A-Infos (en) Brazil, OSL, Libera #183 - Malatesta's Contributions to Social Theory - Felipe Corrêa (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Even though he never was or intended to be an academic, Errico Malatesta 
(1853-1932) possessed a rich and valuable intellectual output. This 
output came to light in newspaper articles and small books, and despite 
being marked by depth and innovation, it maintained a simple, 
unpretentious, didactic, and easily understandable form. After all - as 
his biographers Max Nettlau and Luigi Fabbri confirm - the Italian 
anarchist did not intend to engage only with the intellectuals of his 
time, but especially with the general public, with the oppressed classes 
of Italy and the various other places where he lived and passed through.

This work aims to examine part of this intellectual production in order 
to rescue and reconstruct certain contributions of Errico Malatesta to 
social theory. According to the distinction made by the author himself, 
this discussion focuses only on part of his political thought (or 
political theory), and even on his frame of reference or method of 
analysis (realism). It delves less into reflections linked to the 
philosophical - epistemological and doctrinal-ideological fields, and 
concentrates on some of those related to the scientific field.

Malatesta has made significant contributions to social theory, to the 
point that it is possible to speak of a Malatesta-style social theory , 
which can be defined as an analytical and interpretative tool with a 
certain level of generalization and abstraction, built from a coherent 
articulation of concepts and based on social and historical facts. This 
theory aims to scientifically support particular and concrete analyses 
of social reality, both in terms of history and current context.

In Malatesta's social theory, there are two major guiding categories: 
the interplay of forces and power relations . It can be said that these 
result from the articulation of five fundamental concepts from the work 
of the Italian anarchist: 1) Social system; 2) Inseparability of the 
three fields; 3) Social force; 4) Power; 5) Domination. These categories 
and concepts will be (re)constructed and presented below, so that they 
can support discussions of Malatesta's work and, at the same time, 
explanations of capitalist and statist society.

* * *

Errico Malatesta conceives of society as a "social system" .[4]This is a 
social order composed of related and inseparable parts or elements, 
which influence each other and form a totality of macro and 
micro-social, concrete and abstract aspects. He describes these elements 
or parts as " social relations ".[5]These relations are both vertical 
and horizontal, and are characterized by multicausality.

In vertical terms (from micro to macro-social expressions), the 
interdependent relationships and mutual influence between the individual 
and society stand out: the "reciprocal action[...]between man and the 
social environment," in which, on the one hand, "society makes men as 
they are," and, on the other, "men make society as it is." 6

Individuals, collectively articulated and through their social 
relations, produce " social institutions ." 7 These institutions can be 
more or less durable and, also in relation to each other, produce the 
social system, society itself.

In horizontal terms (concrete and abstract macrosocial expressions), 
social relations within and between the economic, political, and 
moral/intellectual " fields" of society stand out . The social system 
can be analyzed from what happens in these three fields and the 
relationships that exist between them. These fields are inseparable and 
form a totality in which the parts influence each other and which can 
only be understood separately through analytical efforts. It is in these 
fields and in the relationships between them that social institutions 
and the social system are produced.

As can be seen in the graph below, it is the same social system that can 
be analyzed in these two distinct ways, in vertical and horizontal terms.

Historically, the predominant social system in modern society is the " 
capitalist " and statist system , that is, the " capitalist and statist 
order ."[9]It can be analyzed vertically, in the sense of the 
interdependent relations between the individual and society, which 
explains why the subject produced in this system carries with them a 
significant part of the influence of the relations and institutions of 
capitalism and the State.[10]And it can also be analyzed horizontally, 
in the sense of the three fields and the relations between them, that 
is, the capitalist economy, the modern State, and its major institutions 
of communication and education.[11]

Both vertically and horizontally, it is social relations that give shape 
to social institutions. Institutions are nothing more than relationships 
that have been established more permanently; common ways of thinking and 
acting that have consolidated and become structuring elements, organs, 
or part of the social system for the fulfillment of certain socially 
established functions. The more widespread in society, and the more 
permanent in time and space, the more a social institution is part of 
the structure of society, of the established social order. It is through 
the formation, diffusion, and entrenchment of social institutions that a 
society creates its order and produces its structure.

There is no doubt that the structure of society, its most enduring 
institutions, explains a large part of what happens in a given social 
system. 13 Still, it is always important to keep in mind that "history 
is made by men." 14 That is, will plays a relevant role in shaping 
social reality. 15 Malatesta therefore reconciles social structure and 
human action, as well as the role of each in structuring the social system.

For him, social conflict is an essential feature of this system which - 
both in terms of structure and human actions - is nothing more than the 
result of the interplay of forces and power relations that exist within 
it. That is, the formation of society is explained by "the result of the 
centuries-long struggles that men have undertaken among themselves," by 
"the result of a thousand internal struggles, a thousand natural and 
human factors." 16

The constitution of the social system therefore occurs based on the 
result of this infinity of conflicts; of the power relations that have 
been established as a function of the confrontation between forces at 
play , that is, of the countless social struggles and conflicts, which 
may be more or less violent. Struggles and conflicts that will never 
cease to exist, as they are essential traits of society and factors that 
explain its own structure. 17 Which may be class-based, but are not 
limited to them - they have the possibility of involving different 
groups and even individuals. And which explain the development and 
transformation of society. 18

In the case of the capitalist and statist system, it possesses a durable 
social structure and institutions that, although they do not completely 
explain the functioning of society, have considerable reproductive 
power, limiting human action in society. 19

This social action, then, is neither the negation nor the complement of 
individual initiative, but rather the result of the initiatives, 
thoughts, and actions of all the individuals who make up society; hence 
it follows that, all things being equal in principle, all forces concur 
toward the same objective, or diverge and oppose each other . 20

Initiatives, thoughts, and actions that, as can be seen, function within 
the logic of the power dynamics of society, associating with each other, 
confronting each other, and resulting in more or less lasting power 
relations . Social actions that occur within a structural scenario, 
itself forged from historical power dynamics that shaped the enduring 
capitalist and statist social relations and institutions. These actions 
possess the conditions, especially with the "force that emerges from 
cooperation," with "organization, which is life and strength," to 
maximize their potential impact on reality. And , in this way, 
contribute to social change.

Undoubtedly, conflict is a central feature of the capitalist and statist 
order, and explains not only its origin but also its daily functioning. 
The different forms of domination and exercise of authority existing in 
such a society imply different types of violence. And it should not be 
forgotten that the institution of the State plays a central role in this 
sense, insofar as it guarantees, through the threat and use of force, 
the institution of private property. In such a society, "men are 
oppressed in two ways: directly, by brutal force, by physical violence; 
or indirectly, by depriving them of their means of subsistence and thus 
reducing them to impotence." 22 Moreover, in this system, class struggle 
is a central feature, which stands out in the face of conflicts between 
nations, between men and women , and between different races and peoples.23

As pointed out, when analyzing the social system from a horizontal 
perspective, Malatesta argues that it can be understood as a totality 
involving three major parts, three macro-fields: the economic field , 
the political field , and the moral/intellectual field . "Field ," here, 
can be defined as the scope or space dedicated to certain human 
activities, established through institutionalized social relations.

A social system brings together the set of "means of subsistence." 24 
And each of the aforementioned macro-fields also brings together certain 
means. It is possible to say that the means of subsistence are composed 
of the set of means of production and exchange (economic means) , the 
means of government and repression (political means) , and the means of 
communication and instruction (moral/intellectual or knowledge means) . 25

The economic field encompasses all economic means , that is, the "means 
of production and exchange," as well as the relations of "production, 
consumption, and exchange," which "encompass all economic life." The 
political field encompasses all political means , that is, the "means of 
government" and, therefore, the "governmental functions," and the "means 
of repression" that encompass political, legal, and military life. The 
moral /intellectual field encompasses all moral/intellectual means , 
which include the "means of communication," the "means of instruction," 
and everything that could be called the means of "knowledge and 
understanding."

A central aspect of capitalist-statist society is the private ownership 
or monopoly of the means of subsistence; something that implies 
hierarchy and the imposition of the few over the many, as well as 
privileges for the former at the expense of the latter. It should be 
noted that this is not only about economic property, but also the 
private ownership or monopoly of the means of production and exchange , 
as well as the means of government and repression, and the means of 
communication and instruction .[29]These forms of property produce 
certain specific forms of domination and the exercise of authority in 
each of the three fields.

In the economic field, economic domination or " exploitation of labor " 
is a central characteristic of the capitalist economy. This exploitation 
occurs because "the means of production are in the hands of a few 
individuals, and the masses, who have nothing but their labor power, 
must seek work with those who possess these means and accept their 
conditions." Due to their positions in the relationship and economic 
conditions, employers impose themselves on workers, paying them "wages 
that normally do not exceed what is strictly necessary for the most 
rudimentary and vegetative survival," and appropriating most of the 
fruits of their labor. This is why, in capitalist and statist society, 
employers become rich and keep workers in poverty.

In the political field, two forms of political domination are promoted 
by the modern state. The first is the use of "brute force," "physical 
violence," or simply physical coercion . The second is "the power to 
make laws to regulate the relations of men among themselves and to 
enforce these laws," or simply political-bureaucratic domination . 32 
This exercise of government occurs in the following way:

Political, legislative, judicial, military, financial, etc. 
institutions, through which the people are deprived of the management of 
their own affairs, the direction of their own conduct, and the care of 
their own security, entrusting them to a few individuals who, by 
usurpation or delegation, find themselves invested with the right to 
make laws about everything and for everyone, to coerce the people to 
conform to them, using the force of all for this purpose. 33

In the moral/intellectual field, moral/intellectual domination or " 
religious, university power " marks the private ownership of the means 
of knowledge in the capitalist and statist system. 34 Communication and 
instruction, "the blessings of science and civilization, which the 
masses cannot appreciate because today they are monopolized by the 
bourgeoisie." 35 This monopoly produces a set of ideas that legitimizes 
the social order in question, because it makes most people believe that 
it is necessary (or even correct) for society to function in this way. 
36 Such is the result, for example, of the "individualistic morality of 
the bourgeoisie, the morality of contention and competition." 37

