All quotation marks, hyphens, dashes,
apostrophes and colons have been transcribed as entity references.
All apostrophes and single right quotation marks are encoded as
’.
Any hyphens occurring in line breaks have been removed; all hyphens are
encoded as ‐ and em dashes as —.
The publisher's advertisement following p.15 has been omitted.
FELLOW WORKERS,
We come before you as Anarchist Communists to explain our principles. We
are aware that the minds of many of you have been poisoned by the lies
which all parties have diligently spread about us. But surely the
persecutions to which we have been and are subjected by the governing
classes of all countries should open the eyes of those who love fair play.
Thousands of our comrades are suffering in prison or are driven homeless
from one country to the other. Free speech--almost the only part of
British liberty that can be of any use to the people--is denied to us
in many instances, as the events of the last few years have shown.
The misery around us is increasing year by year. And yet there was never
so much talk about labor as there is now, labor, for the welfare of which
all professional politicians profess to work day and night. A very few
sincere and honest but impracticable reformers, in company with a multitude
of mere quacks, ambitious placehunters, etc., say they are able to benefit
labor, if labor will only follow their useless advice. All this does not
lessen the misery in the least: look at the unemployed, the victims
of hunger and cold, who die every year in the streets of our rich cities,
where wealth of every description is stored up.
Not only do they suffer who are actually out of work and starving, but
every working man who is forced to go through the same dreary routine day
by day--the slavery and toil in the factory or workshop--the
cheerless home, if the places where they are forced to herd together can be
called homes. Is this life worth living? What becomes of the intellectual
faculties, the artistic inclinations, nay, the ordinary human feeling and
dignity of the greater part of the workers? All these are warped and
wasted, without any chance of development, making the wretched worker
nothing but a human tool to be exploited until more profitably replaced by
some new invention or machine.
Is all this misery necessary? Is is not if you, the wealth producers,
knew that there is enough and to spare of food and of the necessaries of
life for all, if all would work. But now, in order to keep the rich in
idleness and luxury, all the workers must lead a life of perpetual misery
and exploitation. As to these facts we are all agreed; but as to the remedy
most of you, unfortunately, have not given up trust in Parliament and the
State. We shall explain how the very nature of the State prevents anything
good coming from it. What does the State do? It protects the rich and their
ill-gotten wealth; it suppresses the attempts of the workers to
recover their rights, if these attempts are thought dangerous to the rich.
Thus idle electioneering, labor politics etc. are not suppressed, but any
effective popular demonstration, vigorous strikes as at Featherstone and
Hull, Anarchist propaganda, etc., are suppressed or fought against by the
vilest means. Moreover, the State, pretending thereby to alleviate the
sufferings of the poor, grants Royal Commissions on the Sweating System,
the Aged Poor, on Labor in general, or Select Committees on the
Unemployed--which produce heaps of Blue Books, and give an opportunity
to the politicians and labor leaders, "to show themselves off."
And that is about all. If the workers demand more--there is the
workhouse; and if not satisfied with that, the truncheons of the police and
the bullets and bayonets of the soldiers face them:--not bread,
but lead!
All political promises are of the same value: either they are not
kept, even if it could be, or they involve social changes which can only be
effected by a revolution, and not by mere votes cast in Parliament. This
applies to the promises of Socialist candidates, even if it could be
admitted that these candidates could remain uncorrupted by the demoralising
influence of Parliament.
There can be no true humanity, no true self-respect, without
self-reliance. No one can help you if you do not help yourselves. We
do not promise to do anything for you, we do not want anything from you, we
only appeal to you to co-operate with us to bring about a state of
society which will make freedom, well-being possible for all.
To do this efficiently, we must all be imbued with the spirit of
freedom, and this--freedom, and freedom
alone--is the fundamental principle of Anarchy.
Freedom is a necessary condition to, and the only guarantee of, the
proper development of mankind. Nature is most beautiful when unfettered by
the artificial interference of man. Wild animals are stronger and more
harmoniously developed than their domesticated kind, which the exploiting
mind of man makes mere instruments of profit by developing chiefly those
parts of them which are of use to him. The same
threatens to be the case with the human victims of exploitation, if an end is not put to the system which allows the rich and crafty exploiters to reduce the greater part of mankind to a position resembling that of domestic animals--working machines, only fit to do mechanically a certain kind of work, but becoming intellectually wrecked and ruined.
