Today's Topics:
1. Greece, ESE Athens: Syndicalism as Conflict (gr) [machine
translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. fda-ifa: we want to pronounce: From now on there's a FAU
Dresden office! (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. France, Alternative Libertaire AL-Nanterre - policy, Police
events: the sound of boots on our pavements (fr, it, pt) [machine
translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. BERN, SWITZERLAND: PAINT ATTACK IN SOLIDARITY WITH
PRISONSTRIKE! October 22, 2016 (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. Intervention in the office of the President of the
Thessaloniki notaries association by social anarchist "Black and
Red" APO (gr) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
6. anarkismo.net: Social Classes and Bureaucracy in Bakunin by
Felipe Corrêa (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Syndicalism is to scare bosses, growing power of workers and forcing the repressive
system, judiciary and police, to take action to comply? Either called Libertarian or
anarcho either Base o real unionism makes the worker himself responsible for the claimthe
processes through collective rights. With self-organization through associations or
interprofessional assemblies and weapon solidarity between different sectors creates
militant struggles incompatible. This is exactly what afraid boss every small or large and
therefore arriving to threaten to sue for defamation and extortion. This force we forcing
the state to enable prosecutors and policemen under the orders of the respective employers.
This was the case of shops "Votanopoleio" and "Saladin" Petralona and Keramikos
respectively. Once laid off four workers for their union activities then were targeted and
the Waiters Cooks Association itself for the actions organized and solidarity showed. In
the race started the Association for reinstatement and payment of the accrued several more
employees responded specifically Saladin leaving employers alone with one-way reuptake.
But the bosses decided to leave unemployed and 12 other employees of the store closing and
selling the starting and while an attack with lawsuits for slander and attempted
extortion. The lawsuits were aimed not only redundant but also additional members of the
Association. The prosecution stated that solidarity and industrial action should not only
be protected but that should be punished and exemplary. The judicial system with police
instructions trying to prove that the assertion of our rights can be prosecuted as
"extortion attempt aimed economic benefit", the expression of solidarity be prosecuted as
"an attempt of damage" and the organization of workers into real unions as "composition
and participation in a criminal organization."
You do not scare OUR NO BOSS
AND ANY STATE OR WITHHELD minions
Organized OUR CLUBS
Remake syndicalism DANGEROUS
Libertarian Syndicalist Union
https://ese.espivblogs.net/2016/11/01
------------------------------
Message: 2
Dear friends, ---- How and when exactly the opening hours will be, will straighten out
soon. But we'd already like to introduce it solemnly - preferably of course with you, who
will surely use or need this office sometime. The new office is located in the seminar
house in the backyard of the autonomous housing project ‘Mangelwirtschaft' (Overbeckstr.
26). At this point again we gratefully appreciate we can use this space. ---- On the spot
we wanna celebrate. It starts Tuesday 15.11. (psst: the next day is official holiday...)
from 8pm. The cozy get-together will be enriched by a concert of the band Alarm
(Prop'n'Folk), afterwards DJ Twizted Liz will play HipHop / Trap - dancing, singing or
bawling is always possible. If we want it there will be campfire in the beautiful but dark
garden, maybe we'll watch a film or the like. A basis of vegan food and of drinks will be
available for a donation, please bring delicate additions if you want. And did you ever
think about that: What shouldn't be missing in the new office? Feel invited to bring an
individual piece of ornament ?
Yours, Allgemeines Syndikat Dresden
https://fda-ifa.org/feierliche-buero-eroeffnung-am-15-11-im-seminarhaus-der-mangelwirtschaft/
------------------------------
Message: 3
For three weeks, police demonstrations were held in different cities. We refuse to support
the Police because it is also the tool of governments to establish their domination over
the exploited, whether at work, in the street and their neighborhood. Given this security
drift, it is urgent that the social movement keeps the pad following the mobilization of
the spring against the "work" law. ---- For three weeks, police demonstrations were held
in different cities. Sometimes without declaration prefecture, they take place without
repression, while some demonstrators were masked and armed, marching in Paris in the
government district and the Elysee. Bursting their unions, the police say they are in
solidarity with their colleagues injured by petrol bombs in Viry Châtillon October 8.
Their last major mobilization took place on the day of the death of Remi Fraisse,
environmental activist murdered by the police on the ZAD Sivens on 26 October.