The relational dynamics between the three aforementioned fields in a 
given system are explained by the "nature of the relations" that involve 
a certain "derivation of powers" and that establish the role that each 
factor (field) possesses in shaping social reality (system). 38 
Throughout his life, Malatesta modified his position on this issue. He 
went from defending, between 1871 and 1889, the preponderance of the 
economic field (a position he refers to as "materialist"), to 
supporting, between 1924 and 1932, an equivalence of the three fields, 
thus valuing the role of the political and moral/intellectual fields; in 
the latter case, he rejects materialism only insofar as it is equated 
with economic determinism. 39

But despite these changes, the Italian anarchist maintained throughout 
his life the use of the terms "material" and "ideal" to express the 
dichotomy between concrete and abstract, physical and spiritual, factual 
and ideal. 40 That is, he always agreed that, in a social system, there 
are relationships and institutions that are more or less concrete 
(physical, factual, etc.) than others. And he usually linked, on the one 
hand, aspects related to the economic field (economic production, 
satisfaction of fundamental needs, the world of work, etc.) and the 
political field (state violence, war, conflicts, etc.) to concrete 
relationships and institutions, and, on the other hand, aspects related 
to the moral/intellectual field (spiritual issues, values, ideas, etc.) 
to abstract relationships and institutions. 41

Malatesta also maintained throughout his life the notion of the 
inseparability of the three fields , related to the concept of social 
system and according to which, in a given system, the economic field, 
the political field and the moral/intellectual field are "inseparable" 
42 , that is, inseparable, interdependent. It was in this sense that he 
emphasized "the inseparability of moral, political and economic 
emancipation", and referred to "a given economic, political and moral 
configuration". 43 Although it should be noted that, for him, each 
system, each society, has a specific configuration, a way of 
articulating these three fields.

The economic, political, and moral/intellectual fields, together and 
interrelated, constitute a systemic whole. Each of them influences the 
others, so that social relations and institutions can hardly be 
restricted to monocausal explanations. It must be borne in mind, for 
example, that, to be properly understood, the moral/intellectual ideas 
or issues of a society need to be related to economic and political 
facts.[44]And that, on the other hand, to be correctly understood, 
certain economic issues of a society need to be related to political or 
even moral/intellectual issues.[45]

Now, the fact that these three fields are inseparable does not mean that 
they have the same influence on the shaping of society. Therefore, 
Malatesta managed, throughout his career, to reconcile this 
inseparability of the three fields with what was previously stated: the 
conception of the preponderance of the economic field in his youth, and 
the conception of a certain equivalence between the fields in his 
maturity. Furthermore, it seems necessary to state that it is 
undoubtedly possible to carry out less totalizing analyses, which 
restrict themselves to two or even one field in question, or which focus 
only on a part (larger or smaller) of a field. In any case, the 
important thing is not to lose sight of the fact that this separation 
between the fields only exists in analytical terms, because, in reality, 
they function systemically.

This inseparable relationship between the fields is evident in the 
Italian anarchist's conception of social classes . For him, social 
classes are human groupings that result from the private ownership of 
the means of life (economic, political, and moral/intellectual). Classes 
that exist in all societies are based on domination and privilege, 
placing antagonistic sectors on opposite sides.

In a society based on the antagonism of interests, where one class 
retains all social wealth and organizes itself in political power to 
defend its own privileges, the poverty and subjugation of the 
disinherited masses always tend to reach the maximum level compatible 
with the mere existence of man and with the interests of the dominant 
class. And this tendency finds no obstacle except in the resistance of 
the oppressed. Oppression and exploitation never cease until the workers 
show themselves determined not to tolerate it any longer. 47

Dominant and oppressed classes are in permanent conflict, a class 
struggle . And the levels of domination and privileges of a society are 
the result of the interplay of forces that occurs in contexts involving 
this dynamic: domination versus resistance, class oppression versus 
struggle, and class consciousness.

In the capitalist and statist system, social classes are established 
based on the inseparability of the three fields - and therefore, of the 
four forms of domination that occur within them (economic exploitation, 
physical coercion, political-bureaucratic domination, and 
moral/intellectual domination), which, in such a system, are also 
inseparable and interdependent.

In that Europe at the turn of the 19th to the 20th century, Malatesta 
identified a set of concrete social classes that emerged in a context of 
enormous conflicts and struggles. He identifies certain "dominant 
classes" or "privileged classes" that simultaneously carry out the 
exploitation, governance, and deception of the working masses. Among 
them are: the "bourgeoisie," the former "landowners," the "rulers" 
(sometimes called the "bureaucracy" or "bureaucratic class"), and the 
clergy (or "religious" authorities) .

On the other hand, certain "oppressed" or "dominated" classes can be 
distinguished, composed of "workers" in a broad sense, who are 
simultaneously exploited, governed, and deceived. Among them are: the 
"proletariat" of the cities, those of the countryside, the "peasants," 
and the "poor" in general. 50

The "property-owning class" (bourgeoisie and landowners) includes those 
who "hereditarily possess the land and all social wealth" and who own 
the economic means. The "special class" of rulers and bureaucrats 
encompasses those who hold the monopoly of political means: "material 
means of repression" and government, which are used to maintain the 
privileges of the property owners and also to "arrogate privileges to 
themselves." The "other special class," "the clergy," thanks to the 
monopoly it possesses of moral/intellectual or knowledge-based means, 
leads "the oppressed to docilely endure the oppressor, the government, 
the interests of the property owners, and their own." 51

Dominant and oppressed classes are the protagonists of a "class 
struggle" - a central aspect of the capitalist and statist system, 
although other struggles and conflicts are also important. This struggle 
has particular expressions, for example, when some workers are in 
conflict with their employer, or when some peasants are in conflict with 
the owner of their land. But the class struggle also has more general 
features, when, in a given system, the different dominant classes 
confront, on one side, the different oppressed classes. In this case, it 
is a conflict that can provide the "moral and material elevation" of the 
oppressed and also counter class domination in general, becoming the 
"main revolutionary force" of the oppressed masses. 52

***

According to what has been argued, Malatesta conceives of society as a 
result of the interplay of forces and power relations . These two broad 
categories explain the formation and dynamics of the social system, 
encompassing the three fields of institutions and social relations.