All who acknowledge this to be the great danger to human progress should
carefully ponder over it, and if they believe that it is necessary to
ensure by every means the free development of humanity, and to remove by
all means every obstacle placed in its path, they should join us and adopt
the principles of Anarchism.
Belief in and submission to authority is the root cause of all our
misery. The remedy we recommend:--struggle unto death against
all authority, whether it be that of physical force identical with the
State or that of doctrine and theories, the product of ages of ignorance
and superstition inculcated into
the workers' minds from their
childhood--such as religion, patriotism, obedience to the law, belief
in the State, submission to the rich and titled, etc., generally speaking,
the absence of any critical spirit in face of all the humbugs who victimise
the workers again and again. We can only deal here briefly with all these
subjects, and must limit ourselves to touch only on the chief points.
Economic exploitation--the result of the monopolisation of the
land, raw materials and means of production by the capitalists and
landlords--is at the bottom of the present misery. But the system
which produces it would have long ago broken down if it were not upheld on
one hand by the State, with its armies of officials, soldiers and
police--the whole machinery of government, in one word; and on the
other hand by the workers themselves, who tamely submit to their own
spoliation and degradation, because they think it right, owing to a
superstitious belief in a divine providence
inculcated by their masters, or because they desire, by sneaking means, to
be exploiters themselves--an object which only one in a thousand can
succeed in--or because they have not lost faith in political action or
the capacity of the State to do for them that which they are too ignorant
to do for themselves. Under these protections the rich classes are enjoying
their spoil in safety and comfort.
It is evident that this system, if to be destroyed at all, must be
attacked by the workers themselves, as we cannot expect those who profit by
it to cut their own throats, so to say.
Many still consider the State a necessity. Is this so in reality? The
State, being only a machine for the protection and preservation of
property, can only obstruct freedom and free development, being bound to
keep up the law and every statute law is an obstacle to progress and freedom.
Laws are of two kinds. They are either simple formulæ, derived
from the observation of phenomena as the so-called laws of nature,
the phrasing of which is open to revision with the progress of human
knowledge and the accumulation of fresh material to draw deductions from.
No authority is required to enforce them, they exist; and every being
arranges his conduct in conformity with his knowledge of their action. The
phenomenon of fire burning is the result of such a natural law, and all pay
attention to it though there is no policeman posted behind every match and
fireplace. Here again Nature gives us an example of free development and
Anarchy, and in a free society all social facts and necessities would be
equally well recognised and acted upon.
But there is the other kind of law. That which is the expression of the
will of an unscrupulous minority, who, owing to the apathy and ignorance of
the majority, have been able to usurp the means of power and purport to
represent the whole people at the time of the enaction of the laws.
The fact that a great number of persons is in favor of something is
evidently no guarantee that it is right. Experience, on the contrary, shows
that progress is usually brought about by individuals. New discoveries, new
lines of human activity are first found and practised by a few, and only
gradually adopted by the many. The majority that makes the laws or abides
to them will almost always lag behind progress, and the laws made by it
will be reactionary from the very beginning. How much more so as time
proceeds and new progress is made!
Of course, progress itself laughs at the puny efforts of the usurpers of
power to stop its triumphant march. But its apostles and advocates have to
suffer much and severely for the enthusiasm and the hope that is within
them. Prison and often death itself is their doom, the penalty for having
raised the standard of revolt against authority and law, the embodiment of
the spirit of oppression.
And the very makers of these laws are forced to admit that their work is
useless. Is not the continuous manufacture of new laws going on in the
Parliaments of all countries throughout the greater part of this century,
and in England for many centuries, a proof of the fact that the laws never
satisfy anybody, not even those who make them. They know, however, that
their legislating is mere mockery and hypocrisy, having no other object but
to make the people believe that something is being done for them, and that
the public interest is well looked after. The people obey all these laws,
whilst the State, in the alleged interest of all, in reality in the
interest of the property owners and of its own
power, violates them all and commits numberless crimes--which are glorified as deeds of valor committed in the interest of civilisation.
This principle, kept in the background in time of peace, is paraded
before the eyes of so-called "rights" in some savage
territory, plunders and provokes the natives until they return force by
force. Then the State steps in, in the pretended interest of religion and
civilisation, slaughters them and annexes their land. The greater the
slaughter, the greater the glory for these "heroic" pioneers.
Or it may be in a war on a greater scale with a European State, when the
workers of one country are let loose against those of another, to murder,
plunder and burn homes and villages, and perform such like patriotic deeds
of valor and chivalry.