Quickly, the media have pointed their voice proclaimed: a vigil Carrefour failed several
times to guard competitions Peace and a former candidate of the National Front. The
influence of the extreme right does not stop there given the authoritarian slogans chanted
and sung Marseillaise October 24 before the statue of Joan of Arc, as does the National
Front during its May 1st. In addition, far-right groups were grafted to their events.
The demands made at these events are not left out: more secure means to be able suppress
demonstrations and protests in the suburbs. The government, which has strengthened its
discourse and safe practices since the attacks in January 2015 and in November of the same
year, did obviously not opposed to them by giving them a plan of 250 million euros,
including the project to revise the principle of self-defense and the alignment of
penalties for contempt of those magistrates.
With the presidential campaign begins, many election promises will certainly go in this
direction, not only to right: Jean-Luc Mélenchon is now evidence, it legitimizes the work
of these "officials who embody the public order "by making a parallel with the working
conditions of hospital staff.
However, the police does not ensure an ordinary public service: instead of protecting the
interests of the majority of the population, it mainly protects the rulers. When properly
regulates the cases of common rights, a neighborhood safety organization elected and
revocable by habitant.es could replace the separate militia of the population and the
state orders it is now.
We refuse to recognize the police as a guarantor of our security because it does not
hesitate to load the salarié.es pickets who defend their emplois.Nous refuse to see in it
a way to protect our lives, when impunity she murders habitant.es suburbs, refuses to take
complaints from victims of sexual assault or undermine their feelings, maims, trade
unionists and environmentalists, serves militia bosses in his useless projects like
airport Our -Dame-des-Landes.
We refuse to support the Police because it is also the tool of governments to establish
their domination over the exploited, whether at work, in the street and their neighborhood.
Given this security drift, it is urgent that the social movement keeps the pad following
the mobilization of the spring against the "work" law, either in support réfugié.es,
salarié.es to Goodyear, the protester. poursuivi.es are legal under the latest social
movement, or the return against LGBTI-phobic manifestations of Manif for All.
Alternative Libertaire 92
- Image and Video: DC Taranis news
http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Manifestations-policieres-le-bruit
------------------------------
Message: 4
In the night of October 21st, 2016 we attacked the courthouse in Bern, Switzerland, with
paint. This was an action in solidarity with the #PrisonStrike going on in the USA. ----
Since September 9th, 2016, the 45th anniversary of the Attica prison uprising, the largest
prison strike in history has been going on in the USA. With labor refusal, hunger strikes
and uprisings, prisoners are fighting against prison slavery. ---- Although slavery was
theoretically abolished in 1865, it continues to exist legally in the form of prisoner
labor. This is guaranteed by 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids slavery,
except as a punishment. ---- As a result, prisons can force inmates to unpaid or cheap
work and accumulate huge profits. ---- Alone the two largest private operators of prisons,
the Corrections Corporation of America and the Geo Group make over 1.5 billion $ of
revenue per year.
Other corporations such as McDonald's, UPS, Starbucks and many more profit from cheap
prison labor. However this is not only a strike for wages or better conditions, the
prisoners are fighting against the Prison-Industrial-Complex and white supremacy itself.
We direct our solidarity towards the striking prisoners as well as all imprisoned and
oppressed people struggling against the state.
As a sign of solidarity we decided to attack the building in Bern, which represents this
oppression with paint. In this building, the courthouse of Bern, the premises of the
prosecutors office, the cantonal and regional Court are located and the regional prison is
in the immediate vicinity.
Let's not leave it with the colored walls of this single building!
Together, we can break through the isolation!
Today we color the walls tomorrow we will tear them down!
------------------------------
Message: 5
Today, third 1/11 intervened in the office of the President of the Thessaloniki notaries
association, Joanna Bilisi- Chrousala. While the agency was working and people inside, not
opened to us. We wrote slogans all over the floor of the office, but also in their entry,
flew flyers on the right to housing and shouted slogans against the auctions, state and
capital. The purpose of our visit was to remember in this president (which in various
praplanitika trick "non apochis- abstinence" and "hiding" tried to deliver the bank's
hands a field single asset a man, believing that in this way will fool the movement and
solidarity in the world) that will not let them touch it, the hangers and others who are
part of the auction or home, or plots, as they call them, nor hair of the oppressed. To
remember that those who contribute to the perpetuation of misery and exploitation regime
that our masters in store, so you will find us in front of them. As for the request and
the notaries association for better policing in the conduct of the auctions, we welcome
See you asked, since when contributing to ftochopoiisi the bottom and avgatizoun profits
of the bosses, so you will need uniformed to protect ( since today we were from outside),
this and the like, because of the less reactive.