For him, every individual, group/collective, or social class possesses a 
certain " capacity " for achievement , that is, a certain possibility of 
producing a "force" or condition to accomplish something, certain 
"latent forces" that can be mobilized. 53 When this potential (abstract) 
capacity or force is put into practice, it produces a social force , 
real (concrete) energy applied by subjects in certain conflicts to 
achieve certain objectives. 54

The recognition of this potential capacity/force and the possibility or 
necessity of it becoming what is here called social force was identified 
by the Italian anarchist at different times. For example, when he argued 
that "the most vibrant forces and the most real capacities" can have 
"influence on social life," and when he recognized that 
"individual[potential]forces" have "the possibility of complete 
development," especially when they associate "with each other for the 
greater benefit of all." 55

Also when he argued that "propaganda and ideas are undoubtedly the 
powerful catalyst that will set the inert masses in motion[...], but 
this only appears among them and only affects them in the form of 
actions." 56 And when he acknowledged that "before doing, one must have 
the strength to do," even if "it takes time to build that strength." 57

For Malatesta, if capacity is not transformed into social force, one 
remains powerless. This is the case with the anarchist emancipatory 
project, for which it is essential to convert potential popular force 
(capacity) into real popular force (social force), enabling active 
intervention in social conflicts and class struggle.

Unless we wish to remain powerless dreamers, daydreaming about an ideal 
without the care to foster the conditions that make its implementation 
feasible, we must actively and methodically strive to prepare, organize, 
and inspire popular resistance in all aspects of life. 58

The different social forces can be described, according to what has been 
previously stated, as economic forces , political forces , 
moral/intellectual forces 59; and/or as class, group or individual 
forces . These are forces that relate to their respective means 
(economic, political and moral/intellectual) and which, therefore, can 
be more concrete or abstract: " material forces " or " moral "/ 
intellectual forces . 60

There are numerous resources available for a class, a group, or even an 
individual to constitute a social force and, above all, to increase it. 
These resources include: physical strength and the development of 
techniques for using violence; access to money, property, natural 
resources, positions of power and decision-making; the ability to 
influence and persuade people; access to weapons, war technology, 
information, knowledge, etc. Malatesta dedicated himself to reflecting, 
in particular, on the resource of organization, which he defined as "an 
association with a determined objective and with the necessary means to 
achieve this objective."[61]He emphasized the need to organize an 
"anarchist party" to expand the social force of anarchists in reality, 
and, at the same time, the need for "organization of the working masses" 
to strengthen the revolutionary project of the oppressed classes.[62]

Another relevant factor is that the dispute between social forces always 
occurs within a specific system (field or institution). Furthermore, as 
discussed, the systemic structuring of society occurs with the 
entrenchment of certain historical power relations, which are more 
permanent and lasting. Thus, systems (fields or institutions) themselves 
possess a certain social force geared towards social reproduction, which 
functions as a kind of inertia and explains why forces of change tend to 
face greater resistance than forces of order, even though both possess a 
similar quantum.[63]

Emphasizing that it is the dispute between social forces that 
establishes power relations requires understanding how Malatesta uses 
the term " power "[potere , in the original Italian], as this is done in 
different ways. In one way, power is presented as the notion of 
previously defined capacity for achievement , a capacity to do or 
accomplish something; a possibility , of something that may (or may not) 
materialize . Thus, Malatesta highlights: "The freedom we want is not 
the abstract right to do one's own will, but the power to do it "; "The 
reformists[...]delude themselves into believing they can , little by 
little, through small reforms,[...]undermine the bourgeois state and 
prepare the way for socialism"; "A class, powerful in wealth and 
knowledge, interested in keeping the masses in intellectual slavery in 
order to better dominate them ." 64

In this way, the Italian anarchist has a neutral perspective, insofar as 
one can do or accomplish something that is (more or less) favorable or 
even contrary to the anarchist project. It is in this sense that he 
recognizes the need for an "effective power of all workers aimed at 
overthrowing capitalist society." 65

In a second way, power is conceived as resulting from the interplay of 
forces, the conflict between social forces, when one prevails over 
another(s); a relationship of imposition, oppression, or domination 
between classes, or even between groups or individuals . Such a 
relationship always involves two or more parties and takes place over a 
certain time and in a specific space; it is something relational and 
historical that effectively happens. Using this approach, Malatesta 
argues that the State implies both "the brutal, violent, arbitrary 
domination of some over the masses," and "an ordered instrument to 
ensure dominion and privilege to those who[...]have seized all the means 
of life, especially the land, and use them to keep the people in 
servitude and make them work for them." This simultaneously involves 
"power, that is, political privilege" and "property[of the means of 
production and exchange], that is, economic privilege." 66 In the 
capitalist and statist system, the State is the instrument that 
guarantees the "power of the bourgeoisie" and of "a class of 
bureaucrats" who want to "consolidate power in their hands." 67 In this 
case, some classes impose themselves on others, oppress or dominate 
others, and have power over others. In relation to this way, the Italian 
anarchist generally assumes a rather critical position, insofar as the 
anarchist project is opposed to domination and oppression.