We Anarchists are internationalists, we acknowledge no distinction of
nationality or color. The workers of all countries suffer as we do here,
and our comrades have everywhere to fight the same battle for freedom and
justice. The capitalists are internationally unanimous in persecuting the
defenders of freedom and in fleecing the workers. Even England is brought
more and more under the sway of a continental police system, the dangers of
which the British masses do not see at present, as it is used chiefly
against friendless foreign refugees. They are regardless of the fact that
it is but the forerunner of an attack on their own liberties.
The workers as a rule are filled with an unreasoning dislike to the
workers of other countries, whom their masters have succeeded in
representing to them as their natural enemies, and herein lies one of the
main sources of the strength of the capitalist system; a strength which has
no other foundation than the weakness and the helplessness of the people.
It is in the interests of all governments to uphold patriotism, to have
their own people ready to fly at the throats of their fellow workers of
other nationalities whenever it suits the interests of the employers to
open up new markets, or draw the attention of the people away from the
contemplation of their own misery, which might drive them to revolt.
Patriotism and religion have always been the first and last refuges and
strongholds of scoundrels. The meek and lowly servants of the one
blessing--in the name of their God--the infamies committed for
the sake of the other, and cursing in the same name the deeds they just now
blessed if committed by the enemy.
Religion is mankind's greatest curse! It is absurd to expect that
science, in the few years that the State and the priests have left it to a
certain extent alone--the stake or the prison has been too often the
reward of its pioneers--should have discovered everything. It would not be worth living in a world where everything had been discovered, analysed and registered. One fact is certain: all so-called religions are the products of human ignorance, mere phantastical efforts of barbarous people to reason out matters which they could not possibly understand without some knowledge of science and scientific methods. The opinion of the savage on the power that works a steam engine, or produces the electric light, is evidently worthless and could be refuted by anyone possessing elementary knowledge. In the same worthless way our forefathers, savages also, reasoned about the phenomena of nature, and came to the naive conclusion that somebody behind the curtains of the sky pulled the strings. This supposed individual they called God and the organic force of man the soul, and endowed it with a separate entity, although that organic force does not possess any more separate entity than that working a clock or a steam hammer. A dim consciousness of this has permeated the mind of most in spite of the fact that religion has been bolstered up by all the forces of authority, because it teaches submission to the law, and as a reward gives cheques drawn on the bank of heaven, which are not more likely to be met than the politician's promises of what he will do when he is returned for Parliament. Religion is the most deadly enemy to human progress. It has always been used to poison the mind and deaden the judgment of the young, thus making grown up people accept all its absurdities because they are familiarised with them in their youth.
Unfortunately, religion is not kept out of the labor movement. Priests
and parsons, who should be a horror to mankind, as their presence adds an
additional element of corruption, sneak into it, and labor politicians use
their services as the Liberals and Tories do. There is actually in
existence a body of persons who prostitute the noble word
"Labor" by coupling it with the disgusting word
"Church," forming the "Labor Church," which is
looked upon favorably by most of the prominent labor leaders. Why not start
a "Labor Police"?
We are Atheists* and believe that
man cannot be free if he does not shake off the fetters of the authority of
the absurd as well as those of every other authority. Authority assumes
numerous shapes and disguises, and it will take a long period of
development under freedom to get rid of all. To do this two things are
wanted, to rid ourselves of all
___________________This open statement of our
convictions does not imply any spirit of persecution on our part against
those who believe in the absurdities of the different religions.
Persecution is essential to authority and religion, and fatal to freedom;
we should destroy the basis of our own hopes and ideals, if we were ever
carried away by the spirit of persecution, bigotry and intolerance, which
is so commonly raised against us.
Page 9
superstition and to root out the stronghold of all authority, the State.
We shall be asked what we intend to put in place of the State. We reply,
"Nothing whatever!" The State is simply an obstacle to
progress; this obstacle once removed we do not want to erect a fresh
obstruction.
In this we differ essentially from the various schools of State
Socialists, who either want to transform the present State into a
benevolent public-spirited institution (just as easy to transform a
wolf into a lamb), or to create a new centralised organisation for the
regulation of all production and consumption, the so-called
Socialist society. In reality this is only the old State in disguise, with
enormously strengthened powers. It would interfere with everything and
would be the essence of tyranny and slavery, if it could be brought about.
But, thanks to the tendency of the ways and means of production--which
will lead to Anarchy--it cannot.
