《无政府主义：初学者指南》Anarchism: A beginner's guide 翻译2

作者：Ruth Kinna

译者：A书翻译平台

索引: Kinna, R. (2005). Anarchism: a beginner's guide. One word Publications. Chapter 1, 6-10.

Anarchy: Origins of the word

无政府：词汇的起源

Anarchism is an unusual ideology because its adopted tag has peculiarly negative connotations. Most ideological labels embrace positively valued ideas or ideals: liberalism is the ideology of liberty or freedom, socialism is associated with notions of sociability or fellowship, and conservatism with the conservation of established or customary ways of life. Even fascism has a positive derivation – from fascio, a reference to the symbol of Roman authority. In contrast, anarchism is the ideology of anarchy – a term that has been understood in both the history of ideas and in popular culture to imply the breakdown of order, if not violent disorder. Even after the mid-nineteenth century when the label was first adopted as an affirmation of belief, anarchy was used in political debate to ridicule or denounce ideas perceived to be injurious or dangerous. For example, in a seventeenth-century defense of absolute monarchy, Sir Robert Filmer treated calls for limited monarchy as calls for anarchy. In general usage the term is commonly used to describe fear and dread. The ‘great Anarch!’ in Alexander Pope’s The Dying Christian to his Soul is the ‘dread empire, Chaos!’ that brings ‘universal darkness’ to bury all. The eighteenth-century philosopher Edmund Burke considered anarchy as the likely outcome of the brewing American conflict and identified freedom as its cure. From his rather different political perspective, the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley drew on ‘anarchy’ to describe the violent duplicity of government, yet like Burke he still conceived the term in a wholly negative sense to describe disorder and injustice. Writing in the nineteenth century, the social critic John Ruskin aptly captured the common view: ‘government and co-operation are in all things the laws of life; anarchy and competition the laws of death’. This conception was the very reverse of Proudhon’s.

无政府主义是一种与众不同的意识形态，因为它被贴上了具有特殊负面内涵的标签。多数意识形态的标签都包含积极的观念或者理想：自由主义是代表自由的意识形态，社会主义和社会连结与团结一致的概念有关，而保守主义则代表对既有或传统生活方式的保卫。就连法西斯主义都有积极意义上的来源：法西斯束棒（Fascio）代表着罗马的权威。然而，无政府主义是代表无政府（Anarchy）的意识形态，这个词无论在历史上还是大众文化中都暗示着秩序崩坏，甚至代表着混乱的暴力冲突。尽管在十九世纪中叶这个标签开始被用以指一种政治信仰，在政治辩论中这个词还是通常被用来讥讽那些被人认为是危险或者有害的观点。例如，在十七世纪，罗伯特·菲尔默（Sir Robert Filmer）在为绝对君主制辩护时，将呼吁权力受限的君主制（Calls for limited monarchy）视作呼吁无政府（Calls for anarchy）。而通常来说，这个词被广泛用以描述惧怕与恐怖。在亚历山大·蒲柏（Alexander Pope）的诗歌《垂死基督徒之魂》（The Dying Christian to His Soul）中，“伟大的无政府”（great Anarchy!）是“恐怖的帝国，混乱！”（dread empire, Chaos!），带来了埋葬一切的“无所不及的黑暗”（universal darkness）。十八世纪的哲学家埃德蒙·伯克（Edmund Burke）认为当时愈演愈烈的北美殖民地冲突很可能会导致无政府状态，而自由才是解决这一问题的良药。诗人珀西·比希·雪莱（Percy Bysshe Shelley）用“无政府（Anarchy）”来描述政府那暴厉恣睢无耻欺诈的行径，虽然他和伯克一样，仍将这个词当作一个代表无序和不公的完全否定词。十九世纪的社会批评家约翰·罗斯金（John Ruskin）对这种观点有一个恰如其分的表述：“政府与合作无论何时何地都是生命的法则；无政府和竞争则是死亡的法则”。而这种想法则恰恰与蒲鲁东相反。

The anarchist idea of anarchy has its roots in a critique of revolutionary government advanced in the course of the French Revolution. In 1792, a group of revolutionaries known as the enragés (the fanatics), because of the zeal with which they entered into their campaigns, demanded that the Jacobin government introduce draconian measures to protect the artisans of Paris from profiteers. Banded around Jacques Roux, an ex-cleric, and Jean Varlet, a man of independent means, the group did not call themselves anarchists. Yet their programme (a call to the people to take direct action against profiteers and the demand that the government provide work and bread), was labelled anarchist by their Jacobin opponents.2 During their battle with the Jacobins, moreover, Varlet and Roux rejected the idea of revolutionary government as a contradiction in terms, importantly associating anarchism with the rejection of revolution by decree. As the revolution ran its course the revolutionary government continued to apply the term ‘anarchist’ as a term of political abuse and to discredit those political programmes of which it disapproved. Nevertheless, the idea that anarchy could be used in a positive sense and that anarchism described a political programme was now firmly established. The first four editions of the Dictionary of the French Academy (1694–1762) deified anarchy as an unruly condition, without leadership or any sort of government. The exemplification was taken from classical philosophy: ‘democracy can easily degenerate into anarchy’. In the fifth edition (1798) the definition of anarchy remained the same, but it was supplemented for the first time with an entry for ‘anarchist’ that distinguished ‘a supporter of anarchy’ from ‘a trouble-maker’. It was now possible to speak of ‘anarchist principles’ and an ‘anarchist system’.3