In a third way, which is actually the one most used by Malatesta, power 
is presented as an instrument of management, institution or position of 
authority, of the exercise of power, of domination, of oppression . 
Here, it is the result of power relations, of the power games of society 
, which forges the bases of regulations, controls, norms , and which, 
for the Italian anarchist, in most cases, assumes the meaning of 
political power or the State . Thus, he states: "By State we also 
understand the supreme administration of a country, the central power , 
distinct from provincial or municipal power"; "the right to 
vote[...]gives]the most energetic part of the proletariat the illusory 
hope of reaching power "; "rulers, accustomed to command,[...]seek to 
keep power in their hands "; "politicians[...]are useless parasites, all 
concerned with imposing their whims and remaining in power". 68 In this 
context, Malatesta also always adopts a critical stance, emphasizing 
that anarchists are opposed to power (the State, the positions of 
rulers, bosses, etc.). And based on this, he emphasizes: "we do not want 
to come to power" and the mission of anarchists is "to demolish or 
contribute to the demolition of all political power". 69

For the purposes of conceptual standardization, it is proposed here: to 
call the first method the capacity for achievement (capacity to do or 
accomplish something; possibility of something that may or may not 
materialize; potential force); to refer to the second effectively as 
power or power relation (resulting from the play of forces, the conflict 
between real social forces, when one force prevails over another(s); to 
call the third the instrument of management (institution or position of 
authority, of the exercise of power; basis of regulations, controls, 
norms). In this direction, and starting from the terms used by Malatesta 
himself, it is possible to speak of " economic power ", " political 
power " and moral/intellectual power 70; and/or of class power, group 
power or even of individuals . 71 And, by extension, of economic, 
political, moral/intellectual, class, group, etc. management instruments .

In general, in historical societies, power relations have taken the form 
of " domination " and "oppression"; they have been based on the 
"principle of authority." 72 This has been the case with government or 
the State:

Throughout history, as in the present day, government is either the 
brutal, violent, arbitrary domination of a few over the masses , or an 
instrument designed to ensure domination and privilege to those who, by 
force, cunning, or inheritance, have seized all the means of life , 
especially the land, and use them to keep the people in servitude and 
make them work for them . 73

For Malatesta, domination and oppression are synonymous. They can be 
defined as power relations based on the principle of authority that 
establish lasting social hierarchies; in these relations, a few (the 
dominators) impose themselves on many (the oppressed), decide on matters 
that concern them all, and enjoy certain privileges; such relations 
frequently involve the control of the social force of the dominated, the 
appropriation of the fruits of their labor, the relations of command and 
obedience between dominators and dominated, as well as violence, 
repression, and deception by the former over the latter. 74

In short, for Malatesta, statist capitalism is characterized by its 
relations of domination. In terms of class domination, it can be said 
that it is a system in which certain dominant classes have mobilized 
greater social force in conflicts and, therefore, have managed to impose 
themselves. The capacity for achievement of these classes has been 
transformed into social force and, through intervention in the power 
dynamics of society, they have managed to prevail and forge lasting 
power relations.

The bourgeoisie, landowners, rulers, and religious authorities therefore 
hold power in this society. They create or reinforce management 
instruments that ensure the maintenance of this authoritarian power and 
its agents. Due to the private property or monopoly of the means of 
subsistence that prevails in this society, these dominant classes enjoy 
distinct privileges, thanks to economic exploitation, physical coercion, 
political-bureaucratic domination, and moral/intellectual domination. On 
the other hand, due to their position in the power dynamics of this 
society, the oppressed classes have been victims of the domination 
caused by capitalist and statist power relations. Urban and rural 
proletarians, peasants, and the poor in general-the vast majority in 
this society-have been forced to occupy the lowest positions in the 
social hierarchy. They constitute the source of the privileges of the 
dominators, which are only possible because of their labor, their 
dependence, their repression, their obedience, and their alienation. 
Class struggle explains not only the greater or lesser level of 
domination that exists in society (since resistance and conquests can 
diminish its effects), but it can also point to revolutionary and 
completely transformative perspectives.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

CERRITO, Gino (ed.). Errico Malatesta. Rivoluzione e Lotta Quotidiana 
(electronic edition). Milan: Antistato, 2012. Available at: 
http://www.centrostudifsmerlino.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/malatesta_rivoluzione_e_lotta.pdf. 
Accessed on: August 14, 2022.

CORRÊA, Felipe. Epistemology, Method of Analysis and Social Theory in 
Malatesta.  Institute of Anarchist Theory and History , 2014. Available 
at: 
http://ithanarquista.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/felipe-correa-epistemologia-metodo-de-analise-e-teoria-social-em-malatesta/. 
Accessed on: August 14, 2022.

