"Julien Febvre” is a Greek writer, musician, artist and filmmaker, student of politics and sociology in Birkbeck University of London. He has studied Arts and Pedagogy in Griffith College, (Dublin, Ireland) and Musicology in Kingston University of London. He has been influenced by the Greek philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis, the Situationist Movement, anarchism and Libertarian Socialism.I consider this article to be most reflective of my "imaginary", world view, "weltanschauung" (German), or ideological position. Such an exposition of this ideology is rarely found in American English articles. Unfortunately, this article should have been proofread to eliminate several errors and to conform to ordinary English usage. (Also, I think it is useful to keep in mind that he is writing this to a British audience following the riots in London and other cities in August, and I think that he is responding to the coverage of these events by British mainstream media.)
But, once you get beyond these problems, you will find numerous clarifications of what anarchism really means and has meant to most of its exponents throughout its history. Once you understand it, you will understand that it is a truly revolutionary world view. That is precisely why capitalist propagandists put so much effort into smearing and obfuscating the term "anarchism". It is totally and fundamentally at odds with any kind of authoritarian system as well as the numerous pseudo-democratic systems in existence today. The latter are simply authoritarian systems dressed up in democratic garb.
To aid in your understanding of this important paper, I will point out some of the most glaring errors:
To those myopic conservatives who claim that a society without state violence or capitalism is inevitable, we would respond that oppression, exploitation, war, consumerism, pollution, is the reality they are defending.I think he meant to write:
To those myopic conservatives who claim that a society without state violence or capitalism is impossible, ....
Precisely because of this knowledge [the meaning of "autonomy"], they can set their own laws and institutions and despise them whenever they deem it is necessary, without recognizing any totems and taboos.I think he meant to write:
"Precisely because of this knowledge, they can set their own laws and institutions and discard or reject them whenever they deem it is necessary without recognizing any totems and taboos."
Such like for a Jewish of the Bible the question “is the law right and fair” has no answer because “the law is given by God, consequently everybody who despises it, is a sinner, a heathen or an unbeliever, hence everybody has to obey this law or will receive eternal punishment”.I think he meant to write:
"Similarly, for the Jews in the Bible...."
Direct democracy is not a purport but a mean, an ability to understand how we, ourselves, are able to create laws. In direct democracy, all decisions are taken directly by ourselves (whether through popular assemblies, or other entities).I think he meant to write:
"Direct democracy is not an objective, but a means, ...."