无政府主义者对于“无政府”这个词的理解可以追溯到法国大革命时期对于革命政府的批判。当时有一群革命者被称为“忿激派”（enragés），因为这些人在革命中表现得极为狂热。他们在1792年要求雅各宾派政府采取严厉的措施保护巴黎手工业者免遭投机奸商侵害。他们团结在前教士雅克·鲁（Jacques Roux）和食利者简·瓦雷特（Jean Varlet）周围，并不自称为无政府主义者。但是，他们的主张（呼吁人们采取直接行动对抗趁火打劫的奸商，要求政府提供面包与工作）却被雅各宾派的对手们贴上了无政府主义者的标签。在与雅各宾派的斗争中，瓦雷特和鲁进一步反对“革命政府”的概念，认为这是一个自相矛盾的说法，从而将无政府主义和反对发号施令的革命联系在一起。随着革命的进行，革命政府继续将“无政府主义”一词作为政治侮辱用词，用来污名化那些他们不赞成的政治主张。但是此时，无政府（Anarchy）一词尚未被广泛地用以在积极意义上指代无政府主义的政治主张。《法兰西学术院字典》（Dictionary of the French Academy）的前四版（1694-1762）中都将无政府（Anarchy）定义为没有任何领导或者任何形式的政府的无法无天的状态。其中的举例取自古典哲学：“民主很容易退化为无政府状态”。在第五版（1798）中，无政府状态的定义没有变化，但第一次补充了“无政府主义者”（Anarchist）一词，将“支持无政府的人”和“破坏分子”区分开来。直到此时，才第一次有了“无政府主义原则”和“无政府主义体系”的概念。

The revolutionary movement created by the enragés left its legacy in the history of ideas. Less than 100 years after the outbreak of revolution, the association between anarchy and the idea of popular revolution inspired the French writer Pierre-Joseph Proudhon to label himself an anarchist. In his first book, What Is Property?(1840, where he famously coined the phrase ‘property is theft’) he appropriated the term anarchy to define his egalitarian and libertarian ideal. Proudhon introduced the term in the following dialogue:

What is to be the form of government in the future? I hear some of my younger readers reply: ‘Why, how can you ask such a question? You are a republican!’ ‘A republican! Yes; but that word specifies nothing. Res publica; that is, the public thing. Now, whoever is interested in public affairs – no matter under what form of government – may call himself a republican. Even kings are republicans.’ – ‘Well! You are a democrat?’ – ‘No.’ – ‘What! you would have a monarchy?’ – ‘God forbid!’ – ‘You are then an aristocrat?’ – ‘Not at all.’ – ‘You want a mixed government?’ – ‘Still less.’ – ‘What are you, then?’ – ‘I am an anarchist.’ ‘Oh! I understand you; you speak satirically. This is a hit at the government.’ – ‘By no means. I have just given you my serious and well considered profession of faith. Although a firm friend of order, I am (in the full force of the term) an anarchist. ...’4

As George Woodcock noted, Proudhon delighted in paradox and fully appreciated the ambiguity of the term ‘anarchy’ when he adopted it to describe his politics. Tracing the origin of the word to the ancient Greek (anarkhos) he argued that anarchy meant ‘without government’, or the government of no one. Far from implying social ruin, it suggested progress and harmonious co-operation. Anarchy was the natural counterpart to equality: it promised an end to social division and civil strife. In the nineteenth century some anarchists inserted a hyphen between the ‘an’ and ‘archy’, in an effort to emphasize its derivation from antiquity, whilst also drawing implicit comparison with the better-known alternatives, monarchy (the government of one), and oligarchy (the government of the few). By hyphenating the word in this manner they hoped to challenge their detractors whilst encouraging the oppressed to re-examine their ideas about the nature of political organization and the assumptions on which these ideas were based.

