Tripping through America

Rossella Di Leo

To see ourselves from a different perspective is usually interesting and sometimes instructive . How often can we resist sneaking a peek at ourselves when we pass a reflecting surface? - ourselves being in this case the anarchists of North America. Today we are few in numbers and scattered in many places, but an intrepid emissary from Italy (to tell the truth, she is really from Sicily; there is a significant difference between the two f have been told) has, with amazing energy .sought us out, looked at us, talked to us..Jn the process of which, she has managed to assimilate the very American, quite frantic mood of Kerouac's On The Road, crisscrossing the continent in a manner that he would have envied (in fact, our rather free translation of her more direct title is an oblique and parochial homage to On The Road). in a gracious reply to our request she sent us her written impressions of what she sawr what she heard, what she experienced, doing so with a wide range of cultural references - Goethe, Sterne, etc. (and a use of parentheses) that leaves us awestruck. We, along with Rossella, are hopeful that this view from the other side of the looking glass can begin a dialogue among us that will begin help to restore the once strong international dimension of anarchism. (Though it is now a bit after she wrote it, we feel it is still valid. Perhaps, after her American encounter, she can understand that the modern world (and especially computers) not only help you save time more efficiently, but allow you to squander it more easily-beep.beep.)

-translator's note

As Ursula LeGuin aptly says in The Dispossessed. "The true voyage is the return." In fact, it was only after having returned home, unpacked my bags, greeted my family and friends.and reestablished my contact with domestic reality that my American trip (three hectic months that dragged

me north, south, east and west) began to become "intelligible". It was only after 1 had let my jumbled impressions settle down (for they had transformed me into a receptacle that gulped down facts without digesting them) that the trip lost its fantastic dimension and became "real". And it is only now that I feel ready to put down in a more coherent and considered manner several impressions of this trip which may be worth relating - at the risk of boring some readers. Some among you may have noted that the title of this article echoes the well-known book of Goethe, Travels in Italy. (1 could have referred also to other well-known book , A Sentimental Voyage through France and Italy, by Lawrence Sterne - which in my version would have read "A Sentimental Voyage throughout the United States and Canada" - but then I felt such a title might mislead some readers, promising more than it would deliver. Finally I preferred the more sober refernce to Goethe.) 1 don't do this immodestly but rather in an attempt to give a certain cultural dignity to a little practised custom among anarchists, one which I hope will become more common ~ the exchange of travel impressions between anarchists who are crossing oceans and boundaries in ever increasing numbers. My objective is not to compile an alternative guide a la "anarcho-touristleven if this idea shouldn't be easily dismissed), but rather to "de-provincialize" anarchist culture, which seems to have lost its international dimension, enclosing itself within often anguished national confines. This cultural fragmentation of anarchism, impeding the fiow of ideas, experiences, and information (also caused by the lack of a functioning international network) has dispersed a wealth of acquaintanceships which put together would have surely accelerated the theoretical renewal of anarchism. This has without doubt accentuated a geographical and cultural diversification which, without any concessions to homogeneity-at-any-cost, has for me results undoubtedly negative. Needlesss to say, one of the greatest differences concerns North-American and European anarchism. (I know! it's too grand a generalization, but grant me a few in order to make some order of the still jumbled impressions of my trip.) It's not that European anarchism doesn't have "Yankee" cultural traits or that one can't find more refined traits in American anarchism than in those of the Old World, butusuaily, the tendency of these cultural traits allows one to distinguish between these two perspectives. At this point I'd like to take a brief parenthesis to discuss several cultural similarities and difference which i found surprising.

This wasn't my first trip to North America, actually my fourth, but, already from my first contact with American culture, 1 was surprised to find myself "European", a definition that up to then hadn't been part of my repetoire. i discovered differences not only in driving cars (very careful, I would say, in general except for New York City, which finding itself on the same latitude as Naples, has developed a similar style) and the manner in which doors open {they push when you want to pull and pui! when you want to push), but, above ail there is a difference in language, of behaviour, of cultural references which, almost by surprise, makes me discover a connection io European culture that I had not felt before.

