Nepali Anarchists on the Toppling of the Government

Based off the wiki page, I was a little concerned this book might be advocating for vanguardism. I went looking for a more in-depth summary/analysis of the book, and found a presentation the author gave (along with a written transcript below) that I think gives a fairly good condensed summary: https://matrix.berkeley.edu/research-article/vincent-bevins/

Based off that presentation, I think Bevins does a pretty good job of explaining some potential reasons those previous revolutionary attempts failed, and I agree with his assessment that a pre-existing large and strong labor movement helps determine if they are successful or not, as well as making a good point that that people will jump to a familiar solution even if it's not the best option, demonstrating the importance of prefiguration.

The success of Anarchist controlled Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War is a good example from history of how laying the seeds of alternative societal structures through education and strong militant unions (which teach people how to use their collective power and work together) grown slowly over many decades enabled them to hit the ground running, and ultimately come together to act out that wildly alternative method of society, instead of succumbing to the temptations of easy and familiar solutions.

So while the Bevins seems to take issue with horizontalism, I think his issue is more so that horizontalism's chances of success are proportionate to how established the zeitgeist is for how to work together collectively, the type of societal vision they want, and how established ideas on how to achieve and live in that vision. A less horizontal structure doesn't need to rely on all of that groundwork being first, since that vision can be dictated from a more central point. It makes it much easier than doing all that groundwork, but the downside is once that path is gone down, it seems to inevitably spiral out of control into dictatorship.

6 comments

However, this uprising was not fully prepared for what happens next. Until now, our efforts have focused mainly on education and protests, without envisioning post-collapse structures. Our advice to comrades worldwide is to prepare not only for revolt but for non-hierarchical structures and societal rebuilding once regimes fall.
I take this advice to heart
- If We Burn for more on this lesson. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_We_Burn
  
  Based off the wiki page, I was a little concerned this book might be advocating for vanguardism. I went looking for a more in-depth summary/analysis of the book, and found a presentation the author gave (along with a written transcript below) that I think gives a fairly good condensed summary: https://matrix.berkeley.edu/research-article/vincent-bevins/
  Based off that presentation, I think Bevins does a pretty good job of explaining some potential reasons those previous revolutionary attempts failed, and I agree with his assessment that a pre-existing large and strong labor movement helps determine if they are successful or not, as well as making a good point that that people will jump to a familiar solution even if it's not the best option, demonstrating the importance of prefiguration.
  The success of Anarchist controlled Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War is a good example from history of how laying the seeds of alternative societal structures through education and strong militant unions (which teach people how to use their collective power and work together) grown slowly over many decades enabled them to hit the ground running, and ultimately come together to act out that wildly alternative method of society, instead of succumbing to the temptations of easy and familiar solutions.
  So while the Bevins seems to take issue with horizontalism, I think his issue is more so that horizontalism's chances of success are proportionate to how established the zeitgeist is for how to work together collectively, the type of societal vision they want, and how established ideas on how to achieve and live in that vision. A less horizontal structure doesn't need to rely on all of that groundwork being first, since that vision can be dictated from a more central point. It makes it much easier than doing all that groundwork, but the downside is once that path is gone down, it seems to inevitably spiral out of control into dictatorship.