Anarchist Theory and Archaeology

Author(s):  
Bill Angelbeck ◽  
Lewis Borck ◽  
Matt Sanger
Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colleen Morgan

Recent developments in archaeological thought and practice involve a seemingly disparate selection of ideas that can be collected and organized as contributing to an anti-authoritarian, “punk” archaeology. This includes the contemporary archaeology of punk rock, the DIY and punk ethos of archaeological labor practices and community involvement, and a growing interest in anarchist theory as a productive way to understand communities in the past. In this article, I provide a greater context to contemporary punk, DIY, and anarchist thought in academia, unpack these elements in regard to punk archaeology, and propose a practice of punk archaeology as a provocative and productive counter to fast capitalism and structural violence.


Author(s):  
Susana Sueiro Seoane

Este texto analiza las fuertes discrepancias que hubo en el anarquismo del siglo XIX a propósito del tema independentista cubano. En un principio, la tesis más extendida fue que la liberación de Cuba del dominio español no garantizaba a la isla su libertad, que los anarquistas entendían como una emancipación económica y social y no política. La lucha por la instauración de una república, pensaban, no era su lucha. Sin embargo, el mensaje de Martí caló entre muchos obreros cubanos, incluidos los anarquistas, y en las páginas de los periódicos libertarios, tanto de Cuba como de España o Estados Unidos, se discutió mucho sobre si los anarquistas debían o no apoyar la causa independentista. Personajes centrales en esta polémica fueron los impresores Enrique Roig, Enrique Creci y Pedro Esteve, que utilizaron los periódicos que editaron para reflexionar sobre el tema de la patria, el patriotismo y el independentismo. Finalmente, ganó en el seno del anarquismo cubano la causa de la independencia. Incluso Esteve, el más reticente, acabó aceptando que había que apoyar la guerra por la independencia cubana siempre que el objetivo último siguiera siendo la revolución anarquista. This text analyses the strong discrepancies that arose in XIXth Century anarchism regarding Cuban independence. At first, the anarchist theory was that the liberation of Cuba from Spanish rule did not guarantee the Island its freedom, which the anarchists understood as being an economic and social emancipation but not a political one. The fight for the establishment of a republic, they thought, was not their fight. However, Martí’s message made an impression amongst many Cuban workers, including the anarchists, and in the pages of the libertarian newspapers, both Cuban and Spanish or North American, there was much debate on whether or not the anarchists should support the cause of independence. Key figures in this controversy were the printers Enrique Roig, Enrique Creci and Pedro Esteve, who used the periodicals they published to deliberate on the themes of homeland, patriotism and independence. Finally, at the heart of Cuban anarchism it was the struggle for independence that prevailed. Even Esteve, the most reluctant, ended up accepting that it was necessary to support the Cuban war of independence as long as the final objective continued to be anarchist revolution.


1996 ◽  
Vol 69 (169) ◽  
pp. 143-165
Author(s):  
Mark Bevir

Abstract In the nineteenth century, anarchists were strict individualists favouring clandestine organization and violent revolution: in the twentieth century, they have been romantic communalists favouring moral experiments and sexual liberation. This article examines the growth of this ethical anarchism in Britain in the late nineteenth century, as exemplified by the Freedom Group and the Tolstoyans. These anarchists adopted the moral and even religious concerns of groups such as the Fellowship of the New Life. Their anarchist theory resembled the beliefs of counter-cultural groups such as the aesthetes more closely than it did earlier forms of anarchism. And this theory led them into the movements for sex reform and communal living.


Author(s):  
Abraham P. DeLeon

What is anarchist theory and practice? What does it mean when anarchists engage with qualitative research? Anarchism has a long-standing history within radical political action that has been enacted at particular historical times and spaces. The Spanish Civil War, Paris 1968, and the so-called Battle of Seattle in 1999 saw the potential of anarchism as both a mode of critique and way(s) in which to think about direct political action. However, little has been done within the critical qualitative research project to engage with the ideas and critiques that anarchism offers researchers to think about and inform their own work. Resisting hierarchies and their arrangements, challenging domination and relationships of power, rethinking praxis and direct action in qualitative research, and envisioning a utopian social and political imagination have been just a few of the political and epistemological projects that anarchists have undertaken that have direct implications for qualitative researchers. In thinking about future potentials, it has become imperative that critical qualitative researchers engage with anarchist theory and its critiques to better inform its own assumptions when thinking about the roles that qualitative research plays in resisting and altering oppressive social, political, and economic conditions.


1979 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Haydon

Consideration of the status and treatment of the child is a legitimate concern of political theory, and may lead to reappraisal of some commonly deployed arguments. Several respects are indicated in which decisions taken by adults and affecting children may properly be considered political. More specifically, it is argued that (i) anarchist theory; (ii) Nozick's arguments in Anarchy, State and Utopia; and (iii) consent theories of political obligation run into difficulties when the place of children is considered. The argument points, under (i) and (ii), to putative lines of justification of the state; and under (iii) to the conclusion, contrary to common assumption, that those who have not yet attained sufficient understanding to be considered as consenting are not morally obliged to obey the state's laws and agents.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document