But whilst State Socialism is impracticable as a system of real
Socialism, it is indeed possible if its advocates had their way, that all
matters of general interest and more and more of private interest too would
pass under the control of the State; whether it be a little more
democratised or not, it does not matter, for we reject Democracy as well as
Absolutism. Authority is equally hateful to us whether exercised by many,
or by few, or by one. The last remnant of free initiative and
self-reliance would be crushed under the heels of the State, and the
emancipation of the workers would be as far off as ever. State Socialism
has indeed strengthened the decaying faith in, and renewed the prestige of,
the State.
All we Anarchists want is equal freedom for all. The workers to provide
for their own affairs by voluntary arrangements amongst themselves. This
leads us to a consideration of the economic basis of the state of things we
desire to bring about, and here we avow ourselves Communists.
Everybody has different faculties and abilities for work, and different
wants and desires for the various necessities of life and leisure. These
inclinations and wants require full satisfaction, but can only receive it
in a state of freedom. Everybody supposing his faculties to be properly
developed can best judge what is best for himself. Rules and regulations
would hinder and make him a fettered, incomplete being who necessarily
finds no pleasure in work forced upon him. But under Anarchy he would
associate voluntarily with others to do the work he is best fitted to do,
and would satisfy his wants in proportion to his needs from the common
stock, the result of their common labor.
Cut-throat competition for the bare necessities of life would be
done away with, leaving many matters of a more individual, private and
intimate character, in which the free man would find opportunity for
peaceful and harmonious emulation, and thereby develop his faculties in the
highest possible degree.
One of the stock objections against Anarchist Communism is that no one
would work. We reply that to-day work is viewed with disfavor and
neglected by all who can possibly exist without it because it has to be
carried on under the most disadvantageous conditions and is, moreover,
looked upon as degrading. The worker earning his food by hard labor and
ceaseless toil is a pariah, the outcast of society, while the idler who
never does an hour's work in his life is
admired and glorified, and spends his days in luxurious ease amongst
pleasant surroundings. We believe that under Anarchism everybody would be
willing to work; work being freed from the badge of dishonor now associated
with it will have become a labor of love, and the free man will feel
ashamed to eat food he has not earned. But as to some atavistic remnants of
modern capitalist society that would only work if forced? Well, nobody
would want us to retard the emancipation of the immense mass of mankind on
account of these few unsocial beings who may or may not exist then. Left to
themselves and scorned by everyone they would soon come to their senses and
work.
We cannot further enter here into the arguments which show the tendency
of a development into Free Communism, and we refer to our literature on the
subject. (See Kropotkin's "Anarchism: its Basis and
Principles." Freedom Pamphlets, No. 4, etc.)
Anarchist society will consist of a great number of groups devoted each
to the production of certain commodities free of access to all, and in
local and interlocal contact with other groups to agree and make
arrangements for purposes of exchange. With regard to the first necessities
of life, food, clothes, shelter, education, Free Communism would be carried
out thoroughly. All secondary matters would be left to a mutual agreement
in the most varied ways. There would remain in such a society full freedom
for the Individualist as long as he did not develop any monopolistic
tendencies.
These are our principles; let us consider the means to realise them.
Here we are met by the cry "Dynamiters,"
"Assassins," "Fiends," etc. Let us see who chiefly
utter these cries.
The same people who, by colliery disasters, the ensuring of rotten
ships, fires in death-trap-houses, railway accidents caused
by overwork, etc., daily massacre more people than the Anarchists of all
countries ever
killed. The same people who are ready at any moment to have the natives of any country slaughtered, simply to rob them, who are overjoyed at the butchery of the Chinese war, which will enable them to make fresh profit, who are slowly starving and killing the millions of workers, whose lives are shortened by overwork, adulterated food, and overcrowding slums. These people have, in our eyes, no voice when the question of Humanity is considered. They may abuse and insult us just as they like. The worst thing that could happen to us, indeed, would be to win their approbation, to be petted by them as the respectable labor politicians are.
Some well-meaning, but rather weak-minded people too, are
misled by these cries. To these we say come and study our movement and gain
a knowledge of its history and personalities, and you will find that every
act of revolt is but a reply to a hundred, nay, a thousand
villainous
crimes committed by the governing classes against us and against the
workers in general. You will find that those who did these acts were the
very best, the most human, unselfish, self-sacrificing of our
comrades, who threw their lives away, meeting death or imprisonment in the
hope that their acts would sow the seed of revolt, that they might show the
way and wake an echo, by their deeds of rebellion, in the victims of the
present system.
