talk of the Latin workers being the true hiers to the First International and so on). His love of France and his personal dislike of things German came to a head in 1914, much to the surprise of his friends and comrades.

Devrim wrote:
My basic theses here is that Kropotkin ended up siding with the bourgeoisie. I think we are agreed on that. The question is why. I still maintain that it is probable that there was a political root to this.

And have proved no evidence to support that opinion. Which, to any disinterested reader, says it all.

Devrim wrote:
Anarchist, however, on the whole don't re-examine the politics, and tend to put things like this down to 'mistakes', or in your case personal idiosyncrasies.

If it were his politics then the vast majority of communist-anarchists would have supported the war. They did not. If it were his politics then few people would have been surprised by his 1914 position. Almost all were surprised, even close friends like Malatesta. So what can we draw from this? Obviously, that Kropotkin's communist-anarchist politics do not explain his actions in 1914.

And I do love it when someone admits to not having read of Kropotkin's works, states that anarchists do not "re-examine" their politics! Maybe it others examined them in the first place then we would not have had this pointless argument.

Devrim wrote:
While you harp constantly on about 'the vast majority of communist-anarchists' who didn't follow his lead it isn't really the point. In my opinion they took a class position. Kropotkin is the person who people are celebrating here.

ROTFL! So when the vast majority of communist-anarchists took a communist-anarchist position then "it isn't really the point"! How strange. But, in reality, it is the point. If Kropotkin's politics (communist-anarchism) were to blame for his 1914 actions then we need to look at what other communist-anarchists did at the same time, i.e., people who shared his politics. The evidence is clear. They expressed the communist-anarchist position, as Kropotkin had up to 1914 with respect to wars.

As for celebrating Kropotkin, I would say that anarchists recognise his contribution to the development of communist-anarchism between the early 1870s and 1910s. They also recognise that his position between 1914-17 should condemned and was directly against his own communist-anarchist principles (as other communist-anarchists like Malatesta, Berkman, Goldman, etc all pointed out at the time). Perhaps if you "examined" his writings during this period you would discover why anarchists still read him and quote him, while opposing his actions of 1914.