忿激派所掀起的革命运动在思想史上留下了重要的遗产。革命爆发后不到百年，无政府主义与人民革命的联系就激发了法国作家皮埃尔-约瑟夫·蒲鲁东给自己贴上了无政府主义者的标签。在他的第一部著作《什么是所有权？》(What is property?)（著于1840年，在这部著作中他提出了著名的“所有权就是盗窃”）中，蒲鲁东将“无政府”(Anarchy)这一术语用以定义他的平等主义和自由主义理想。他用下文的对话形式引述道：

未来的政府是什么形式的呢？我听到一些年轻的读者说：“什么？你怎么提这种问题？你是个共和派！”
“‘共和派’！是的，我是个共和派，但这个词毫无意义。‘共和’（Res Publica），意思就是公共的东西（the public thing）。那任何关心公共事务的人，无论他生活在什么政府形式下，都可以自称为共和派。就连国王们都是共和派。”
“好吧，那你是民主派？”
“不是。”
“什么！难道你想要君主制？”
“那可千万别。”
“那你就是个贵族制支持者了？”
“我可一点不支持。”
“你想要混合制的政府？”
“也不对。”
“那你到底是什么”
“我是个无政府主义者。”
“啊！我明白你什么意思。你在故意夸张讽刺地讥讽政府。”
“绝无此意，我刚刚对你说的是我无比严肃，经过深思熟虑的信仰。虽然我坚定地站在秩序的一边，但我是一个彻彻底底的无政府主义者…”

正如乔治·伍德科克所说，蒲鲁东醉心于这种悖论，他用无政府（Anarchy）这个词的描述自己的政治观点时，特别看重了这个词的模糊性。正如他说，这个词的起源可以追溯到古希腊语（anarkhos），意即“没有政府”，或无人的政府。这非但不代表社会毁灭，反而意味着进步与和谐的合作。无政府状态是平等的自然对应物：它代表着社会分裂与内乱的结束。在十九世纪，一些无政府主义者在“无”（An）与政府（Archy）之间插入了一个连字符（An-archy）来强调这个词悠久的历史起源，同时暗示了这个词和更加知名的几个概念，君主制（Monarchy，一人的政府）以及寡头制（Oligarchy，少数人的政府）之间的比较性。这些无政府主义者希望用这种方式把这个词连起来，以还击诋毁他们的对手，并且激励被压迫者，让他们能够刷新对政治组织本质的观点，并重估构成之前旧观点的那些基本预设。

Some anarchists have shared Proudhon’s delight in the paradox of ‘anarchy’ and played up the positive aspect of chaos associated with the term. The Russian anarchist Michael Bakunin famously described the disordered order of anarchy in the revolutionary principle: ‘the passion for destruction is a creative passion, too’.5 Another nineteenth-century Russian, Peter Kropotkin, followed suit. Order, he argued, was ‘servitude ... the shackling of thought, the brutalizing of the human race, maintained by the sword and the whip.’ Disorder was ‘the uprising of the people against this ignoble order, breaking its fetters, destroying the barriers, and marching towards a better future.’ Of course anarchy spelt disorder for it promised ‘the blossoming of the most beautiful passions and the greatest of devotion’: it was ‘the epic of supreme human love’.6 Other anarchists have been less comfortable with the connotations of ‘anarchy’. Indeed, much anarchist literature suggests that the ambiguity of ‘anarchy’ has forced anarchists onto the defensive. As many anarchists have pointed out, the problem of Proudhon’s paradox is not only the confusion to which it lends itself, but its broadness: disorder can imply anything from disorganization to barbarism and violence. One of the most persistent features of introductions to anarchism is the author’s concern to demythologize this idea. Examples from three different authors are reproduced below. The first is taken from Alexander Berkman’s ABC of Anarchism:

... before I tell you what anarchism is, I want to tell you what it is not. That is necessary because so much falsehood has been spread about anarchism. Even intelligent persons often have entirely wrong notions about it. Some people talk about anarchism without knowing a thing about it. And some lie about anarchism, because they don’t want you to know the truth about it. ...
Therefore I must tell you, first of all, what anarchism is not.
It is not bombs, disorder, or chaos.
It is not robbery and murder.
It is not a war of each against all.
It is not a return to barbarism or to the wild state of man.
Anarchism is the very opposite of all that.7

