“Communal luxury: The political imaginary of the Paris Commune” by Kristin Ross is a remarkable work that explores the intellectual and political legacies of the Paris Commune, highlighting its lasting influence on the theorists and revolutionaries who shaped libertarian and socialist thought. Published in 2015 by La Fabrique, this essay analyzes how the Commune reconfigured Karl Marx’s political perspectives and influenced figures such as William Morris, Élisée Reclus, and Pierre Kropotkine, while paving the way for the thought of Murray Bookchin.
The impact of the Commune on Karl Marx’s thought
For Karl Marx, the Paris Commune marked a decisive turning point in his thinking about the state and class struggle. Prior to the Commune, Marx focused primarily on the working class taking power to destroy the bourgeois state. However, the revolution of 1871 prompted Marx to reconsider the form that a post-revolutionary state might take. In “The Imaginary of the Commune”, Kristin Ross reminds us that Marx, inspired by the decentralized and self-managed management of the Commune, saw it as a model of “dictatorship of the proletariat” that would in no way resemble a centralized state, but rather an association of free producers. Kristin Ross writes in this regard: “The Commune forced Marx to reconsider his conception of the state, no longer as a simple instrument, but as a structure to be deconstructed”.
An inspiring praxis for Morris, Reclus, Kropotkin and many others…
Kristin Ross then explores how the Commune provided a source of inspiration and food for thought for figures such as William Morris, Élisée Reclus and Pierre Kropotkine. For Morris, the Commune embodied an ideal of community based on solidarity and autonomy, a model that went beyond simple socialist reforms and tended towards a radical transformation of society. According to Ross, Morris saw in the Commune the possibility of a post-revolutionary culture, where art and daily life would be reconciled in a collective effort.
Élisée Reclus, geographer and anarchist, was deeply marked by the Commune, which he saw as an experiment where the individual and the collective could coexist harmoniously in a non-hierarchical society. Ross refers to his analysis of the Commune as an example of what he would later call “harmony through anarchy”. Reclus considered that the self-management of the neighborhoods and working-class districts of Paris proved the viability of a decentralized organization of cities. He also insisted on the necessary solidarity between cities and the countryside.
Since the Paris Commune, Reclus had been absolutely convinced that by ignoring the countryside, revolutionaries risked playing into the hands of the ruling classes, whose power, as the Commune had shown better than any other event, was based on the hostility they fomented between urban workers and peasants. “This association of land workers is perhaps the greatest development of the century,” wrote Reclus in 1873. And yet, he regretted, there was never a word about the peasantry or the agricultural question in the revolutionary meetings he attended. My brother the peasant intended to fight against the ignorance of the urban revolutionaries, but above all he wanted to combat the fear and hostility of the peasantry, as well as the propaganda that fed them.
Against such a numerous and powerful enemy, there is no other choice than new alliances and a broader federation: “If you do not know how to unite, not only from individual to individual and from commune to commune, but also from country to country, in a great international workers’ movement, you will soon share the fate of millions and millions of men who are already stripped of all rights to sow and reap and who live in wage slavery”. Pursuing his rhetorical strategy of placing the urban worker and the peasant on the same side against those who own the land, Reclus shows how today’s urban worker is nothing more than yesterday’s peasant – the two have become interchangeable. (…)
“Workers, peasants, the same fight”
As for Pierre Kropotkine, he saw in the Commune a prefiguration of the anarchist society he longed for. The destruction of the centralized institutions of the State and the autonomous management of the city of Paris embodied for him a model of mutual aid and community solidarity. Kristin Ross highlights the way in which Kropotkin considered this experience as confirmation of his theories on solidarity and self-sufficiency, quoting in particular an extract in which he refers to the Commune as a “school” for the anarchist communist movement.
Fiercely anti-Malthusian, Reclus and Kropotkin insisted on the scientific data proving that material abundance was possible for all if capitalism were ended. The solidarity of all could be formally affirmed on the basis of statistics and geographical data which showed, in a convincing way according to them, that the resources of the earth were more than enough to feed everyone. “The great factory of the earth”, managed cooperatively, led to a world of equality in abundance, or communal luxury.
The Commune and its influence on Murray Bookchin
Kristin Ross concludes her book by showing how the ideas that emerged from the Commune influenced various contemporary thinkers decades later. Murray Bookchin, with his social ecology and his critique of centralization, found in the Paris Commune a source of inspiration for his project of “libertarian municipalism”, which he would refer to as Communism in the last years of his life. Bookchin saw in the popular assemblies of the Commune an early form of neighborhood or city assemblies, a structure allowing for direct democracy, the decentralization of power and an international confederation of free communes.
Through a historical, political and cultural approach, Ross shows that the imagination of the Paris Commune has served as the basis for a tradition of revolutionary and decentralizing thought which, through Marx, Morris, Reclus, Kropotkin and even Bookchin, has continued to shape the ideals of social emancipation. This book invites readers to rediscover the Commune not only as a historical event, but as a living source of inspiration for contemporary struggles and alternatives – Let’s bring the Commune to life!
Translated by TerKo with the help of a free translation tool.
Rebound: