source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_and_present_anarchist_communities Celtic Ireland (650-1650) In Celtic Irish society, the courts and the law were largely libertarian, and operated within a purely state-less manner. This society persisted in this libertarian path for roughly a thousand years until its brutal conquest by England in the seventeenth century. And, in contrast to many similarly functioning primitive tribes (such as the Ibos in West Africa, and many European tribes), preconquest Ireland was not in any sense a "primitive" society: it was a highly complex society that was, for centuries, the most advanced, most scholarly, and most civilized in all of Western Europe. A leading authority on ancient Irish law wrote, "There was no legislature, no bailiffs, no police, no public enforcement of justice... There was no trace of State-administered justice." All "freemen" who owned land, all professionals, and all craftsmen, were entitled to become members of a tuath. Each tuath's members formed an annual assembly which decided all common policies, declared war or peace on other tuatha, and elected or deposed their "kings." In contrast to primitive tribes, no one was stuck or bound to a given tuath, either because of kinship or of geographical location. Individual members were free to, and often did, secede from a tuath and join a competing tuath. Professor Peden states, "the tuath is thus a body of persons voluntarily united for socially beneficial purposes and the sum total of the landed properties of its members constituted its territorial dimension." The "king" had no political power; he could not decree or administer justice or declare war. Basically he was a priest and militia leader, and presided over the tuath assemblies. Celtic Ireland survived many invasions, but was finally vanquished by Oliver Cromwell's brutal reconquest in 1649-50.
Icelandic Commonwealth (930 to 1262) Main article: Icelandic Commonwealth Anarcho-capitalists cite this as an example of society where police and justice were guaranteed through a free market. They also cite the law merchant, international trade law, some traditional justice systems (as in Somalia) and other historical examples of order happening outside of government (and sometimes against government). Most anarchists reject the claim that there is anarchism in Somalia, given that there exist proclaimed states who are governed by local war-lords. Further many anarchists contend that anarcho-capitalist communities are not truly anarchistic in nature, and that the "anarcho-" part of the name is a misnomer.
Rhode Island (1636-1648) Religious dissenter Roger Williams, after being run out of theocratic puritan Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636, founded Providence, Rhode Island. Unlike the brutal Puritans, he scrupulously purchased land from local indians for his settlement. In political beliefs, Williams was close to the Levellers of England. He describes Rhode Island local "government" as follows: "The masters of families have ordinarily met once a fortnight and consulted about our common peace, watch and plenty; and mutual consent have finished all matters of speed and pace." While Roger Williams was not explicitly anarchist, another Rhode Islander was: Anne Hutchinson. Anne and her followers emigrated to Rhode Island in 1638. They bought Aquidneck Island from the Indians, and founded the town of Pocasset (now Portsmouth.) Another "Rogue Island" libertarian was Samuell Gorton. He and his followers were accused of being an "anarchists." Governor Winthrop of Massachusetts Bay called Gorton a "man not fit to live upon the face of the earth," Gorton and his followers were forced in late 1642 to found an entirely new settlement of their own: Shawomet (later Warwick). In the words of Gorton, for over five years the settlement "lived peaceably together, desiring and endeavoring to do wrong to no man, neither English nor Indian, ending all our differences in a neighborly and loving way of arbitration, mutually chosen amongst us." In 1648, Warwick joined with the other three towns of Rhode Island to form the colony of the "Providence Plantation." From that time on Rhode Island had a government; this government, however, was far more democratic and libertarian than existed elsewhere in the American colonies. In a letter to Sir Henry Vane penned in the mid-1650s, Williams wrote, "we have not known what an excise means; we have almost forgotten what tithes are, yea, or taxes either, to church or commonwealth."
Albemarle (1640s-1663) The coastal area north of Albemarle Sound in what is now northeastern North Carolina had a quasi-anarchistic society in the mid-17th century. Officially a part of the Virginia colony, in fact it was independent. It was a haven for political and religious refugees, such as Quakers and dissident Presbyterians. The libertarian society ended in 1663, when the King of England granted Carolina to eight feudal proprietors backed by military. [edit] Holy Experiment (Quaker) Pennsylvania (1681-1690) When William Penn left his Quaker colony in Pennsylvania, the people stopped paying quitrent, and any semblance of formal government evaporated. The Quakers treated Indians with respect, bought land from them voluntarily, and had even representation of Indians and Whites on juries. According to Voltaire, the Shackamaxon treaty was "the only treaty between Indians and Christians that was never sworn to and that was never broken." The Quakers refused to provide any assistance to New England's Indian wars. Penn's attempt to impose government by appointing John Blackwell, a non-Quaker military man, as governor failed miserably.
Libertatia (1670s to 1690s) Libertatia is a legendary free colony, forged by pirates and the pirate Captain Misson, although some historians have expressed doubts over it's existence outside of literature. In the book "Pirates", Marcus Rediker describes the pirates. These pirates who settled in Libertalia would be "vigilant Guardians of the People's Rights and Liberties"; they would stand as "Barriers against the Rich and Powerful" of their day. By waging war on behalf of "the Oppressed" against the "Oppressors," they would see that "Justice was equally distributed." [Rediker, Marcus] The pirates were against the various forms of authoritarian social constructs of their day, monarchies, slavery, and capitalism, (or capital in it's early forms of development). The pirates practiced forms of direct democracy, where the people as a whole held the authority to make laws and rules, and used systems of councils with delegates, who were supposed to think of themselves as "comerads" of the general population, and not rulers. The pirates were also anti-capitalist, as David Cordingly explains. [The] pirates were anti-capitalist, opposed to the dispossession that necessarily accompanied the historic ascent of wage labor and capitalism. They insisted that "every Man was born free, and had as much Right to what would support him, as to the Air he respired." They resented the "encroachments" by which "Villains" and "unmerciful Creditors" grew "immensely rich" as others became "wretchedly miserable." They spoke of the "Natural right" to "a Share of the Earth as is necessary for our Support." They saw piracy as a war of self-preservation. [They redefined the] fundamental relations of property and power. They had no need for money "where every Thing was in common, and no Hedge bounded any particular Man's Property," and they decreed that "the Treasure and Cattle they were Masters of should be equally divided." [Rediker, Marcus] Misson's crews often were half white and black, as the pirates were have been reported to free enslaved people, as the idea of slavery went against their own ideals of freedom. Although the existence of Libertatia is still contested, the radical ideas that it represented were very common in various pirate era events. After the American revolution, pirates fleeing from England crashed on an island and set up their own Libertatia. They called their new island "the Republic of Spensonia", and according to A.L. Morton, it "looks backward to the medieval commune and forward to the withering away of the state."
Utopia (1847 to 1860s) Utopia was an individualist anarchist colony begun in 1847, by Josiah Warren and associates, in the United States on a tract of land approximately 30 miles from Cincinnati, Ohio. Personal invitation from the first settlers was required for admission to the community, with Warren reasoning that the most valuable individual liberty was "the liberty to choose our associates at all times." Land was not owned communally, but individually, with lots being bought and sold at cost, as required by contractual arrangement. The economy of the community was a system based upon private property and a market economy where labor was the basis of exchange value (see Mutualism (economic theory)). Goods and services were traded by the medium of "labor notes." By the mid-1850's, the community eventually came to contain approximately 40 buildings --about half of which were of an industrial nature. Also present were two "time stores" (see Cincinnati Time Store). The impact of the Civil War, the rising prices of surrounding land that made expansion difficult, and the requirement of being invited by the original settlers are said to have led to the eventual dissolution of the project. However, as late as 1875 a few of the original occupants were still there and some business in the area was still being conducted by labor notes. [edit] Modern Times (1851 to late 1860s) Modern Times was an individualist anarchist colony begun on March 21, 1851 on 750 acres (3 km²) of land on Long Island, New York, Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews. By contract, all land was bought and sold at cost, with three acres being the maximum allowable lot size. The community was said to be based in the idea of "individual sovereignty" and "individual responsibility." There was an understanding that there was to be no initiation of coercion, leaving all individuals to pursue their self-interest as they saw fit. All products of labor were considered private property. The community had a local private currency based upon labor exchange in order to trade goods and services (see Mutualism). All land was private property, with the exception of alleys which were initially considered common property but later converted to private property. No system of authority existed in the colony. There were no courts, no jails, and no police; yet, there are no reports of any problem with crime existing there. This appears to have given some credence to Warren's theories that the most significant cause of violence in society was most attributable to policies and law which did not allow complete individuality in person and property. However, the modest population of the colony might be considered a factor in this characteristic. The civil war, as well as infiltration into the community by those that did not share the same libertarian and economic philosophy is said to have contributed to its eventual dissolution. The location is now known as Brentwood, New York. Almost all of the buildings that existed in Modern Times have been destroyed.
Whiteway Colony (1898 to present) Whiteway Colony in the Cotswolds near Stroud, Gloucestershire was set up in 1898 and still exists today. Though it no longer has an explicitly anarchist outlook, it still retains a flavor of its roots and many of its residents are both aware, and proud of its origins. Today the traces of its anarchist roots can be seen in the communal facilities such as the playing field, hall and swimming pool built and used by residents, and in the way the governance of the community is still carried by general meeting of all residents. [edit] Spanish revolution (1936 to 1939) Main article: Spanish Revolution (see also Anarchism in Spain) In 1936, against the background of the fight against fascism, there was a profound libertarian socialist revolution throughout Spain. Much of Spain's economy was put under direct worker control; in anarchist strongholds like Catalonia, the figure was as high as 75%, but lower in areas with heavy Socialist influence. Factories were run through worker committees, agrarian areas became collectivized and run as libertarian communes. Even places like hotels, barber shops, and restaurants were collectivized and managed by their workers. George Orwell describes a scene in Aragon during this time period, in his book, Homage to Catalonia: I had dropped more or less by chance into the only community of any size in Western Europe where political consciousness and disbelief in capitalism were more normal than their opposites. Up here in Aragon one was among tens of thousands of people, mainly though not entirely of working-class origin, all living at the same level and mingling on terms of equality. In theory it was perfect equality, and even in practice it was not far from it. There is a sense in which it would be true to say that one was experiencing a foretaste of Socialism, by which I mean that the prevailing mental atmosphere was that of Socialism. Many of the normal motives of civilized life – snobbishness, money-grubbing, fear of the boss, etc. – had simply ceased to exist. The ordinary class-division of society had disappeared to an extent that is almost unthinkable in the money-tainted air of England; there was no one there except the peasants and ourselves, and no one owned anyone else as his master. The communes were run according to the basic principle of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," without any Marxist dogma attached. In some places, money was entirely eliminated. Despite the critics clamoring for maximum efficiency, anarchic communes often produced more than before the collectivization. The newly liberated zones worked on entirely egalitarian principles; decisions were made through councils of ordinary citizens without any sort of bureaucracy. It is generally held that the CNT-FAI leadership was at this time not nearly as radical as the rank and file members responsible for these sweeping changes. In addition to the economic revolution, there was a spirit of cultural revolution. Oppressive traditions were done away with. For instance, women were allowed to have abortions, and the idea of free love became popular. In many ways, this spirit of cultural liberation was similar to that of the "New Left" movements of the 1960s. However, some express disapproval at the methods of the anarchists, claiming that they executed those who disagreed with them. Burnett Bolloten, in The Spanish Civil War, claims that "Thousands of members of the clergy and religious orders as well as of the properties classes were killed, but others, fearing arrest of execution, fled abroard, including many prominent liberal and moderate Republicans." Bryan Caplan says that ""many discussions of the Spanish Civil War overlook, minimize, or apologize for the atrocious behavior and tyrannical aspirations" of the Spanish anarchist movement.
Ukraine and the Makhnovist movement (1918 to 1921) In March 1918 Russia (led by the Bolsheviks) signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk to pull Russia out of the First World War. The Treaty gave most of the Ukraine to the German and Austro-Hungarian empires. This was done without consulting the inhabitants. Various insurgence groups arose, including the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of the Ukraine, led by the anarcho-communist Nestor Makhno. They won popular support due to their attacks on the Austro-Hungarian puppet-leader Hetman Skoropadsky and the Nationalist Petliurists. Although the movement was forced to spend great energy and resources on fighting off the invaders, they still managed to carry out a social revolution according to the principles of Anarchism. It seemed as though a giant grate composed of bayonets shuttled back and forth across the region, from North to South and back again, wiping out all traces of creative social construction. [Arshinov] The Makhnovists aimed for a true social revolution in which the working classes (both urban and rural) could actively manage their own affairs and society. As such, their social programme reflected the fact that oppression has its roots in both political and economic power and so aimed at eliminating both the state and private property. At the core of their social ideas was the simple principle of working-class autonomy, the idea that the liberation of working-class people must be the task of the working-class people themselves. This vision is at the heart of anarchism and was expressed most elegantly by Makhno: Conquer or die -- such is the dilemma that faces the Ukrainian peasants and workers at this historic moment . . . But we will not conquer in order to repeat the errors of the past years, the error of putting our fate into the hands of new masters; we will conquer in order to take our destinies into our own hands, to conduct our lives according to our own will and our own conception of the truth. [quoted by Peter Arshinov, The History of the Makhnovist Movement, p. 58]. Around Gulyai-Polye (Nestor Makhno’s birthplace) several communes sprang up. Several regional congresses of peasants and workers were organized. A general statute supporting the creation of 'free soviets' (elected councils of workers', soldiers' and peasants' delegates) was passed, though little could be done