SO Bilisi-Chrousala HANDS YOU THE RIGHT TO HOUSING AND OUR LIVES.
POVERTY, misery and cannibalism, THIS IS THE STATE AND CAPITALISM.
ALL / S IN CONCENTRATION AGAINST Sushi AUCTIONS IN COURTS THES / NIKI, 2/11 ON WEDNESDAY 15.30
Collegiality for social anarchism "Black and Red", a member of the Anarchist Political
Organisation -O.S-
https://maurokokkino1936.wordpress.com/2016/11/01
------------------------------
Message: 6
This article - almost fully extracted from my book Teoria Bakuniniana do Estado
[Bakuninian Theory of the State]- aims to realize a brief discussion on the theory of
social classes and bureaucracy elaborated by Mikhail Bakunin in his anarchist period. What
are the criteria that define the social classes? Which are the social classes? Are there
dominant and oppressed classes? How can class struggle be defined? What is bureaucracy?
How does it relate to other social strata? These are some of the questions the text tries
to answer. ---- "The state has always been the patrimony of some privileged class: ---- a
priestly class, an aristocratic class, a bourgeois class, a bureaucratic class in the
end". ---- Mikhail Bakunin[1] ---- This article - almost fully extracted from my book
Teoria Bakuniniana do Estado[Bakuninian Theory of the State][2]- aims to realize a brief
discussion on the theory of social classes and bureaucracy elaborated by Mikhail Bakunin
in his anarchist period.
What are the criteria that define the social classes? Which are the social classes? Are
there dominant and oppressed classes? How can class struggle be defined? What is
bureaucracy? How does it relate to other social strata? These are some of the questions
the text tries to answer.
Social classes and class struggle
For Bakunin, social classes are fundamental features of capitalist society and they are
constituted from social production and reproduction.
"In human society[...]the differences in classes is, still, very marked, and the whole
world will know to distinguish the noble aristocracy from the financial aristocracy, the
upper bourgeoisie from the petit bourgeoisie, and the latter from the proletariats of the
factories and cities; in this way too, the big landowner from the farmer and the peasant
who cultivates their land; the farmer from the simple proletarian of the countryside."[3]
In this excerpt a few concrete social classes are, more or less clearly, distinguished:
nobility, landowners, bourgeoisie, proletariat (of the city and the countryside) and
peasantry. In other texts, the author points out the existence of yet other concrete
social classes: "priestly class", "bureaucratic class" and "tattered proletariat".[4]Thus,
in addition to the classes listed above, there are at least three others: the clergy,
bureaucracy and the marginalized in general, or "lumpenproletariat", according to Marxian
terminology.
In discussing the criteria for the definition of the social classes, Bakunin points to the
notions of domination and privilege as the primary foundation. Thanks to the relevance of
the economic sphere in the social dynamic, economic privileges and domination constitute
key criteria in this conceptualization: "exclusive ownership of the land", a privilege of
the nobility of its time, and "monopoly of capital and both industrial and commercial
companies", privilege of the bourgeoisie of its time, constitute the bases of economic
domination both of the owners of the means of production and distribution in relation to
the wage workers of the city and countryside, as well as of the landowners in relation to
peasant farmers or even smallholders; the difference between rich and poor, based on the
ownership of capital, also implies another important economic privilege and contributes to
class domination.
Ownership of the means of production, including the land, of distribution and of capital
implies, according to the author, "the exploitation of the subjected labour, or forced by
hunger, of the popular masses" and thus increases social inequality, making the rich get
richer and the poor poorer.[5]
However, the economic criteria are not the only ones in this conceptualization. The
bureaucracy, Bakunin continues, constitutes a "class of privileged[...]men" that has
"solidarity with the interests of the state" and, because of this, devotes itself "body
and soul to its prosperity and existence", by means of the control of the state's
administration that it has and all that this implies. He also points out "the artificial
and forced development of the stupidity of the masses", privilege of the clergy of its
time, based on the capacity that it has to promote a certain understanding of the
world.[6]For him, another criteria capable of strengthening this vision of reality is the
"difference in instruction and education", that can support class domination, in which "a
mass of slaves" is subjugated by "a small number of rulers".[7]
Thus, in addition to economic criteria the author points out other criteria that are
relevant to his definition of social classes: ownership of the means of administration,
control and coercion, as well as ownership of the means of the production of knowledge.
In short, it can be said that social classes are defined starting with the category of
domination and are forged in a triadic relationship, covering economics, politics and
culture; they provide, therefore, a social stratification which demonstrates different
privileges.