The second surprise 1 had was to notice how these differences were present in anarchist culture as well as in "official" culture. At first ! was convinced that anarchism had produced the double effect of being isolated, thanks to its "deviant nature" from the surrounding "official" culture , and, at the same time, of activating a process of interna! homogenization Now, if this proves to be true from an ethical and {in part) philosophical point of view, from a more strictly cultural point of view the bond between anarchism and the immediate reality which surrounds it, remains stronger than 1 suppose, while the process of homogenization remains weaker. Here is the reason for the American imprint upon their anarchism and the European imprint upon our own that so astonished me initially. A good example of what i have said is the pragmatic approach so typical of American culture and found as well among the anarchists { to convince oneself of this one simply has to glance at anarchist writing).

One could stretch the list of convergences between official and deviant culture on both sides of the ocean to infinity, but 1 prefer to have this convergence come out during the course of the following discussion. For the moment it will be enough to underline the importance of this relationship which, combined together with that "provincial" development of anarchism, which we have already noted, explains the extraneousness that characterizes contemporary anarchist tendencies . It is a hole which I think can be filled; a matter which 1 will seek to accomplish within the limits of my possiblities ( supplied only with a teaspoon).

At this point (and briefly for goodness sakes!) a description of the writer: a woman, itatian, a bit over thirty, who, although Sicilian (no Mafia connection), lives in Milano, has been active in the movement since the mythical year of 1968, and since 1976 works at the Center for Libertarian Studies, part of an anarchist editorial collective.

This finishes the biographical note, but more important is a bio-political note that is essential for two reasons. First of all, to understand the motivations for a trip that finds its significance within the context of politcal-cultural project which transcends individual decision. Secondly, because explicating the theoretical presuppositions (preconceptions), the expectations (and the myths) of the writer not only makes her comments become more intelligible but makes the voyage assume a new and more complex dimension: it is not only a "voyage" through the world which is described, but also a "voyage" in the inner world of the one who describes. 1 belong to that generation which is called in Europe "the sixty-eighters", formed politcally in that year of social turbulence whose impact in Italy lasted until the mid-seventies, ft is a generation {today between 30 and 40 years old) "political" to the core, nourished by ideology, militant by definition, predominantly materialistic and rationalistic, sometimes dogmatic. Now, don't think that I am so self-critical to define myself like this. This was true ? but no longer! However these were the political origins of my generation and it is undeniable that they have left their mark upon our thinking. ( If I am not mistaken, to find this type of mentality in North America one has to return to the thirties ~ a great difference in time which is an obvious symptom of the different development of American anarchism.)

In this debatable legacy of the sixties there is however an element which I still accept entirely: the spirit of militancy. That is the deep conviction that only through a daily committment can one satisfy the desire (ethical and aesthetic) to transform this society of domination, in which, willingly or unwillingly, we live. Beyond this , little else remains from that mentality, which became part of our anarchist cultural imagery { which we can summarily describe as "political, insurrectionist, and proletarian") that prevailed until the mid-seventies and has been in constant decline since then.

The scenario is more complex if we enlarge our view to cover European reality {and here we bow down before that too-dichotomous representation of "European" culture as opposed to "American" culture). The decline of this imagery, verified throughout "Western" Europe (in a political and not in a geographical sense) , has come about in different tempi, leading to the formation of two distinct geo-cultural areas. The most rapid decline has been in north-central Europe, where an existential-communitarian anarchism has developed (much like that found in North America): while the decline has been slower in the Latin areas, where it has

remained predominately a classic anarchism, more traditional in form and in content (and much closer to Latin-American temperaments), (in passing, I should note the formation within international anarchism of the same division between North and South so typical of the dominant economical-political structure.) Even here it should be realized that we are not dealing with two exactly opposite and clearly marked areas: parts of one can be found in the other and vice-versa. Let us say rather that this description reveals above all the prevalent trait in each geo-cultural area.

This last clarification was necessary in order to describe properly the activities of the group to which I belong. While having our roots in a Latin culture, for more than a decade we have been trying to renew anarchist theory, especially through several publishing-cultural initiatives: il Centro Stud! Libertari {The Center for Libertarian Studies), A Rivista {the anarchist journal A), Volonta' (an anarchist quarterly), Edizioni Antistato (an anarchist publishing house), and , in the past, another anarhist quarterly. Interrogations, all different aspects of a single project.

