A-Infos (en) France, UCL AL #373 - International Contributions - In 1926... and 1956: Trajectories of Organized Anarchism (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

The Uruguayan Anarchist Federation (fAu) is celebrating the seventieth 
anniversary of its founding. From its inception, it has defined itself 
as belonging to the specificist current of organized anarchism. --- 
Specificism supports the need to build a specific anarchist political 
organization, endowed with theoretical, strategic, and tactical unity, 
capable of intervening permanently in popular struggles in order to 
contribute to the development of social force and processes of 
revolutionary transformation.
The Origins of Specificism
The fAu's main theoretical reference since its founding has been Errico 
Malatesta, from whom it adopted the idea that anarchists must organize 
themselves politically in order to intervene coherently in social 
reality, avoiding both spontaneity and militant fragmentation. 
Contributions from Bakunin were also incorporated, particularly his 
concept of a revolutionary organization operating within popular 
processes without transforming itself into a new authority or replacing 
popular initiatives.

Specifism cannot be defined solely by an organizational doctrine. It is 
also expressed in a way of analyzing reality, developing a strategy, and 
engaging with popular struggles. Its distinctiveness lies not only in 
the existence of an anarchist organization, but also in the attempt to 
make this organization a tool capable of addressing the concrete 
problems of each situation.

One of the central characteristics of specificism is the rejection of 
the mechanical importation of political models developed for other 
contexts. From its earliest years, the fAU maintained that Latin America 
must be understood from its own historical, economic, and cultural 
perspective. This did not imply rejecting theoretical contributions from 
Europe or other regions, but rather avoiding their automatic 
application. Conceptual tools had to be tested in the concrete reality 
of our peoples and adapted to their specific circumstances.

Porto Alegre (1997) - Congress of the Federação Anarquista Gaúcha (FAG), 
bringing together activists from different regions of Brazil as well as 
the Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU), at a pivotal moment in the 
development of an organized anarchism that would become deeply rooted in 
Brazilian social struggles.

Federación Anarquista Uruguaya
From this stems another fundamental element: a constant awareness of 
the current situation. For specificism, political organization does not 
exist to repeat formulas or administer doctrines, but to understand the 
transformations of capitalism, the changing forms of domination, and the 
concrete possibilities for popular organization that exist at each 
historical moment. Revolutionary strategy cannot be built outside of 
these conditions.

Links with Platformism
Unlike Leninist conceptions, specificism does not consider that 
political organization should lead the people or replace their 
decisions. Nor does it conceive that revolutionary construction consists 
of strengthening a party to conquer the state. On the contrary, 
anarchist organization exists to strengthen the self-organizing capacity 
of the dominated, exploited, and oppressed classes.

This is why we distinguish two complementary levels of organization: the 
anarchist political organization, which brings together activists on the 
basis of ideological, strategic, and programmatic agreements; and 
popular organizations and social movements, which must maintain their 
independence and develop according to their own dynamics. The task of 
anarchists is to act within these movements by promoting practices of 
direct democracy, federalism, direct action, solidarity, and 
self-management, without attempting to transform them into mere 
instruments of political organization.

The centenary of the Platform offers an opportunity to reflect on the 
points of convergence and differences between this experience and the 
specificism developed by the fAu. The Platform constituted one of the 
first systematic attempts to address a problem that would mark much of 
20th-century anarchism: how to build an effective revolutionary 
organization without reproducing the authoritarian forms that were 
beginning to consolidate in the Soviet Union.

"Let us sing so as not to forget the working class and its struggle for 
survival." Specificism is a Uruguayan anarchist current that affirms the 
necessity of a specific anarchist organization. This organization must 
be rooted in popular struggles and act within them as an active minority 
to build popular power through direct action and self-organization.

During the formation of the fAu (Front d'Action pour la Révolutionnaire 
Uruguayan), the classic documents of platformism did not have a direct 
influence, although they were probably known to some of its activists. 
The organizational tradition that gave rise to Uruguayan specificism was 
primarily nourished by Malatesta, the experiences of Río de la Plata 
anarchism, revolutionary syndicalism, and decades of debates led by 
generations of local activists.

This does not mean, however, that there was an open opposition between 
these two currents. Platformism and specificism both affirmed the need 
for an anarchist political organization capable of intervening in 
reality, developing a strategy, assuming collective responsibilities, 
and actively participating in popular struggles.

However, while some historical platformist currents emphasized the 
construction of a libertarian communist organization, specificism tended 
to stress the link between political organization and social 
integration, the building of popular power, and the need to develop 
strategies adapted to each specific reality.

In our view, the differences lie primarily in their historical 
trajectories and the specific problems they sought to solve. While the 
Platform was developed in the context of the defeat of the Russian 
Revolution and the rise of Bolshevism, specificism developed within a 
reality deeply marked by imperialism and the particularities of Latin 
American social formations.

Beyond these differences, the historical value of the Platform remains 
undeniable. Faced with the concentration of political power in the hands 
of a ruling elite, it asserted the need for coordinated organization, 
strategy, and intervention, without abandoning the principles of 
federalism, collective responsibility, and popular participation.

Therefore, on the centenary of its publication, we can affirm that both 
platformism and specificism are part of the same organizing tradition 
within revolutionary anarchism. This tradition, arising from different 
contexts, has sought to address a common challenge: to build political 
tools capable of bringing about profound transformations without 
replacing the initiative of the oppressed classes or reproducing new 
forms of domination.

Uruguayan Anarchist Federation

https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?En-1926-et-1956-Trajectoires-de-l-anarchisme-organise
_________________________________________
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