[this text is seriously garbled and will be fixed sometime]

The Furious Five Revolutionary Collective, based in San Jose,
California, was formed in 2003. Brought together by mutual organizing
work, the collective united around a shared belief in the continued validity
of anarchist communism, but only if it committed itself to serious
organizing, tactical/ideological unity, and a return to idea of the base of
anarchism being in the struggles of everyday people and especially op-
pressed communities. The Collective is not based on ideological purity. On
the contrary, it is constantly striving to help in the revising of anarchist
communism and its reconstruction where necessary in order to make it
relevant to the present (much changed) context.
The Furious Five Revolutionary Collective also considers itself an
especifista collective, meaning that it believes in the necessity of anarchists
working within popular, mass organizations. We commit ourselves to
learning from whatever groups or struggles are out there, no matter where
on the map or where in time they may be.
Currently, we work in several areas of organizing student, labor,
and community organizing. We believe that the purpose of the collective is
to constantly debate the effectiveness of working in whatever area of
organizing and provide a venue for accountability, review, self-criticism, and
mutual support. We also believe that we should help in the propagation of
anarchist and anti-authoritarian ideas. That being said, the Furious Five
Revolutionary Collective is not imbued with a missionary spirit. We wish to
help in the creation of an anarchistic movement, not necessarily a move-
ment of anarchists.
www.furiousfive.50megs.com
webcomrade@furiousfive.50megs.com
Over the past few years Anarchist-Communist orga-
nizations have been budding across the globe from South
Africa to South America to North America. Yet few people,
even within anarchist and revolutionary circles, have a good
grasp of the beliefs, motivations and purposes behind this
movement. Often times with an emerging movement it is not
until the egg hatches, producing concrete and visible results,
that people begin to give it its name and tell its story.
This article aims to give a brief outline the lessons
to be learned from our revolutionary histories and show the
roots from which the current movement of Anarchist-Com-
munists in North America and worldwide stems from and
further argue the case for this movements vision of a coher-
ent Anarchist-Communist organization based on a strategic
orientation towards social movements of the working class
and oppressed.
While hard to believe now, the ideas of Anarchism
once held center stage in the mass revolutionary movements
during the turn of the century on every continent. Through
labor unions, cultural centers, women? s groups and popular
newspapers, the libertarian ideal of a free, horizontal social-
ism created by the people inspired millions across the globe.
Anarchism, expressed through revolutionary and anarcho-
syndicalism, was the dominant revolutionary ideology of
mass movements in most countries, while the vast majority
of the Marxist current was organized into reformist social
democratic parties that were oriented towards electoral
change, or, ? ? socialism at the ballot box.? Marxist writer Eric
Hobsbawm notes that
It became hard to recall that in 1905-14, the Marxist
left (sic) had in most countries been on the fringe of the revo-
lutionary movement, the main body of Marxists had been iden-
tified with a de facto non-revolutionary social democracy, while
the bulk of the revolutionary left was anarcho-syndicalist, or
at least much closer to the ideas and mood of anarcho-syn-
dicalism than to that of classical Marxism. Marxism was
henceforth after the Russian Revolution identified with ac-
tively revolutionary movements... Anarchism and anarcho-
syndicalism entered upon a dramatic and uninterrupted de-
cline. 1
But as history has shown in numerous countries,
tivists. The Anarchist-Communist vision of social movements
is also different to those movements that while seemingly
popular and seemingly based on struggles of oppressed
and working class people, are leadership orchestrated, top-
down movements where participants are passive actors of
their own fate or where a movements true function is acting
as a conveyor belt of electoral or party politics. Unfortunately
too many anarchists find themselves plowing every garden
but their own and doing this very type of work.
The role of the Anarchist-Communists is not to
wrestle the leadership of movements into their hands, which
assumes a presumptuous leadership of the masses or
vanguardist role, but to work as a catalyst of ideas and action
within. Like baking soda to vinegar, a catalyst works to create
a reaction when it interacts with something else. Anarchist-
Communists would play key roles as active participants, help-
ing push the social movements forward in organization,
strength and militancy. They would also work to maintain the
popular character by arguing against electoral politics, their
accompanying party organizations and vanguardist elements.
In Conclusion
Just as history is putting everyday people into the line of fire,
it is forcing them to step up to the plate to resist the attacks of
capitalism, white supremacy and patriarchy. But these at-
tacks and the growing resistance are neither isolated events,
but are all elements of historical forces at work. These forces
are also calling forth the ideals inspired by anarchism and
Anarchist-Communism that of a society reshaped in the
image of a popular, horizontal socialism created by the people.
As revolutionaries our moment is now and we cannot afford,
nor can all of our people and communities, to abdicate our
responsibility and ignore the lessons of our histories. We
must accept this challenge by coherently organizing ourselves
and putting our ideal into practice of mass, popular and mili-
tant social movements that will have the power to bring about
the social revolution.
by Adam Weaver of the Furious Five Revolutionary Collective.
