Calendar

Lecture Summary

With the Spanish Civil War being the last episode of classic anarchism, the revival of this doctrine that began in the 1950s has marked a new era in defining what anarchism is. These changes can be linked to the shift from the old social movements to the new social movements interpretation that became more broadly used in the 1970s and 1980s. The experiments with returning to the anarchist doctrine by countercultural social movements in the 50s, 60s, and in the 70s have extracted a very important issue of what anarchism is; its critical potential.

Development of anarchist doctrine embedded in and used by social movements overlapped with philosophical discussions about power and its relations to subjects and societies. Anarchism and it’s critical potential have less focused on society as a mass, but more on the individual level, generating a plethora of various anarchisms like for instant queer anarchism, eco-anarchism and other forms focused on individualism. The writings of Michel Foucault, and in particular his concept of bio power, have had a significant impact on contemporary anarchist doctrine.

By referring to the sociological concept of framing, developed from the writings of Erving Goffman I would like to point out to the three main elements that are the diagnostic element, the prognostic element, and the mobilizing element. In the context of anarchist doctrine, those three elements have not developed in an equal pace with the diagnosis of societal problems being the most developed and most widely spread part of contemporary energies doctrine, however with the other two elements of framing there are still some developments observed.

Leaflet to download