FABBRI, Luigi.  Life of Malatesta . Libcom, 2010. Available at: 
http://libcom.org/library/life-malatesta-luigi-fabbri. Accessed on: 
August 14, 2022.

MALATESTA, Errico.[1925]Gradualismo. Pensiero e Volontà , year 2, no. 
12, October 1925. Available at: 
https://www.bibliotecaginobianco.it/flip/PEV/PEV02-1200/3/. Accessed on: 
August 14, 2022.

_____.[1905]Bourgeois Infiltrations in Anarchist Doctrine. In: 
Anarchists, Socialists and Communists. São Paulo: Cortez, 1989 .

_____.[1924]"Idealism" and "Materialism". In: Anarchists, Socialists and 
Communists. São Paulo: Cortez, 1989.

_____.[1919]Letter to Luigi Fabbri about "Dittadura del Proletariato". 
In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1920]Riforme and Rivoluzione. In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione 
. Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1920]A Proposito di Libertà. In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . 
Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1920]Le Due Vie: Riforme o Rivoluzione? Free the Dictatorship? 
In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1921]Syndakalism and Anarchism. In: Il Buon Senso dela 
Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1921]Popolo and Proletariat. In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . 
Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1922]In Regime di Dittatura "Proletaria". In: Il Buon Senso dela 
Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1923]Bolschevism and Anarchism . In: Il Buon Senso dela 
Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1924]"Idealism" and "Materialism". In: Il Buon Senso dela 
Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1925]L'Unità Sindacale. In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . 
Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1929]Qualche Considerazione sul Regime della Proprietà Dopo la 
Rivoluzione. In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . Milan: Eleuthera, 1999.

_____.[1892]A Little Theory. In: Revolutionary Writings. São Paulo: 
Imaginário, 2000.

_____.[1903]Anarchist Program. In: Revolutionary Writings. São Paulo: 
Imaginário, 2000.

_____.[1891]Anarchy. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2001.

_____.[1891]L'Anarchia. In: L'Anarchia . Liber Liber, 2012.

_____.[1903]Il Nostro Programma. In: L'Anarchia . Liber Liber, 2012.

_____.[1921]Gli Anarchici nel Movimento Operaio. In: CERRITO, Gino 
(org.). Errico Malatesta. Rivoluzione and Lotta Quotidiana (electronic 
edition). Milan: Antistato, 2012.

_____.[1931]Il Rovescio della Medaglia: l'attendismo dei compagni 
spagnoli. In: CERRITO, Gino (org.). Errico Malatesta. Rivoluzione and 
Lotta Quotidiana (electronic edition). Milan: Antistato, 2012.

_____.[1921]La "Fretta" Rivoluzionaria. In: Anarchism and Insurrection . 
Edizioni Anarchismo, 2013.

_____.[1884]The Republic of the Boys and That of the Bearded Men. In: 
TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader 
. Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1884]The Economic Question. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method 
of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1884]Program and Organization of the International Working Men's 
Association. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of Freedom: an Errico 
Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1889]A Revolt is no Revolution. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1890]Matters Revolutionary. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method 
of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1891]Anarchy. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of Freedom: 
an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1892]A Bit of Theory. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1893]The First of May. In: TURCATO, Davide (ed.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1896]Errors and Remedies. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method 
of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1897]The Duty of Resistance. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1897]Organization. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1897]The Decline of the Revolutionary Spirit and the Need for 
Resistance. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of Freedom: an Errico 
Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1897]Our Tactics. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1899]Against the Monarchy. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method 
of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1899]Signor Malatesta Explains. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1900]The Monza Tragedy. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1902]In Relation to Strikes. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1913]Liberty and Fatalism, Determinism and Will. In: TURCATO, 
Davide (org.) The Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . 
Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1922]Revolution in Practice. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1923]Anarchist's Line Within the Trade Union Movement. In: 
TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader 
. Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1924]Ideal and Reality. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1924]Individualism and Anarchism. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1925]Gradualism. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The Method of 
Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1930]The Anarchists in the Present Time. In: TURCATO, Davide 
(org.) The Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK 
Press, 2014.

_____.[1931]Apropos of "Revisionism". In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) The 
Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 2014.

_____.[1902]Lo Sciopero Armato. In: "Lo Sciopero Armato": Il lungo 
esilio londinese (1900-1913). Milan: Zero in Condotta, 2015.

_____.[1897]Individualism in Anarchism. Última Barricada , 2020. 
Available at: 
https://ultimabarricada.wordpress.com/2020/05/22/o-individualismo-no-anarquismo-errico-malatesta/ 
. Accessed on: August 14, 2022.

NETTLAU, Max.  Errico Malatesta: the life of an anarchist. Rosário: 
Pensamiento and Voluntad, 2012.

1 NETTLAU, Max.  Errico Malatesta: the life of an anarchist. Rosário: 
Pensamiento y Voluntad, 2012; FABBRI, Luigi.  Life of Malatesta . 
Libcom, 2010.

2. It is important to highlight that, throughout the more than six 
decades he defended anarchism, Malatesta modified part of his political 
thought. Therefore, the elements revisited in this text cannot and 
should not be understood as unitary within Malatesta's work. Nor should 
this text be read as the only interpretation of his theoretical 
contributions. Furthermore, I would like to emphasize that, although I 
made extensive use of Malatesta's writings in English and Portuguese, 
when faced with terminological issues, I tried to prioritize the 
original Italian texts.