Footnotes 1. As quoted by Arif Dirlik, Anarchism and the Chinese Revolution (Berkeley University
of California Press, 1991), 2
2. Citing just a few examples of China, Vietnam and Cuba John King Fairbank, The Great Chinese
Revolution (San Francisco Harper Perenial, 1987), 208, 212 William J. Duiker, Ho Chi Minh, A Life
(NY, Hyperion 2000), 89 Frank Fernandez Cuban Anarchism (Tuscon, AZ See Sharp Press, 2001),
55
3. The Global Influence of Platformism Today (Johannesburg, South Africa Zabalaza Books, 2003),
24 (Interview with Italian Federazione dei Comunisti Anarchici for Organizational Dualism), 50
(Interview with Brazilian Federac? a? ? o Anarquista Gau? cha for especifismo) www.nefac.net or
www.zabalaza.net/zababooks
Building a revolutionary movement
Why Anarcho-communist organization
Adam Weaver
61
Weaver Building a revolutionary movement Furious Five Revolutionary Collective San Jose, CA
along with dedicated work. Of course the way particular groups
implement a strategy may be different because of local cir-
cumstances and different approaches.
This process of developing a revolutionary strategy
and ideological discussion within the organization allows
the members and groups who make up the federation to
constantly be engaging themselves in the process of revolu-
tionary theory and practice. Then, by taking their discussions,
reflections and conclusions into media forms, such as the
federation publication, it creates more discussion and influ-
ence within the larger revolutionary and social movements.
Further, the federation can act as a historical well of experi-
ence for new militants brought into the movement and allow
the members to hold themselves accountable to the mis-
takes they make.
Based on the analysis and strategy of the organiza-
tion, day-to-day work is focused around working within broader
social movements. While social movements are broadly de-
fined as movements of affected groups of people brought
together for social change, the social movements that Anar-
chist-Communists specifically refer to are movements of op-
pressed people that seek not only social change, but a break-
ing down of existing structures and oppression. They must
have the potential to counter pose oppressed people? s own
collective power and vision (also called dual power). The
movements should be horizontal, participant led and demo-
cratic in structure as much as possible. They should be ori-
ented towards direct action and more importantly create the
type of conditions that transform the participants into self-
conscious thinkers and organizers amongst their peers. The
classic example of social movements is radical labor orga-
nizing, but contemporary examples could also be working
class student and community organizing.
The Brazilian FAG (Federac? a? ? o Anarquista Gau? cha
or Gaucha Anarchist Federation) describes their view on an-
archists involvement in social movements
On the political-ideological level (political groups,
including the FAG) should enhance the social and popular
movements, but without trying to make it ? ? anarchist? , more
militant. The social movements should not have a political
ideology, the role should be to unite and not belong to a politi-
cal party. In social movements it is possible to unite militants
and build a unified base, which is not possible in an ideo-
logical level. 4
This is radically different from the work that most of
the US left is engaged in, of cyclical activist work which lacks
strategy and is divorced from everyday experience and rel-
evance to oppressed and working class people. Most of this
work amounts to issue based advocacy by small groups of
political activists that orient themselves to other political ac-
despite the popularity of anarchist ideas and the high level of
involvement and even leadership of anarchists in the popu-
lar struggles of their day, anarchists were not able to effec-
tively organize themselves during important revolutionary
moments. The loosely knit anarchist movement was not able
to develop the strategic and tactical unity necessary to deal
with massive state repression, moves toward state
accommodationism of social movements (such as advent of
the welfare state or government mediation of workplace
struggles) or the rise of Bolshevism. Together these forces
sounded the decline of anarchism and the role of anarchists
in mass movements, along with a number of anarchist mili-
tants who were swayed into the forming Communist Parties
of the early 20? s.
The Russian Revolution of 1917 profoundly swayed
the orientation of the global revolutionary movements towards
the statist politics of Marxist-Leninism. Many began to see
Russia, under Lenin, Trotsky and later Stalin? s leadership,
as the leading hope of revolution. The new soviet state opened
up training institutes, offered advisors and contributed finan-
cial resources to emerging Communist Parties throughout
the global south, vastly expanding the once small role that
Marxism held throughout the world.2 This factor of Marxism? s
growth has unfortunately yet to be sufficiently examined and
taken into consideration in looking at the origins of Marxism
globally.
By the early 1930? s the majority of the revolutionary
movements, with the great exception of Spain, were strongly
influenced if not in the hands of the Communist Parties. The
Communist Parties affiliated with the Third International, or
Comintern, with Stalin at the helm, directed or created strong
poles in the ideology of the oppressed and working class
movements in numerous countries through the popular front
strategy which led to their historic defeat. Where the CP? s
were ? ? successful? in erecting Marx? s idea and Lenin? s model
of dictatorship of the proletariat, the result was dictatorial state-
capitalist regimes that oppressed workers, ethnic minorities
and indigenous peoples.