This process of theoretical rethinking seems to us unavoidable because the anarchism that came to us from the nineteenth century, and which with certain successful grafts remained vital up to the Spanish Revolution, today is no longer able to give satisfactory answers, either in the "computer-anarchist" or "post-industrial" society { however meaningful these definitions are). We find ourselves therefore in front of a structual, not a conjunctural, crisis, which is anyway not an "ideological" crisis, nor even an ethical one. It is not anarchism as the extreme and most coherent antithesis of a dominating society, as an egalitarian and libertarian option, that is in doubt, but its historical form - that insurrectional and proletarian anarchism which we have noted, that "political" anarchism (in its organizational structure and social discourse) which has shown many times its limits and its incongruities.

The first task in this process of theoretical renewal is to identify the "hard core" of anarchism, outside of its historical form which it has assumed up to now: to update this "core" with one or more forms consonant with contemporary society; and above all to remake an anarchist cultural imagery which can free itself from the myths and from the rhetoric of a glorious but bygone era and which can interact creatively with the myths, the aspects, and the Utopian aspects extracted from the "deviant" culture of our time

Let me now pick up the thread of my "trip" {after this parenthesis about the European movement, too long and at the same time too short), by quoting two popular proverbs both of which include the sane premises and conclusions: while the first tells us "the grass is always greener in someone else's yard", the second says "all that glitters is not gold".

The why of the first proverb is quickly understood: in the work of theoretical renewal, our attention has been obviously been attracted by that existential-communitarian anarchism which seemed to be so flourishing in North America. The ethical and theoretical premises of this anarchism {which others prefer to call a neo-anarchism) could be a valid response to this qualitative and quantitative crisis which was (and is) consuming the Italian movement {and, in general, classical anarchism).

More specifically, this overseas anarchism was distinguished for us by a greater vitality and dynamism which allowed it to identify more rapidly the tears, libertarian in form and content, in the social fabric; by a greater adaptive capacity which allowed it to interact in an easier and more elastic manner with emerging libertarian movements; by a consequent greater social diffusion, not only in quantitative terms but also as a cultural influence (thanks to that cultural tradition of American individualism which seemed to us to facilitate anarchist discourse). All objectives which we have been pursuing for some time - and with modest results - in Italy, where we find ourselves with a movement weighed down by tradition, which moves with the grace and dignity of an elephant (although without its dimensions).

As ! previously noted, the reality which 1 found before me was not identical with the image which we had, looking from a distance. Not that the reality was totally different, but several traits were less pronounced and others produced "collateral effects" which we had not noticed.

My original impression was gradually modified, above all, by many talks with anarchists of all sorts: from the most nitpicking academics to hippies of the old school, from the ancient militants of the old emmtgrant movement to the young militants of the ecological movment, etc. Although different among themselves by location and by interests, they seemed to me to be bound together by a similar outlook - a sense of disillusionment, a pyscho-political depression often greater than that commonly found in Europe.

Pragmatic approach. Fragment I

The size and degree of this depression is naturally not uniform. Geographically, I found its greatest concentration in the Mid-West while on both coasts (perhaps because of the beneficial effects of the sea) the depression is less virulent I found the "anarcho-greens" to be unquestionably among the less depressed tendencies, while I found the situation of anarcho-feminism somewhat negative, in a phase where, in my opinion, it has lost direction.

A peculiar effect of this depressed state is a compulsive desire to move about The anarchists of the Mid-West want to transfer themselves to the Coasts, those on the East Cost think about moving to California and those in California talk of going to Europe. Faced with this psycho-motoring mania (quite surprising for an European of the post-migratory era). / remember a saying of a La tin poet, "coeios non animos mutant" (they change places but not their state of mind).

That sage advice, mentioned about two years ago in the pages of the journal, Voionta', at the height of the crisis which wracked the Italian movement echoed in my mind : "let us leave pessimism for better times". An invitation {paradoxical certainly, but at the same time full of good sense) to react to the crisis with a rational optimism that contrasts with the emotional pessimism that is typical of today. Certainly the eighties, particularly in Europe, follow a decade (the "roaring" seventies) that make today seem decidedly depressing, but...Reagan is not the incarnation of Leviathan and we have gotten past 1984 without the gloomy prophesies of Orwell coming true.

i am convinced, moreover, that the present heart-felt pessimism is a necessary phase of anarchism's development, it was necessary to pass through the present profound crisis to accelerate the process of theoretical renewal; -to make us reflect, a phase which is almost thirty years overdue and without which anarchism would certainly end. There are, moreover, a series of "existential " discoveries which, it appears, every generation has to make for itself. So it was only recently that we found that the revolution was not just around the corner, that history was not a progressive, linear movement, that reason does not inevitably guide human actions, and , horror of horrors, that we are mortal and that Utopias are rarely created during the course of one's life.