3 For such epistemological reflections, see: CORRÊA, Felipe. 
Epistemology, Method of Analysis and Social Theory in Malatesta. 
Institute of Anarchist Theory and History , 2014.

4 MALATESTA, Errico. Qualche Considerazione sul Regime della Proprietà 
Dopo la Rivoluzione. In: Il Buon Senso dela Rivoluzione . Milan: 
Eleuthera, 1999, p. 190, emphasis added.

5 Id. Lo Sciopero Armato. In: "Lo Sciopero Armato": Il lungo esilio 
londinese (1900-1913). Milan: Zero in Condotta, 2015, p. 71, emphasis added.

6 Id. Anarchist Program. In: Revolutionary Writings. São Paulo: 
Imaginário, 2000, p. 14.

7 MALATESTA, Errico. Syndakalism and Anarchism. In: Il Buon Senso... Op. 
Cit. , pp. 162-163, emphasis added.

8 At another time I called what I now refer to as a "sphere" a "sphere." 
(CORRÊA, Felipe. Epistemology... Op. Cit.) In Italian, Malatesta uses 
the term "terrain," which finds in the word "field," in Portuguese, one 
of its possible translations. (MALATESTA, Errico. L'Unità Sindacale. In: 
Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit. , pp. 177, 175) For mentions of these three 
fields, see: Id. Apropos of "Revisionism." In: TURCATO, Davide (org.) 
The Method of Freedom: an Errico Malatesta Reader . Oakland: AK Press, 
2014, p. 528; Id. "Idealism" and "Materialism." In: Anarchists, 
Socialists and Communists. São Paulo: Cortez, 1989, p. 141; Id. 
Bourgeois Infiltrations in Anarchist Doctrine. In: Anarchists, 
Socialists... Op. Cit., p. 16.

9 Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit. , p. 21, emphasis added; Id. 
Anarchist's Line Within the Trade Union Movement. In: TURCATO, Davide 
(org.). The Method... Op.Cit., p. 436, emphasis added.

10 Id. Anarchy. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2001, p. 12.

11 Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit.

12 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 51.

13 Id. The Decline of the Revolutionary Spirit and the Need for 
Resistance. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., p. 255; 
Id. Ideal and Reality. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. 
Cit., p. 449.

14 Id. A Little Theory. In: Writings... Op. Cit. , p. 27.

15 Id. Liberty and Fatalism, Determinism and Will. In: TURCATO, Davide 
(org.). The Method... Op. Cit., pp. 363-364.

16 Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit., pp. 8, 15.

17 Id. Individualism in Anarchism. Last Barricade , 2020.

18 Id. Ideal and Reality. Op. Cit., p. 450.

19 Id. Errors and Remedies. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... 
Op. Cit., p. 201; Id. The Decline of the Revolutionary Spirit... Op. 
Cit., pp. 255-256.

20 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 56-57, emphasis added.

21 Id. Matters Revolutionary. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... 
Op. Cit., p. 103.

22 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 23; cf. also: pp. 22-26, 30-32.

23 Id. Program and Organization of the International Working Men's 
Association. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., pp. 
37-40, 44-49.

24 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 22.

25 Id. Il Nostro Programma. In: L'Anarchia . Liber Liber, 2012, p. 82; 
Id. Gradualism. Pensiero and Volontà, year 2, num. 12, October 1925, p. 
266; Id. Regime di Dittatura "Proletaria". In: Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit. 
, p. 200; Id. Anarchy. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. 
Cit., p. 140.

26 Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit., p. 17; Id. Program and 
Organization... Op. Cit., p. 49.

27 Id. Gradualism. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., 
p. 472; Id. Program and Organization... Op. Cit., p. 43.

28 Ibid., p. 51; Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 44, 72; Id. Anarchy. Op. 
Cit., p. 140.

29 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 19-22.

30 Ibid., p. 42, emphasis added.

31 Id. The Republic of the Boys and That of the Bearded Men. In: 
TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., p. 20.

32 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 23, 18.

33 Ibid., p. 15.

34 Ibid., p. 23, emphasis added.

35 Id. Program and Organization... Op. Cit., p. 55.

36 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 12-14.

37 Id. Errors and Remedies. Op. Cit., p. 200.

38 Id. The Republic of the Boys... Op. Cit. , p. 19.

39 Cf., for example: Id. The Economic Question. In: TURCATO, Davide 
(org.). The Method... Op. Cit.; Id. "Idealism" and "Materialism". Op. Cit.

40 Cf., for example: Id. Program and Organization... Op. Cit., pp. 51, 
54; Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit. , pp. 11, 13-14, 15, 17, 23-24.

41 Id. A Revolt is no Revolution. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The 
Method... Op. Cit., pp. 91-92; Id. "Idealism" and "Materialism". Op. 
Cit., pp. 139-141; Id. Ideal and Reality. Op. Cit., p. 452.