Now that the dust has settled on the great struggles
of the 20th century, the weight of Marxist and reformist narra-
tives of history have buried most of the spectacular history
and struggles of anarchists worldwide. But now as a new
epoch of 21st century struggle is beginning, signs of resur-
gence are surfacing in response to new crises and popular
movements are again bursting forth with new examples of
popular rebellion and organization. In this climate a few dedi-
cated individuals have begun to brush off the dust and bring
these stories of Anarchism and popular movements to light
again.25
Weaver Building a revolutionary movement Furious Five Revolutionary Collective San Jose, CA
The new world in our hearts
We are standing at a moment of historic juncture, a moment
that promises to bring ever more frightening realities. Yet,
with this frightening reality comes the opportunity for new
movements to resist imposed social crises and reshape
society in a new image. Following the Cold War and the col-
lapse of the communist ? alternative? , the US was left as the
sole world superpower. It has now begun to enact, through
treaty or tank, the globalization of hyper-exploitative capital-
ism and US hegemony into every corner of the world. Glo-
bally the economy is in shambles. Following Asia? s economic
crises, a typhoon has carried across the pacific, hitting South
America. Now reaching America, millions are jobless or be-
ing squeezed into the low wage service and retail sector,
while the economy is floated by massive military spending
and an accompanying national debt. Further, the extremist
leadership of President Bush, has expanded America? s
agenda to one of empire building through neocolonial milita-
rism abroad and US protectionism at home, putting the US
into potential conflict with other emerging powers such as
the EU and China. Important reforms of previous struggles
such as welfare, social security, accessible public education
and affirmative action are being slashed or nearly eliminated.
The years ahead will likely see a growth in massive
social movements challenging these crises of unemploy-
ment, war, public services, economic restructuring and con-
current repression and serious anarchists will be challenged
to put their beliefs into practice and turn these coming rebel-
lions into international social revolution. Already we can some
of this in new Anarchist-Communist organizations that have
formed and in the syndicalist unions in Europe and the US
that are reviving out of dormancy.
This requires not only a new analysis of our current
world and the realities of the oppressed and working classes,
but a strategy of how the revolutionary forces will act as cata-
lysts towards social revolution, which inevitably leads to the
question of how these forces will organize themselves as a
vehicle to implement and undertake this strategy.
Traditionally the movement of Anarchist-Commu-
nism within anarchism has defined itself by fighting for a
positive vision of social revolution. They have avoided the
pitfalls of moving into reformist mutualism and while involved
in the social movements, rejected ? ? pure? anarcho-syndical-
ism that denied any necessity for separate anarchist organi-
zation. Within the FAI of Spain, the Makhnovistas of the
Ukraine, the PLM of Mexico and the anarchist federations of
South America, Anarchist-Communism represents the lead-
ing ideological force of these social revolutionaries.
While classic Anarchist-Communist beliefs were
built on the simple theorem of, ? ? From each according to their
ability, to each according to their needs,? the new emerging
movement of Anarchist-Communists is expanding their
framework of analysis. While Anarchism offers timeless prin-
ciples, much of its political, social and organizational theory
is outdated and thus serious anarchists have begun the pro-
cess of historical revision and reexamining concepts of race,
gender, social oppression, nationalism and imperialism.
The Basis of Organization
Based on these historical conclusions and assessment of
the current situation emerges the rising Anarchist-Commu-
nist movement within anarchism based around two central
themes 1) the organization of militants into a coherent fed-
eration and 2) the interaction and active participation of anar-
chists within the social movements. While these ideas have
only recently come into North American Anarchism, they are
historically rooted in the anarchist movement and have
formed independently in different countries. For example the
same concept was called ? ? organizational dualism? in the Ital-
ian anarchist movement of the 20? s and a similar concept
has emerged in the South American anarchist movement
they call ? ? especifismo.? 3
Today? s current borrows loosely from the Platformist
current in the belief of rejecting an anarchist catch-all federa-
tion combining different tendencies within Anarchism, called
a ? ? synthesis federation,? and instead advocating an organi-
zation based on common ideological belief. This type of fed-
eration interacts in ideas with the broader anarchist move-
ment and may work with similar minded anarchists, but does
not seek to speak for, represent or recruit the whole anarchist
movement.
In the ? Organizational Platform of the Libertarian
Communists,? document written by Nestor Makhno and the
Dielo Trouda (Workers Cause) group after the Russian Revo-
lution, the term coined to describe their proposal for anar-
chist federation is one based on ? ? theoretical and tactical
unity.? This does not mean having a rigid, all encompassing
ideological hegemony within the organization (as many Marx-
ist-Leninist and especially Maoist parties do), but rather the
organization brings its members together to develop a com-
mon strategy towards building a revolutionary movement.
This important strategizing work can only occur in an organi-
zation with a high degree of trust, commitment and political
unity. Theoretical and tactical unity is not something imposed,
but is an ideal that is always strived towards and developed
out of a process of critical thinking, strategizing, action and
evaluation. It is a concept born out of necessity as revolution-
aries realize that a successful revolution requires a strategy43
Weaver Building a revolutionary movement Furious Five Revolutionary Collective San Jose, CA