As you see, there is enough to make us deeply pessimistic; but, rather than morbidly wallowing in our disappointments , it is better to resist and to find positive signs in the real world that can corroborate reason's optimism. Without entering into details (which would require a wide-ranging discussion), we can refer to those libertarian tensions and ferments which, notwithstanding the crisis of official anarchism, continue to poke through the fabric of the society of domination ( acertain feminism, a certain ecology, a certain pacifism, a certain decentralism, etc.). It's true that many tears are continually mended, but it is also true that in the long run the cloth becomes threadbare and , in the long run, wears out

And yet, in contrast to this to pessimism, another fundamental discourse, which was among the motives that ted me to a closer knowledge of American anarchism , is also true - living anarchism. That is anarchism as an ethic and an aesthetic, the anarchism of "here and now", Utopia lived; it was to search out the theoretical basis of this existential-communitarian anarchism that I undertook my American trip.

Before affirming {and perhaps attracting the annoyance of many) that "all that glitters is not gold", 1 prefer (in an attempt to make myself not totally detestable) to talk of the positive aspects that I found in American anarchsim.

Actually, many of the positive aspects which we attributed to American anarchism from a distance are real. And let us begin exactly with that prevalent existential-communitarian anarchism which does not intend to put off the posssiblity of living as anarchist until "the glorious future'' This practice of day-by-day anarchism has had the merit of having produced an anarchist sensibility which influenced the style of all life (that is beyond the specifically "political") in a more pervasive, coherent, and profound manner than in other geo-cultural areas like Italy. Let it be emphasized again that we are talking of prevalent traits, not solitary ones, of which many exceptions can be found. As can be seen this type of approach is not wholly absent from traditional anarchism, but it is found there in an atrophied form. The novelty introduced by existential-communitarian anarchism is not to have "invented" anarchism as a way of life, but to have displaced the accent from political militancy { and therefore from the movement as a "party") to daily life (that is to the anarchist community).

Pragmatic approach. Fragment IS

This anarchist sensibilty is present in many more existential milieus than we find in Europe. The aspirtion to social marginality is an idea which is often found in Amercian anarchist publications (above all in revealing "letters to the editors"). The type of work that is selected (part-time triumphs among the anarchist ranks) is often a confirmation of this marginalist mentality which refuses at the same time social integration along with the social guarantees that this would bring.

On the contrary, in Italy ~ apart from some rare examples of "pure and strong" anarchists (but watch out for the fakes!) - marginality is not a widespread choice. Anarchists are spread throughout all the working categories, from the lower to the middle classes, and no one dreams of giving up social guarantees such as pensions, social security, vacations, etc. There is a greater leap in general between the militant ethic (deeply felt) and the existential ethic {more~or~less "permissive") than in North America. An example: the number of "traditional" families which I found among the North Amercian anarchists is clearly smaller than in Europe (and above all in Italy).

Precisely this emphasis on daily life has faciiitated the participation of anarchists within emerging social movements {as an Individual" and not as "movement": a fundamental difference of stance with respect to the approach more largely accepted by the European movement). This participation has given the double benefit of re-enforcing libertarian traits present in these movements and to give some oxygen to anarchism, bringing to its thinking and to its practice new themes and new forms of struggle. Thanks to this interaction, in North America one does not find (at least to the same degree) that division between "movement" and "libertarian ground", so typical of Italian reality.

Among the traits which seemed to be recognizeabte in American anarchism I have first listed a greater vitality and dynamism, which is in part reconfirmed by close analysis. Important in this development has been (beyond the undoubted influence of "official" culture) the lesser weight given to anarchist tradition in the "ideological" formation of American anarchists after the Second World War. it is an event which closes the epoch of immigrant anarchists and opens the era of an "autonomous"

anarchism, whose ties with the past are much looser than those maintained by the European movement.