42 At another time, I called what I now conceptualize as the 
"indissociability of the three fields" the "interdependence of 
the[three]spheres." (CORRÊA, Felipe. Epistemology... Op. Cit.) In 
Italian, Malatesta uses the term "indissolubilità," which finds one of 
its possible translations in the Portuguese word "indissociability." 
Others would be indissolution, inseparability, and indissociability. 
(MALATESTA, Errico. "Idealism" and "Materialism." In: Il Buon Senso... 
Op. Cit. , p. 58)

43 Ibid., p. 58; Id. Apropos of "Revisionism". Op. Cit., p. 528.

44 Id. Our Tactics. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., 
p. 265; Id. A Revolt is no Revolution. Op. Cit., pp. 91-92.

45 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 27; Id. Against the Monarchy. In: TURCATO, 
Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., p. 273.

46 Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit. , pp. 8-9.

47 Id. The First of May. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. 
Cit., pp. 167-168.

48 In Italian, Malatesta uses the terms "classi dominanti"[dominant 
classes]and "classi privilegiate"[privileged classes]with some 
frequency. (See, for example: MALATESTA, Errico. Le Due Vie: Riforme o 
Rivoluzione? Libertà o Dittadura? In: Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit. , p. 88; 
Id. Qualche Considerazione... Op. Cit., p. 196; Id. Riforme e 
Rivoluzione. In: Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit., p. 86; Id. L'Unità 
Sindacale. Op. Cit., p. 176)

49 Id. L'Anarchia. In: L'Anarchia . Op. Cit. , pp. 13, 20, 56; Id. Il 
Rovescio della Medaglia: l'attendismo dei compagni spagnoli. In: 
CERRITO, Gino (org.). Rivoluzione and Lotta Quotidiana (electronic 
edition). Milan: Antistato, 2012, p. 362; Id. Gli Anarchici nel 
Movimento Operaio. In: CERRITO, Gino (org.). Errico Malatesta... Op. 
Cit., p. 186; Id. A Proposito di Libertà. In: Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit. 
, p. 44; Id. Il Nostro Programma. Op. Cit., p. 73.

50 In Italian, Malatesta, even when referring to the "classi 
soggette"[subjugated classes]and the "gli oppressi"[oppressed], usually 
uses singular terms to refer to workers in a broader sense: "classe 
operaia"[working class], "classe di diseredati"[disinherited class], 
"classe spossessata"[dispossessed class]. For these terms, and those 
cited in this last passage, see: MALATESTA, Errico. Le Due Vie... Op. 
Cit. , p. 88; Id. L'Anarchia. Op. Cit., pp. 12, 20, 34, 40, 50, 58; Id. 
Qualche Considerazione... Op. Cit., p. 190; Id. Bolscevismo e Anarchismo 
. In: Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit. , p. 206.

51 Id. Anarchist Program. Op . Cit. , pp. 8-9.

52 Id. Popolo and Proletariat. In: Il Buon Senso... Op. Cit. , p. 124.

53 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 87, emphasis added; Id. Anarchist Program. 
Op. Cit. , p. 25.

54 However, it is important to note that when Malatesta speaks of 
"social force" or "social forces," he usually refers to "the force of 
all," as in the Portuguese translation of Anarchy , or to "the 
collective force of all in society," as in the English translation by 
Turcato. (MALATESTA, Errico. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 80; Id. Program and 
Organization... Op. Cit., pp. 43, 47)

55 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 83, 57-58.

56 Id. A Revolt is no Revolution. Op. Cit., p. 91.

57 Id. Our Tactics. Op. Cit., p. 265.

58 Id. The Duty of Resistance. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... 
Op. Cit., p. 230.

59 Id. In Relation to Strikes. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... 
Op. Cit., pp. 319-320.

60 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 57, 80, 87, 55, emphasis added.

61 Id. Organization. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., 
p. 235.

62 Ibid. pp. 236-245.

63 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., pp. 12-13.

64 Id. A Proposito di Libertà. Op. Cit., p. 43; Id. Le Due Vie... Op. 
Cit. , p. 145; Id. La "Fretta" Rivoluzionaria. In: Anarchism and 
Insurrection. Edizioni Anarchismo, 2013, emphasis added.

65 Id. Letter to Luigi Fabbri about "Dittadura del Proletariato". In: Il 
Buon Senso... Op. Cit. , pp. 198-199.

66 Id. L'Anarchia. Op. Cit., pp. 16-17.

67 Ibid., p. 20; Id. Riforme and Rivoluzione. Op. Cit. , p. 87.

68 Id. L'Anarchia. Op. Cit., pp. 11, 20, 41, 66 italics added.

69 Id. Revolution in Practice. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... 
Op. Cit., p. 421.

70 Id. Le Due Vie... Op. Cit. , p. 90, emphasis added.

71 Id. The First of May. Op. Cit.; Id. A Bit of Theory. In: TURCATO, 
Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., p. 155; Id. The Anarchists in the 
Present Time. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., pp. 
504-505.

72 Id. L'Anarchia. Op. Cit., pp. 16, 51, emphasis added; Id. The Monza 
Tragedy. In: TURCATO, Davide (org.). The Method... Op. Cit., p. 311.

73 Id. Anarchy. Op. Cit., p. 22, emphasis added.

74 Ibid., pp. 22, 29; Id. Anarchist Program. Op. Cit. , p. 22; Id. 
Organization. Op. Cit., 236.

https://socialismolibertario.net/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en