With the specific mode of action of anyone we have nothing to do.
Anarchists advocate the propagation of their ideas by all means that lead
to that end, and everyone is the best judge of his own actions. No one is
required to do anything that is against his own inclination. Experience is
in this as in other matters the best teacher, and the necessary experience
can only be gained through entire freedom of action.
Thus the means which we would adopt embrace all that furthers our cause,
and exclude all that will damage it. The decision of what is good or
harmful must be left to persons or groups who choose to work together.
Nothing is more contrary to the real spirit of Anarchy than uniformity
and intolerance. Freedom of development implies difference of development,
hence difference of ideas and actions. Every person is likely to be open to
a different kind of argument, so propaganda cannot be diversified enough if
we want to touch all. We want it to pervade and penetrate all the
utterances of life, social and political, domestic and artistic,
educational and recreational. There should be propaganda by word and
action, the platform and the press, the street corner, the workshop, and
the domestic circle, acts of revolt, and the example of our own lives as
free men. Those who agree with each other may co-
operate; otherwise they should prefer to work each on his own lines to trying to persuade one the other of the superiority of his own method.
Organisation arises from the consciousness that, for a certain purpose,
the co-operation of several forces is necessary. When this purpose
is achieved the necessity for co-operation has ceased, and each
force reassumes its previous independence ready for other
co-operation and combination if necessary. This is organisation in
the Anarchist sense--ever varying, or, if necessary, continuous
combinations of the elements that are considered to be the most suitable
for the particular purpose on hand, and refers not only to the economical
and industrial relations between man and man, but also to the sexual
relations between man and woman, without which a harmonious social life is
impossible.
These views differ immensely from those held by the believers in
authority, who advocate permanent organisations with chiefs or councils
elected by the majority, and who put all their trust in these institutions.
The more they centralise these organisations and introduce stringent rules
and regulations to preserve order and discipline, the more they will fail
to achieve their object. In such organisations we see only obstacles to the
free initiative and action of individuals, hot-beds of ambition,
self-seeking and rotten beliefs in authority etc. That means, we see
in them agents of reaction to keep the people in continued ignorance of
their own interests.
We do not therefore discourage workingmen from organisation, but such
organisations could only be free groups of men and women with the same aims
for identical purposes, disbanding when the object in view is achieved.
This brings us to the question of the advisability of Anarchists to join
Trade Unions, not the question of the membership of Unions which may be a
necessity for them as the case stands, but the question of propaganda in
them. Anarchists do not wish to isolate themselves and Unions may be useful
as a place to meet their fellow workers. But whether Unions should be
formed by Anarchists is entirely dependent on the particular case. For we
do not consider Trades Unionism as at present constituted as a serious
force to overthrow the system, but only as a means to get a little better
provision for the workers under the present conditions. Therefore they
cannot be carried on without dealing with immediate so-called
practical questions, which are never settled without compromises, as all
members are not Anarchists.
In Unions the General Strike might form a proper subject to start the
propaganda, and such a strike, though in itself not effective as a remedy,
would probably bring about revolutionary situations which would advance the
march of events in an unprecedented way. To
speak plainly, we advocate the General Strike as a means to set the ball rolling: who knows whether it may not lead to the Social Revolution, which we all desire as the only thing that can help us.
The Social Revolution, as we conceive it, would consist in the
paralysation of all existing authoritarian institutions and organisations,
the prevention of new organisations of this character, the expropriation of
the present exploiters of labor, and in the rearrangement of relations
between men on the basis of voluntary agreements. This will appear to some
to be rather a large program, but logical thinking will convince them of
the fact that every one of these points is the necessary consequence of the
others, and that they can only be carried out altogether, or not at all.
For what is really impracticable are not full measures, but those
half-hearted measures--so-called reforms--which
pretend to do away with a part of the existing misery, whilst the root
remains intact and makes the whole reform futile and useless.
These then are our means of propaganda, and we trust they are manifold
enough to allow everybody full scope for his energies who chooses his place
amongst us. The leading idea of our propaganda must always be defiance and
destruction of the principle of authority in all its forms and
disguises--full scope for freedom, the basis and condition of all
human development and progress.
In conclusion, let us consider briefly the remedies proposed by the
other parties--useless as they are, as the ever-increasing
misery around us abundantly shows.