In Europe, neither the Second World War nor the sixties resulted in making a significant break with the old anarchism (although more strain was produced) and only in the last decade has the process of theoretical renewal begun to develop. Up to then the "weight of tradition" had held up a "heretical" rethinking, reproducing an "orthodoxy" which was showing itself to be mortal. No wonder then that ideological hardening of the arteries and organizational institutionalization was mummifying the European movement.

This (apocalyptic) vision, it seems, remains extraneous to American anarchism which, not having inherited this cumbersome tradition, interacts more freely with the changed socio-economic reality. Those matters, which remained tabu' to us up to very recent times ( look at the example of revolution, proposed over and over again until yesterday in the same terms as in the nineteenth century), were, instead, desacrementalized in North America without much fuss and without too great a sense of guilt.

1 have criticized European and, above ail, Italian anarchism in order to look at the other side of the coin and allow myself some critical remarks about American anarchism.

As you have noticed, I have often talked of the European movement, while I have accurately avoided using this term in referring to North America, preferring to use the more generic term American anarchism. It is easy to understand why - while in Europe the greater part of anarchists are in the movement (that is, a network of contacts which however loose constitute an organizational structure), in North America the greater part are outside the movement. Or, to put it better, they are outside the idea of the movement . Since, before there is an organizational structure and a functioning mentality, we talk about the manner in which the group and the individual perceive themselves, about how "one thinks about things".

In Europe {less so in central-north, more so in the latin areas) the prevailing conception is still that tradition of the political movement (or a community of militants, as it has sometimes been defined). The movement is the place of the political and the political is the way of anarchism. From this vision, itself, develops - beyond organizational forms - a sense of belonging to an anarchist community, as much as to a community of thought, which has cemented the the European movement together , creating those foundations which have allowed it to overcome the worst

crises, ft ts just this sense of belonging to the ideai community that i searched for in vain in North America.

Not that in the past this sense of belonging did not exist - the immigrant anarchist movement nourished this classical conception. Today, however, American anarchism results in a number of individuals and groups rather than a movement, whose collective force {the concept is of Proudhon; and don't accuse me, because of this, of having quoted the "classics" too much) is not utilized to construct either an organizational net or an ideal community.

The danger, in my view, that American anarchism runs - if it does not happen to develop this sense of belonging to an ideal, if it does not develop an identity which transcends the day-to-day (without denying it) and which brings together in a general vision the thousand aspects of its social presence - is that of transorming its social "diffusion" into a social "dispersion".

The fact that an organized movement does not exist (according to European standards) derives, yes, from this lack of ideal identification, but also from the influence of the larger culture surrounding it, with its burden of individualism and isolationism.

Pragmatic approach: fragment III.

With regard to the isolationaist mentality I wish to open a list of grievances. This point of view, found in less-concentrated form in anarchism, is changed by the official culture (the U.S above all. ) unabashedly "Americo-centric". A perusal of the national press, quite revealing, makes one quickly understand the underlying basis of this conception: there is the United States of America and somewhere in the outskirts the rest of the world. Now I don't say that American anarchism has the same (arrogant) conception, but it has taken from it that isolationist mentality of which I talk. Its attention is too centered upon the American reality and too little upon the world's reality.

One could object that cases like Nicaragua (or Viet Nam) contradict this statement, butAhis is not so, for in my opinion, these countries have been important only insofar as their paths have unfortunately crossed that of the U.S. I wish to suggest that we also turn our attention upon that part of reality ignored by the mass-media and official culture, and often more interesting from an anarchist point of view. A reality which is often known

only through a reading of the alternative press, since the mass-media takes care to circulate only a certain type of news. And here I must once more lament: I know that this suggestion more than likely falls into a void since too few american anarchists read foreign languages. This, beyond removing a fundamental international dimension from American anarchism, is particularly irritating for whoever has to "sweat blood" to learn English. For example, this need to learn other languages was deeply felt in the "old" movement, where even an anarchist mason like Pio Turroni could read and speak French and Spanish, besides Italian.

