When one mentions the word communist, even among anarchist circles one is frequently met with perhaps rightful hostility. Of course, historically what was and is conceived of as manifestations of communism were nothing but state capitalist regimes where the population was forcefully subservient to the party bureaucracy. In theory such regimes extrapolated the weak and authoritarian side of Karl Marx’s writing and hardened it into a dogma and ideology which one- whether as a member of the party or general population- was forced to live up to.

As a former adherent of the ideology of Marxism-Leninism, I’ve witnessed the personification of ideology in self-avowed communist parties such as the Spartacist League. Many people I met and worked with were the ultimate personification of ideology-rigid, fixed, and brazenly authoritarian in personality and actions. On the converse, younger individuals joined such organizations because it was and is to many- including myself at the time- perceived as actually participating in tangible activity (IE newspaper sales, and "militant" demonstrations). Whether that activity contributes to a practice beyond that of propagandizing is the subject of another essay. Let’s just say practice as conceived of as propagandizing in the form of trying to gain ideological adherents has seen its day (if it ever had one). Informal networks of individuals, with similar objectives and proclivities, collectively coming together on projects when possible and individually when collective projects do not seem to come to fruition, is seemingly the direction revolutionary theory and practice are forced to head. In this sense the intention is not to gain converts to the religion of anarchism or communism, but to participate in concrete projects and from this actively intervene in concrete struggle. Practice as conceived of as a means by which to encourage individuals to join your revolutionary clique is doing nothing to further the class struggle, but continuing to foster a sense of false community.

Similarly, ideology can easily creep its way into anarchism. Many anarchists have an almost automatic and dogmatic response to anything that is slightly Marxist or Marxian. Given that many perceive its history to be lodged in authoritarianism and manipulation this is somewhat understandable. Nonetheless it still behooves me that self-avowed freethinkers would allow themselves to merely react in an irrational way against anything even slightly Marxian influenced. After all the critique of capitalism starts largely with Marx’s three volume book Capital.

So with this in mind Gilles Dauve and Francois Martins’ book the Eclipse and Re-Emergence of the Communist Movement is an excellent introduction to the communist critique of capital and the state. The foreword (or as they call foreworld) entitled Out of the Future starts out with a new introduction, which helps situate the text within the context of late capitalism. The text itself was written in 1969 and 1972 and published in English by Black& Red in 1974. To quote the introduction "Capital has invaded all life, and determines the way we feed our cat, how we visit or bury our friends to such an extent that our objective can only be the social fabric, invisible, all-encompassing, impersonal... Our most vital need: others, seems so close and so far at the same time... When a sizable minority fed up with virtual reality starts making possibilities real, revolution will rise again, terrible and anonymous". (13) This introduction is an excellent examination of capitalism and potential resistance in its late phase.

Much of the beginning is devoted to defining terms such as wage labor, commodities, capital, competition, crisis, proletariat and revolution, etc. This serves as a useful contribution as it attempts to assess such terms within the framework of negation. With this definition and negation, an analysis of the movement of communism is provided, which allows for a more dialectical approach. At times it appears as if this transcendence is tainted with an almost fixed ideal (which is perhaps due to the often mechanical theory of history Marx teetered on in many of his writings) to which communism is subject to, rather than an actual supersession of all fixed ideals within the context of struggle. It nonetheless makes for a more balanced reading. The subheading entitled "Communism as a Present Social Movement" does however help clarify this and situate communism within the present context. In this a penetrating critique is made of those who perceive communism as an ideal to be established after the revolution. They go on to cite examples such as squatting and rejection of assembly line work as concrete sites of struggle where the world is not merely rejected, but the whole of capital is questioned through the transformation of exchange value (viewed merely for it ability to be bought and sold) into use value (the object is made use of without ascribing any sort of monetary value). "Such movements will be forced to become conscious of their acts, to understand what they are doing, in order to do it better." (40)

The second half of this book is an analysis of the class struggle, which was written soon after May 1968. In his introduction to this part Dauve notes that if this text were written today historical data would be different. Nonetheless it contains an insightful analysis of the role parties and unions play in recuperating the class struggle. Under the subheading reading "Forms of Action Which Cannot Be Recuperated: Sabotage and Downtiming" it is stated that; "Destructive acts are part of an attempt to destroy the mediation of wage labor as the only form of social community. In the silence of the proletariat, sabotage appears as the first stammer of human speech." (56) In other words, in the absence of collective refusal the individual reacts against his own alienation through acts of sabotage.

This book complemented with Aufheben Journal from England, Undercurrent Journal from England (a more polemical variant of Aufheben though they are very similar), and an examination of this pamphlet all serve as useful introductions to anti-state communism. The pamphlet itself contains vague references to subjects I would have like to have seen expanded upon. The somewhat confusing references to production and consumption as well as the question of technology, are all subjects which could a have been expanded upon. At any rate, this book as well as anything taken at face value- including anarchism- without a critical analysis can easily degenerate into dogma, but that is only if we let it.

Through a critical theory of capital, the social relations it produces, and the state we can better understand how such operate, while struggling daily against capitalism and the state. This pamphlet is an important contribution to that project.