towards its implementation in much of the Ukraine because of the constantly changing battlefront. The Makhnovist movement consisted almost entirely of poor peasants and in contradiction to the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks the Makhnovists were very popular. Wherever they came, they were enthusiastically greeted by the population, who provided food, lodging and information on the enemy. The Bolsheviks and Whites relied on terror, imprisoning and killing thousands of peasants. It is rare for a group of anarchists to be named after an individual. This occurred because the movement, although inspired by Anarchism, contained few people who had solidly defined their anarchist views. The movement encouraged learning and political discussion, but most combatants and supporters still called themselves Makhnovists and the name stuck. The Makhnovist movement was quite a threat to the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks clung to the idea that the “masses” were unable to carry out a social revolution on their own and perform self-management. This was proven wrong by the Makhnovist movement, prompting Bolshevik attacks. Even in the military area it seemed that the anarchist answer was superior. The Makhnovists defeated on several occasions armies up to 30 times their size, and had great morale. The army was organized according to three main principles: Voluntary enlistment meant that the army was composed only of revolutionary fighters who entered it of their own free will. The electoral principle meant that the commanders of all units of the army, including the staff, as well as all the men who held other positions in the army, were either elected or accepted by the insurgents of the unit in question or by the whole army. Self-discipline meant that all the rules of discipline were drawn up by commissions of insurgents, then approved by general assemblies of the various units; once approved, they were rigorously observed on the individual responsibility of each insurgent and each commander." Sources: http://www.nestormakhno.info/ http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/platform/makhno37.htm
Tolstoyan Agricultural Communes (1921-1937) Following the anarchistic teachings of Leo Tolstoy, many peasant communes were formed voluntarily after the October Revolution based on his values of labor and non-violence. Repressed heavily by the Soviets, the history of many of these communes is lost. One of the largest was the Life and Labor Commune which at its peak had almost a thousand members. [edit] The autonomous Shinmin region (1929-1931) The apex of Korean anarchism came in late 1929 outside the actual borders of the country, in Manchuria. Over two million Korean immigrants lived within Manchuria at the time when the Korean Anarchist Communist Federation (KACF) declared the Shinmin province autonomous and under the administration of the Korean People’s Association. The decentralized, federative structure the association adopted consisted of village councils, district councils and area councils, all of which operated in a cooperative manner to deal with agriculture, education, finance and other vital issues. KACF sections in China, Korea, Japan and elsewhere devoted all their energies towards the success of the Shinmin Rebellion, most of them actually relocating there. Dealing simultaneously with Stalinist Russia’s attempts to overthrow the Shinmin autonomous region and Japan’s imperialist attempts to claim the region for itself, the Korean anarchists had been crushed by 1931. Source: http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/talks/korea.html [edit] Israeli Kibbutz Movement The Kibbutz movement was an outgrowth out of socialist strands of the Zionist Movement, many of which stressed Arab-Jewish cooperation. The movement revolved around anarchist principles of non-hierarchy, self-management of production, and direct democracy. The early kibbutz collectives could be seen to be following the doctrine of, "...from each according to ability, to each according to need". New people joining the collective farms, however, were expected to give up most of their assets to the greater whole. "... a voluntary collective community, mainly agricultural, in which there is no private wealth and which is responsible for all the needs of its members and their families." (Encyclopedia Judaica, 1969) "...an organization for settlement which maintains a collective society of members organized on the basis of general ownership of possessions. Its aims are self-labor, equality and cooperation in all areas of production, consumption and education." (Legal definition in the Cooperative Societies Register) The early kibbutzim were examples of a closely-knit egalitarian community, based on common ownership of the means of production and consumption, where all, conferring together, made decisions by majority vote and bore responsibility for all. Decisions were generally made during general assembly dinners, and direct democracy was used to come to consensus. In discussions, which often continued late into the night, members would decide how to allocate the following day's work, guard duties, kitchen chores and other tasks, as well as debate problems and make decisions. Beyond farm land and dining halls, many centers included offices, sports areas, libraries, and entertainment areas. When kibbutzim were smaller, social and cultural life was characterized by togetherness and being "one big family". This found expression in the high involvement of members in planning, organizing and carrying out activities, which ranged from campfires and nature walks to choirs and folk dancing. Each kibbutz appointed a cultural director to plan and coordinate events. After the creation of the state of Israel, the kibbutz movement began to become much more hierarchical and wage-labor based. Ideas of egalitarianism still existed, but became seen as not as important. To this date however, hundreds of thousands of people have existed and worked in worker-self-managed kibbutz farms.
You forgot "Christiania" in Denmark. My personal favorite! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freetown_Christiania And where is Catalonia during the Spanish Revolution?