Opposite to the European conception , the basic standard is that of "organized guerilla warfare": many small groups (or small networks of groups) which form and dissolve themselves with great ease; which do not aspire to institutionalize themselves ( that is to perpetuate themselves beyond certain predetermined goals); which are single-issue oriented, without reaching for more general goals. If in the European movement the accent is placed upon stability and continuity (whose negative dangerous other side is "organizational immortality"), in American anarchism the accent is placed upon dynamism { which, exaggerated by a maddening mobility, runs the risk of of degenerating onto "infant(ile) mortality").

Pragmatic approach. Fragment IV

For a fanatical organizer like me the lack of anarchist centers (which one can count on the fingers of one hand) is disconcerting: the too few and casual nature of meetings between anarchists of the same geographic area ( I do not even dare to imagine national meetings); the almost non-existence of networks (even around publications , which do not constitute that organizational web so important for the European movement)

Utilizing for the moment the technique of "juggling two things at the same time" (another Italian proverb), let us turn now to the European movement. That tradition which 1 so heavily attacked in the preceding pages, has just revealed itself to be essential in providing the anarchist movement with a cultural, philosophcia! , and ethical background which gives a certain coherence to its actions and its thought. This patrimony of struggle and of thought, left as a heritage by classical anarchism, even if, on one hand, it blocks the road to theoretical renewal, on the other, it

presents us with a rich referential Framework (philosophically, historically, practically...) which is fundamental if we are not to lose our way in the social labyrinth. Moreover, it allows us to proceed through this social labyrinth because it gives us an "ideal direction" which does not let us lose ourselves in the many winding curves that we must take in seeking an exit.

Speaking plainly, the frame of reference furnished by classical anarchism, if it is not reduced to a pious reading of sacred texts, can give us a world vision which can give meaning to daily action, can give us an "ideal direction" when we are passing through the small segments of that labyrinth whose proportions escape us. From this patrimony {which is often ignored in North America, sometimes disparaged, or sometimes repeated pedantically) we do not derive the how of our social action, but the why, distilling all of its ethical force and Utopian tension.

Tradition, typically Janus-faced, has at the same time a positive and negative value, which is not limited to what has just been said. If it is indeed true that tradition generates the ideal community, its ?"political" vocation has held back the affirmation of anarchism as a way of life - a conception that does not deny a community of militants, but integrates it within a more complex community that includes every aspect of existence. It seems to me that if one part of the European movement is the carrier of a world vision and an Utopian tension peculiar to its identity as a community of militants, American anarchism is instead the carrier of a philosophy of life and an anarchist sensibility peculiar to its identity as an existential community.

And now I think the moment for conclusions has arrived ,

My first conclusion Is that anarchism has suffered from a defective vision: a defect not serious but troublesome . If indeed one eye is is near -sighted, the other is far-sighted. The effects are well-known: the nearsighted eye sees well only what is close {let us say the "here and now") while the horizon remains obscured by a confusing fog; the far-sighted eye sees well only the far distance (let us call it Utopia) while it is unable to see well what is under its own nose.

The metaphor, it seems to me, is explicit enough. American anarchism {the near-sighted eye) has to enrichen itself with a world vision that wilt give more sense { both in direction and meaning) to its social practice. European anarchism, above all Italian (the far-sighted eye), instead of being

fed astray by the "sun of the future" has to look around itself a tittle and transform into daily practice that part of Utopian tension which drives it.

The second conclusion is that this defective vision is not incurable, but it will not correct itself. To cure it the active collaboration of the patient will be necessary. The cure, among other things, ts experimental.

1 certainly do not think that one solution to the problem exists. 1 hope that it's clear during the course of my reflections that I am not trying to sell a product, nor promoting any miraculous formula. 1 am firmly convinced only that the prospect of a theoretical renewal of anarchism is completely experimental and that we must proceed by means of a synthesis between classical and existential-communitarian anarchism , between the Utopian practice of the first and the anarchist sensiblity of the second

Let us bring to an end this "trip" within a trip. I have done what I can with my reflections to deepen our reciprocal understanding and to begin (armed with my tea spoon) to fill in the existing gaps of international anarchism. Events like the international anarchist meeting organized in Venice during 1984 are other very worthwhile ways to proceed in the same direction. To come out of the tunnel is not an individual task, but will be a collective work, made by that collective force which is greater than the sum of its parts {and here we returned to Proudhon, whom 1 swear ~ 1 really mean it -1 have never read).

Milano.ltaiy / August 1985 (translated by Robert D'AttiHo)