In the economic sphere, the ownership of the means of production, including land, of
distribution and of capital; in the political sphere, the ownership of the means of
administration, control and coercion; in the cultural sphere, the ownership of the means
of the production of knowledge. In general terms, economic privileges imply exploitation
of labour, political privileges imply political-bureaucratic domination and physical
coercion and cultural privileges imply cultural alienation.
Taking into account the nineteenth century analyzed by Bakunin, the ruling classes - or
"privileged classes"/"upper classes", as he generally calls them - included: the
nobility/landlords (owners of the lands), the bourgeoisie (owners of the means of
production and of capital), bureaucracy (owners of the means of administration, coercion
and control) and clergy (owners of the means of knowledge production). The dominated
classes encompassed: proletariat of town and country (salaried workers), peasants (farmers
or smallholders) and marginalized (the unemployed, beggars, destitute, illiterate, thieves
etc.). Obviously there are fractions of classes and "grey areas" that are placed between
these large categories.
The class struggle manifests itself in the particular social relations between different
agents according to their position in the social structure: workers and bosses, farmers
and landowners etc. However, its manifestation on a larger scale involves the general
social relations, shaped by two broad groups of dominators and dominated, which
extrapolate the social structure and also involve the interests and the position taken in
the conflict.
From a particular concrete historic-conjunctural universe, of nineteenth-century Europe,
Bakunin establishes a theoretical model - and therefore, more abstract and general -,
which proposes to reduce the set of concrete social classes of his time to two broad groups:
"All these different social and political existences are today reduced to two main
categories, directly opposed one to the other, and natural enemies of one another: the
political classes, comprised of all the privileged, both of land as well as capital, or
even just of bourgeois education, and the working classes disinherited both of capital and
of land, and deprived of any education and any instruction."[8]
Although this quote does not include all the criteria used by the author in their
definition of classes, it shows that the concrete social classes in a given context can be
reduced to two groups, which are permanently in conflict. They are here called the
"political classes" and "working classes", but they could be named, more aptly, the
dominant classes and the dominated classes, oppressor classes and oppressed classes,
superior classes and inferior classes, privileged classes and dispossessed classes.
The basis of this reduction is not the centrality of these categories in a given
historical moment nor its perspective for future evolution, but the class interests and
the role played by these classes in the process of the class struggle more generally. Such
permanent conflict founded on the structural position of the agents, but potentiated by
their consciousness and their actions, constitutes the Bakuninian concept of class struggle.
The class struggle is characterized, in this more general way, by the contradiction of
these two groups motivated by determined interests that, although they have in the
structural position of the agents a greater influence of determination, they are not
derived mechanically from them and may be influenced by other factors, strengthening or
cooling the process of struggle.
Bureaucracy as a social class
According to Bakunin's thought, the bureaucracy is a social class, which he conceptualizes
and explains how it arises, structures itself and relates to other classes. For the
author, as seen, the political criteria are incorporated into the very definition of
social classes and in his way of achieving social stratification.
As sustained by Gaston Leval, for Bakunin, the political domination of the state implies a
class domination, not only through the direct relation with the dominant classes in
general, but because it has the structural capacity itself to reproduce another dominant
class: the bureaucracy.[9]
The bureaucracy is a social class with a political base consisting of a privileged
minority that has ownership of the means of administration, control and coercion of the
state. It is, as shown by Bakunin, "a body of politicians, privileged in fact, not in
right, which, dedicated exclusively to the conduct of a country's public affairs, ends up
forming a kind of aristocracy or political oligarchy".[10]Their privileges - ownership of
power, the monopoly of political decision-making - are always enjoyed by a minority, since
the majority do not fit in the state; they are important aspects of the bureaucracy and
form the basis of the domination exercised by it.
René Berthier adds, taking Bakunin's analysis of the German bureaucracy as a basis:
"The bureaucracy is in first place an emanation of the state, its social base, the layer
that sustains the illusion of the rationality and necessity of the state. It is what makes
the state a reality, an effective power that gives it content. The bureaucracy embodies
the idea of the state at the same time as it is its apparatus.[...]The bureaucracy ends up
being confused with the state, with its cascading hierarchies constituting what Bakunin
called the ‘priestly body of the state'."[11]
As the modern state emerges and is strengthened, it conforms to the bureaucracy that, even
though coming from different classes, gives meaning and content to the state itself, and
ends up defending the interests of the state itself, establishing its own interests as a
separate class, justified by the need for rational management of policy. Ownership of the
means of administration, control and coercion of the state, beyond the political benefits
relative to power, also imply economic advantages for the members of the bureaucracy,
which can be more or less temporary, constituted through hereditary means, exclusive
recruitment from certain social strata or "democratically" elected from among the population.
