Association formed without any outside economic consideration, or any leading interest, association for its own sake, as an act of devotion, a family tie, as it were, is an act of pure religion, a supernatural bond, without real value, a myth.
critica a associação por si só, apenas porque sim. As associações entre pessoas são feitas por necessidade mútua
(uma ideia presente em stirner tb)
The authors who have advocated utopian fraternities, by which so many are still attracted, have attributed, without reason or proof, a virtue and efficacy to the social contract, which belongs only to collective force, the division of labor, or to exchange.
contra um contrato social mas sim a favor das forças que considera económicas
The union of forces, which must not be confounded with association, as we shall shortly see,
este conceito também é elaborado em "o que é a propriedade?"
There is no harm in recalling that it was, oddly enough, at a congress of the Italian Sections of the first workers' International, meeting clandestinely near Florence in 1876, that, on a motion put forward by Errico Ma1atesta, it was affirmed that communism was the economic arrangement that could best make a society without government a possibility; and that anarchy (that is, the absence of all government), being the free and voluntary organisation of social relationships, was the best way to implement communism. One is effectively the guarantee for the other and vice versa. Hence the concrete formulation of ANARCHIST COMMUNISM as an ideal and as a movement of struggle.
uma revolução comunista tem que ser necessariamente anarquista. Se é uma revolução da "imensa maioria nos interesses da imensa maioria" (manifesto comunista) não pode ser controlado por uma minoria, por um governo. Tem de ser feita pelos próprios trabalhadores.
"All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority. "
Any governing body is an impediment to the real organisation of the broad masses, the majority. Where a government exists, then the only really organised people are the minority that make up the government; and, this notwithstanding, if the masses do organise, they do so against it, outside it, or at the very least, independently of it. In ossifying into a government, the revolution as such would fall apart, on account of its awarding that government the monopoly of organisation and of the means of struggle.
uma visão semelhante foi descrita por Kropotkin em "Revolutionary government" Um governo, mesmo que se diga revolucionário, só limita a atividade criativa das massas.
Any power, whatever the circumstances, is unacceptable to anarchists because it oppresses. For this reason, workers’ power is unacceptable to them in that it oppresses the bourgeoisie.
just not true, anarchists are against any form of government of man by man, and do not oppose "workers' power", they are firm advocates of it.