The State Socialist parties, apart from a few Socialists pure and simple
who, if they were true to the foundations of their opinions, would come
over to us, have of late become entirely parties for advocating political
action. They believe in sending the right man to Parliament, and we have
the choice between the chosen of the I.L.P., of the Fabians, and of the
S.D.F. We do not consider their minor differences: what is the
principle of political action worth?--is the question we ask. It is
intended to bring pressure on the governing classes to effect social
changes. We maintain that no amount of pressure exercised through political
action can bring about these social changes. Some palliatives may be
adopted, but the system will continue to exist; for these labor parties
make the workers believe in constitutional means, in the leadership and
worship of men; in short, they will destroy their self-reliance and
self-respect, and do for them that which religion does--make
them expect everything from others, nothing from themselves. The history of
the labor movement in Europe and America shows the greater these parties
become the less advanced their leaders grow and
the less is achieved by these bulky, cast-iron organisations with no room for freedom left in them.
We have no more belief in Trades Unions as such than in political
action, yet we prefer those Unionists, who rely upon their own action to
those who cry for State help. Our propaganda might sometimes use this
question as a starting point.
The Co-operative movement can only benefit a few who remain
unnoticed among the general misery. Productive Co-operation on a
large scale would have to compete with capitalism, which ruthlessly cuts
down wages and gets a supply of cheap labor from the unemployed.
Co-operators would have to work on similar lines, those of the
greatest possible exploitation of labor and that will be no remedy for the
needs of labor, or they would be crushed by the capitalist competition,
being in fact the first victims of a commercial crisis. Thus on a large
scale Co-operation is impracticable, and those who take part in it
in its present form are only too often estranged from the general labor
movement. So we consider Co-operators as workers who are no
essential factor in the coming struggle.
The meanest and most repulsive "friends" of the workers are
the Teetotalers, Malthusianists, and advocates of thrift and saving, who
propound each his particular crochet as an infallible remedy for poverty.
They want the workers to give up the small mites of, however adulterated
and paltry, pleasure and enjoyment that are left to them. "Hypocrisy
is the compliment vice pays to virtue," the proverb says, and the
other parties make at any rate promises of better things, but these want to
make life still more dreary and cheerless. Economically they are utterly
wrong. If all were content to live as Coolies do, on a handful of rice per
day, wages would be lowered by competition down to the level of Coolie
wages--a few pence per day. We want the standard of the workers'
living raised, not lowered, and all the things to which these
"friends" object belong to a real, full, human life.
We need not dwell on all the cranks who have cut and dried remedies like
the Free Currency advocates, who ignore the principle of every society with
private property: "No property, no credit." To be
benefited by money cheques, it would be necessary to possess some kind of
portable or realisable property to be given in exchange for the cheques or
to have them secured on. Nothing would be altered by them, they could
simply perpetuate the worst evils of the present system in a more
aggravated form. To the worker who has no property but his labor to dispose
of, in times when work is slack and labor therefore not in demand, they
would offer no resource whatever, and he would still be obliged to suffer
and to starve. To make the remedy
proportionate to the evil proposed to be cured, it would be requisite to abolish all private property and make the land and all it contains, together with all the implements of production, common property--that is, to introduce Communism, where money and money cheques will become equally useless.
As you will have seen, Anarchism does not preach anything contrary to
the principles which have always inspired men to strive for freedom and
right. It would indeed be absurd to try and impose something new upon
mankind. No! Anarchism is nothing but the full
acknowledgment of the realisation of the principle that freedom is at the
root of sound natural development. Nature knows no outside laws, no
external powers, and only follows her own inward forces of attraction or
repulsion. Everything is the result of the existing forces and tendencies,
and this result becomes again in turn the cause of the next thing
following. In its childhood, humanity suffered from ignorance of this
cause, and suffers still by being trodden under the heel of imaginary
celestial and human authority (both arising from the same
sources--ignorance and the fear of the unknown). All progress has been
made by fighting and defying authority. Great men in history--men who
have done real work, that is, work useful for the progress of the human
race by breaking and defying laws and regulations apparently made for
everlasting time--showed mankind new roads, opened new ground. These
were rebels, and the last in this series--those who wish not only to
be free themselves but who saw that which before them men did not see so
clearly, that to be free ourselves we must be surrounded by free men; that
the slavery of the meanest human being is our own slavery. Those last
rebels for freedom and progress are the Anarchists of all countries, and in
solidarity with them we appeal to you.
Study our principles, our movement, and if they convince you join us in
our struggle against authority and exploitation, for freedom and happiness
for all.
London, May 1st, 1895.