Berthier continues, highlighting that "the bureaucracy may tend to be autonomous from the
state, just as the state tends to become autonomous in relation to society".[12]This
tendency to autonomization of the bureaucracy is always forged in a permanent tension with
the dynamics of relations between state and civil society in general, and between the
state and social classes in particular. From a structural perspective, there is a constant
tension, more latent or manifest, between the class origin of the members of the
bureaucracy and the bureaucratic class itself. Their interests, although they do not
originate mechanically from their structural position, are certainly influenced by it and,
in the process, the tension between class origin and bureaucracy shows itself to be
relevant. Independent of this conflict, the bureaucratic class tends to develop its own
interests, even though seeking to reconcile them with others.
In the historical analysis that he performs of the state, Bakunin points out that it is
established as an instrument of class domination and as a result of class conflict. In
this process, it forms a determined modus operandi that implies generalized domination and
with which the bureaucracy is directly linked.[13]
When people begin to administer the state, "the inflexible logic of its condition and
other imperative reasons dictated by certain considerations of hierarchical order and
political interests overlap", since "the demands of a certain situation are always
stronger than feelings, ulterior motives and good intentions". Over time, the state
structure is strengthened and becomes able to give continuity to relations of domination
since they are able, to a large extent, to shape the interests of their members and
conform them in a distinct social class. The structure of the state was created to ensure
class domination and thus remains, independent of the will of the members of the
bureaucracy, regardless of their class origin. "Once integrated into this
class[bureaucratic class]", these agents "become, in one way or another, enemies of the
people".[14]Even if they don't want to, the agents of the bureaucracy are condemned to
promoting domination since they embody an essentially dominating structure.
The bureaucracy has a relatively autonomous existence in relation to the other dominating
classes. The defense of the interests of the dominant classes being the state's reason for
being, as Jean-Cristophe Angaut points out, the operation of the bureaucracy can occur in
different ways, in its relationship with the other dominating classes:
"Firstly, the state defends the interests of one of the three socially dominant classes
(landed nobility, bourgeoisie or clergy) excluding those from the rest of society:
depending on the case, the state will take the form of a feudal monarchy, a censitary
constitutional regime or a theocracy. In the second case, which seems the most common, or
even the most decisive for the formation of the state, the three ruling classes find
themselves united against the people they exploit. Without it being possible to know
whether there is a link with this predominant characteristic of the union of the
privileged against the exploited, Bakunin says, then, that to the triple social
exploitation is added an exploitation by the state itself, an exploitation that it
qualifies politically and that can, at certain times, come into contradiction with the
three other forms of exploitation (feudal, capitalist and religious), the point of the
state, very accidentally, takes up the defense of the exploited. But, again, it is the
union of the interests of the dominant that seems to prevail, such that the specific class
that has given rise to the statist phenomenon does not delay in uniting with the other
three to ensure social exploitation."[15]
Seeking to generalize the historic cases evaluated by Bakunin in his time and establishing
a conceptual standardization in relation to what was discussed, it is possible to say
that, for him, the bureaucracy can relate to the other dominating classes in two ways.
One, less frequent, when it simply defends the interests of one of them, as in the cases
posed and, also, in the case of the bourgeois state. Another, more frequent, when the
bureaucracy is added to them to establish a concerted domination over the oppressed
classes in general and that has not only an economic or political, but social basis,
involving all the types of previously discussed domination.
Another relevant aspect is that the author recognizes that, in its dynamics, it sometimes
occurs that the state defends the interests of the dispossessed in relation to the
privileged: there are periods in which "the government becomes even more hostile to the
privileged classes than to the people". Its "survival instinct" ends up forcing it, in
some cases, to contradict the logic of class domination; even though, "these periods do
not last long, since the government, whatever it is, cannot live without classes and these
without the government."[16]
According to Angaut's explanation, this occurs in some circumstances when the bureaucracy,
causing the state to mediate class conflicts, undermines the interests of the other
dominating classes in the name of the long-term guarantee of the continuity of class
domination. This is not established by an interest of the state in defending the dominated
classes, but by the need to ensure the functioning of the system.[17]For this reason, in
determined situations the state acts against the interests of the dominant classes, be it
against all of these classes, one of them or some of its members in particular.