一些无政府主义者同样也有蒲鲁东这种对“无政府”悖论的独特欣赏，强调这个术语所蕴含的“混乱”(chaos)含义中积极的一面。俄国无政府主义者米哈伊尔·巴枯宁（Michael Bakunin）对革命原则中的“无政府的无秩序之秩序”（disordered order of anarchy）有一个著名的论述：“毁灭的激情同样也是创造的激情”。另一个十九世纪的俄国无政府主义者，彼得·克鲁泡特金（Peter Kropotkin）,也持有同样的观点。他认为，秩序（Order）是“奴役…禁锢思想，灭绝人性，是靠剑和鞭子维持的”。而无序（Disorder）则是“人民揭竿而起反抗卑鄙的秩序，打破束缚，摧毁障碍，迈向更美好的未来”。无政府主义当然意味着无序，因为无序预示着“最美好的激情和最伟大的奉献一并绽放”，它是“人类至爱的史诗”。其他一些无政府主义者对“无政府”（anarchy）的含义不太满意。许多无政府主义者的文献表明，无政府一词的歧义使得无政府主义者陷入被动的地位。许多无政府主义者指出，蒲鲁东悖论的问题不仅仅在于它本身带来的混乱，也在其宽泛性：无序可以意味着包括从单纯无组织到野蛮破坏的所有东西。在对无政府主义的介绍中，作者们最常关注的问题之一就是去除无政府主义思想的神话色彩。首先，正如亚历山大·伯克曼在（Alexander Berkman）《无政府主义ABC》（ABC of Anarchism）中所说：

在我告诉你们什么是无政府主义之前，我想先告诉你们什么不是无政府主义。我非常有必要说明这一点，因为关于无政府主义的谣言已经泛滥成灾了，就连有识之士也常常对其有非常错误的认识。很多人对无政府主义一无所知却对其侃侃而谈，还有很多人谈起来谎话连篇，因为他们不想让你知道关于无政府主义的真相…
因此我必须首先告诉你们，什么不是无政府主义。
无政府主义不是炸弹，不是无序，也不是混乱。
它不是抢劫和谋杀，
不是一场人人杀的你死我活的战争。
它不是回到野蛮蒙昧，也不是回到茹毛饮血的原始状态。
无政府主义恰恰是这一切的对立面。

The second comes from the Cardiff-based Anarchist Media Group:

There is probably more rubbish talked about anarchism than any other political idea. Actually it has nothing to do with a belief in chaos, death and destruction. Anarchists do not normally carry bombs, nor do they ascribe any virtue to beating up old ladies ...... There is nothing complicated or threatening about anarchism ...8

第二个例子来自卡迪夫当地的无政府主义者媒体社群：

关于无政府主义的废话可能比其他任何政治观点都要多。事实上，无政府主义和信仰混乱，死亡和毁灭毫无关系。无政府主义者一般不会身藏炸弹，他们也不认为殴打老太太是什么高尚的事…无政府主义没有多么复杂，也并不恐怖…

Finally, Donald Rooum offers this in his introduction to anarchism: Besides being used in the sense implied by its Greek origin, the word ‘anarchy’ is also used to mean unsettled government, disorderly government, or government by marauding gangs ... Both the proper and improper meanings of the term ‘anarchy’ are now current, and this causes confusion. A person who hears government by marauding gangs described as ‘anarchy’ on television news, and then hears an anarchist advocating ‘anarchy’, is liable to conclude that anarchists want government by marauding gangs.

Of course, anarchists have moved beyond these disclaimers to advance fairly detailed conceptions of anarchy and to highlight the success that anarchy has enjoyed, albeit on a temporary and proscribed scale. Yet anarchy remains a problematic concept because, unlike liberty for example, it so readily lends itself to the evocation of an unattractive condition. And whilst anarchists are happy to discuss the possibility of moving beyond existing forms of state organization they have been wary of employing ‘anarchy’ as an explanatory concept, preferring to define anarchism in other ways. The remainder of what is anarchism? the chapter examines three alternative approaches to anarchism: the first looks at key personalities, the second at schools of thought and the third at history.

最后，唐纳德·鲁姆（Donald Rouum）在他对无政府主义的介绍中这样说道：除了在希腊语中隐含的意义外，“无政府”还用于表示动荡不安的政府，混乱无序的政府或者由肆意抄掠的匪帮统治的政府。“无政府”的正确和错误的含义在今天混淆使用，造成了不小的麻烦。一个人听到电视新闻把一个匪帮统治下的政府称为“无政府”，然后又听到一个无政府主义者支持“无政府”，那他很容易得出结论，即无政府主义者是在支持一个匪帮统治的政府。

诚然，无政府主义者们并没有局限于自我辩解，而是进一步改良和充实无政府主义的概念，突出无政府主义取得的成功（尽管这些成功通常都遭到禁止，难以长久）。但是，无政府仍然是一个有问题的概念。因为，不同于例如自由这样的概念，无政府太容易让人们联想起某种消极的状况。虽然无政府主义者乐于讨论超越当下国家组织形式的种种可能，他们一直警惕将“无政府”作为一种解释性概念，而宁愿用其他方式解释无政府主义。《什么是无政府主义？》接下来的章节将从三个方面讲解无政府主义：第一方面将介绍重要的无政府主义者，第二方面将介绍无政府主义的思想流派，第三方面则研究无政府主义的历史。