Malatesta - Life & Ideas

MALATESTA – LIFE & IDEAS – 
EDITED BY VERNON RICHARDS

According to writer George Woodcock, Errico Malatesta was 'the most realistic of all anarchists' and on reading Vernon Richard's Malatesta – Life & Ideas, I would tend to agree. I wonder, however, if being realistic is actually a virtue particularly when it comes to changing the world? Was John F Kennedy being realistic, for example, when he declared 'We choose to go to the moon'? Probably not but to the moon America went. 'Be realistic – demand the impossible' said the words of the prophets as written on Parisian walls in '68. There is no guilt in dreaming.

One of the main differences between Malatesta and Kropotkin was in their espousal of different methods and processes to attain anarchy. Kropotkin, forever the optimist, believed anarchy would eventually and naturally happen, aided and abetted by anarchist propaganda of the spoken and written word. Malatesta, on the other hand, whilst not dismissing the importance of propaganda accentuated the need for revolutionary violence particularly in regard to the inevitable backlash from forces on the side of and in defence of the status quo.

Malatesta understood that governments would not just whither away or relinquish any of their powers and riches without a fight and it was this fight that Malatesta insisted we need to be aware of. There would be a backlash and a violent one at that, and refusing to acknowledge this sounded the death knell for any revolution from the start. Those who only make half a revolution dig their own graves, as the Situationists of '68 advised.

Organising in preparation for that backlash was just as important as the steps needed to be taken to instigate a revolutionary situation in the first place. The importance of anarchist propaganda, said Malatesta, was in determining the revolution and influencing the direction it might take so as to ensure its success. The insurrection determines the revolution. Everything depends on what people are capable of wanting, meaning that if they want very little then they will obtain very little. And if people aren't prepared to fight and be prepared to continue fighting, then all will be lost and will remain to be so.

This is all well and good, you might say, but a revolution is never going to happen and anyone believing one might is simply deluding themselves. Which is where Malatesta comes in again. Is the world as it is all that we can hope for? Are we really unable to think beyond present conditions? Must man always remain as he is today?

'The main plank of anarchism is the removal of violence from human relations,' as Malatesta put it. Is that really too much to ask for? No, it's not – of course it's not. The problem being (for some) is that Malatesta also meant the removal of the violence of exploitation, of oppression, injustice, inequality, of religion, government and police.

'What we want is the complete destruction of the domination and exploitation of men by men,' said Malatesta 'We want bread, freedom, love and science – for everybody.' Is that really too much to ask for? Of course it's not. So why then don't we have it? Is it perhaps, as Malatesta suggested, because we are simply unwilling to actually fight for it? And until the time comes when we are willing to fight it will indeed remain an elusive dream or at best a dream that is easily quashed.

Errico Malatesta, alongside the likes of Bakunin, Proudhon, Kropotkin and Emma Goldman was one of the anarchist greats, being an exponent of anarchism in its purist form. Not for him any watering down of ideas in a bid to make them more 'acceptable', 'palatable' or 'achievable'. Not for him the rejection of revolutionary violence for being 'counter-productive' but then also not for him the embracing of violence to the exclusion of any other means. For Malatesta, both violence and peacefulness had equal roles to play. For Malatesta, the most important thing was action, and continuous action at that.

If Malatesta were alive today he would say it's actually the watering down and diluting of anarchist ideas that has led to anarchy still not coming to fruition. He would say it's moderation, the pursuit of concessions and the lack of will to act that is the cause of the blockage. And if Malatesta were alive today he would most certainly not be voting for Jeremy Corbyn...

John Serpico