* Translation: Jonathan Payn
NOTES
1. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1869]. "Aux Compagnons de l'Association Internationale des
Travailleurs du Locle et de la Chaux-de-Fonds. Article 4." In: Oeuvres Complètes, IISH,
Amsterdam, 2000.
2. CORRÊA, Felipe. Teoria Bakuniniana do Estado. São Paulo: Intermezzo/Imaginário, 2014,
pp. 101-110.
3. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1867-1868]. Federalismo, Socialismo e Antiteologismo. São Paulo:
Cortez, 1988, pp. 15-16.["Federalism, Socialism, Anti-Theologism"]
4. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1869]. "Aux Compagnons..." Op. Cit.; BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1873]. Estatismo
e Anarquia. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2003, pp. 79, 30.["Statism and Anarchy"]
5. In this text, domination is a central category that includes, among other
sub-categories, the economic exploitation. (Cf. Errandonea, 1989)
6. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1868]. "La Russie: la question révolutionnaire dans les pays russes et
en Pologne." In: Oeuvres Complètes, IISH, Amsterdam, 2000.
7. Ibid.
8. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1869]. Instrução Integral. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2003, p.
59.["Integral Education"]
9. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1867-1868]. Federalismo, Socialismo... Op. Cit. p. 16.
10. LEVAL, Gaston. "Bakunin e o Estado Marxista". In: Alexandre Skirda et alii. Os
Anarquistas Julgam Marx. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2001.
11. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1871]. Deus e o Estado. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2000, p. 36.["God and
the State"]
12. BERTHIER, René. "Elementos de uma Análise Bakuniniana da Burocracia". In: BERTHIER,
René; VILAIN, Éric. Marxismo e Anarquismo. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2011, p. 72.
13. Ibid.
14. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1871]. "Três Conferências Feitas aos Operários do Vale de
Saint-Imier." In: O Princípio do Estado e Outros Ensaios. São Paulo: Hedra, 2008.
15. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1873]. Estatismo e Anarquia. Op. Cit. p. 77.
16. ANGAUT, Jean-Christophe. Liberté et Histoire chez Michel Bakounine (PHD thesis), 2
vols. Université Nancy 2, 2005, pp. 436-437.
17. BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1867]. "Essência da Religião". In: Essência da Religião / O
Patriotismo. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2009, p. 63.
18. ANGAUT, Jean-Christophe. Liberté et Histoire... Op. Cit., p. 437.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ANGAUT, Jean-Christophe. Liberté et Histoire chez Michel Bakounine (PHD thesis), 2 vols.
Université Nancy 2, 2005.
BAKUNIN, Mikhail[1867-1868]. Federalismo, Socialismo e Antiteologismo. São Paulo: Cortez,
1988.
_________________[1868]. "La Russie: la question révolutionnaire dans les pays russes et
en Pologne." In: Oeuvres Complètes, IISH, Amsterdam, 2000.
_________________[1869]. "Aux Compagnons de l'Association Internationale des Travailleurs
du Locle et de la Chaux-de-Fonds. Article 4." In: Oeuvres Complètes, IISH, Amsterdam, 2000.
_________________[1871]. Deus e o Estado. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2000.
_________________[1873]. Estatismo e Anarquia. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2003.
_________________[1869]. Instrução Integral. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2003.
_________________[1871]. "Três Conferências Feitas aos Operários do Vale de Saint-Imier."
In: O Princípio do Estado e Outros Ensaios. São Paulo: Hedra, 2008.
_________________[1867]. "Essência da Religião". In: Essência da Religião / O Patriotismo.
São Paulo: Imaginário, 2009.
BERTHIER, René. "Elementos de uma Análise Bakuniniana da Burocracia". In: BERTHIER, René;
VILAIN, Éric. Marxismo e Anarquismo. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2011.
CORRÊA, Felipe. Teoria Bakuniniana do Estado. São Paulo: Intermezzo/Imaginário, 2014.
ERRANDONEA, Alfredo. Sociologia de la Dominación. Montevideu/Buenos Aires: Nordan/Tupac, 1989.
LEVAL, Gaston. "Bakunin e o Estado Marxista". In: Alexandre Skirda et alii. Os Anarquistas
Julgam Marx. São Paulo: Imaginário, 2001.
Related Link: http://ithanarquista.wordpress.com
http://www.anarkismo.net/article/29744
------------------------------
Home »
» Anarchistic update news all over the world - 7 November 2016