In 2011, global mass protests emerged, such as Occupy Wall Street movement. This paper considers how we can locate American anti-capitalist movements within the global justice movement. Since the protest against the 1999 WTO Ministerial Conference, the movements against neoliberal globalization have extended with a great variety, involving anarchists/autonomists. The latter's characteristics are symbolized by "Direct Action" or "horizontalism". Contemporary anarchist discourses (David Graeber, Marina Sitrin, and Massimo de Angelis) and Postmodern Marxism (Michael Hardt, Antonio Negri) have diffused, and we can see their influence on the Occupy movements in the United States. But the global justice movement subsumes the other oppositional wings; NGOs, some Marxist trends, popular education movements in Latin America, etc. Above all, according to Graber, "Marxism has tended to be a theoretical or analytical discourse about revolutionary strategy" and "[a] narchism has tended to be an ethical discourse about revolutionary practice". How then can we understand the relation between the anarchist's "ethics" and the contemporary Marxist's "theory"? How can we relate anarchist-autonomist views with logics of Marxists who have participated in the global justice movement, such as David Harvey and Samir Amin? Starting from this problem, we can derive five points to consider. 1. How to understand the "outside" of capital - Anarchists and Postmodern Marxists emphasize the creation of "outside" of capital. They suggest somewhat spontaneous emergence of the "common", the "outside", as a result of historical transition from industrial to biopolitical economy (Hardt and Negri), or as a process of "value struggles" (De Angelis). But Marxists propose the analysis of conditions of that emergence. Besides theorizing about capital accumulation/circulation process, theories of "co-evolutionary process" (Harvey) and "under-determination" (Amin) are attempts to study the non-economic conditions of "outside" creation. 2. Imperialism - Hardt and Negri regard the concept of "imperialism" as outdated, and De Angelis underestimates it. On the contrary, Harvey and Amin defend its contemporary importance. This opposition is based on the different interpretation of capitalist time-space. Marxists in question focus on the geographical agglomerations of capitalist activities, while Postmodern Marxists and anarchists emphasize the flattening "space" of capital. 3. State - Direct Action's discourses include the equation of state with capital. Hardt and Negri also identify the "Empire" with capitalistic domination, although considering the "nation-state" as obsolesced. Amin and Harvey oppose these opinions, because they consider the state as an institutional place/space where the capital accumulation process relates to, and collides against, the "co-evolutionary process" or "under-determination". So the "territorial logic of power" in states can hinder the demands of capitalist power. 4. Structural dilemma in social movement's organization - Occupy Wall Street tried to become a hallmark of participatory and democratic decision-making. This "horizontalism" could get Marxists consent. However, Harvey is cautious about a "fetishism of organizational form". Because we need "general rules" to resolve problems at wider scale, progressive anti-capitalist movements must accept hierarchical structures. 5. Position of intellectuals - Contemporary social movements include self-education processes. This poses the question about the position of intellectuals. Anarchists and autonomists condemn the leadership of intellectuals as a justification of hierarchical

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

抄録全体を表示

This paper discusses how China’s relations with other nations, especially with Soviet Russia had an impact on the Anti-Christian Movement in the year of 1922 in China. The Anti-Christian Movement started with the establishment of the Anti-Christian Student Federation (Fei Chituchiao hsüehsheng t’ungmeng). The main purpose of this federation was to protest against the 11^th conference of the World Student Christian Federation (WSCF) at Tsinghua College in Beijing. Previous studies have revealed that the federation was formed by the Socialist Youth Corp in Shanghai. But the debate still continues at the motivation of the federation to start the Anti-Christian Movement. Its relationship with the Great Federation of Anti-Religionists (Fei tsungchiao ta t’ungmeng), another (anti-Christian) federation that had a nationwide influence, has not been fully figured out yet.

The present study, examining publications such as newspapers of the time and memoirs, clarifies that: 1) anti-capitalism and anti-Christian thought expressed in the Congress of the Toilers of the Far East and the Congress of the Revolutionist Organizations of the Far East were the significant factors which drove the Chinese communists to the Anti-Christian Movement. Considering the fact that the two congresses were held in Soviet Russia against the Washington Conference, the Anti-Christian Movement in 1922, in a sense, was the manifestation of the conflict between Russian Bolshevism and American Protestantism in China; 2) unlike Anti-Christian Student Federation which was founded on socialist ideology in Shanghai, the Great Federation of Anti-Religionists in Beijing was grounded on the Anti-Religion Thought, which emerged during the time of the May Fourth Movement and the New Culture Movement. It was, however, the communists who took a leading role in the formation of both federations. And they listened to the intention of the leading Socialist Youth Corp in Shanghai; 3) one of the significant factors which contributed to the expansion of the Anti-Christian Movement among students and intellectuals throughout China was the Anti-Religion Thought, which was influenced by an enlightenment thought during the New Culture Movement (Renaissance) among Chinese intellectuals. It may be said that the Anti-Christian Movement was an direct extention of the enlightenment movement started by the New Culture Movement. It became increasingly radicalized, however, as communists began to participate in it with political purposes; 4) the radical anti-capitalistic and anti-Christian thought was finally formulated by the resolusion of the 1st Conference of the Social Youth Corp in Guangzhou in May 1922. Then after the First United Front, the radical thought further spread to the Chinese Nationalist Party (the Kuomintang).

抄録全体を表示

On constate bien l'importance du mouvement paysan pendant la Revolution francaise. Mais on n'a pas encore reussi a preciser sa tendance et sa nature a cause de la diversite des opinions. Nous essaierons donc ici de montrer l'image reelle des masses rurales autant que possible, en nous appuyant sur "l'affaire Carion" en Bourgogne, un de ceux qui ont ete appeles "cure rouge". D'apres la documentation archivistique, on peut signaler les problemes suivants: la reglementation generale de la circulation du ble afin d'en assurer; la reparation et l'elargissement des rues par la destruction des haies et des murs, installes par les riches, qui genaient les passages; la location des biens communaux afin de les soustraire a l'usurpation des notables et leur utilisation pour en faire des deniers publics; l'intervention dans les metayages en vue d'ameliorer les conditions des metayers; l'imposition de la corvee dans le but de reparer les rues; l'etablissement des octrois pour faire des deniers publics; et le maintien de l'ordre mais parfois avec violence.Toutes ces actions du cure et des habitants pauvres d'Issy-l'Eveque, que l'on a rencontrees ci-dessus, s'opposaient naturellement la politique de l'Assemblee Nationale Constituante. Car elle pronait la circulation libre du ble, la propriete inviolable et sacree, la liberte contractuelle et l'abolition totale des privileges, soit ceux des ordres, soit ceux des pays ou des villes. Et l'accomplissement de cette politique, en meme temps, risquait de ruiner les corps qui avaient associe les hommes sous la monarchie absolue. Carion et ses partisans, au contraire, n'avaient aucune intention de detruire les corps, autrement dit, la communaute rurale, quoiqu'ils voulussent certaines innovations pour mieux vivre. Et dans ce but meme, ils osaient rendre la reglementation plus rigoureuse a l'interieur de la communaute. Ils essayaient donc de transformer leur corps, au lieu de dissoudre la solidalite sociale prerevolutionnaire. En somme, bien que la revolution fut acceptee, c'est a dire, la modification de la societe, il y avait des differences entre Carion et les habitants d'Issy-l'Eveque d'une part, et les deputes de l'Assemblee de l'autre, sur la mise en pratique de leurs idees revolutionnaires.Ceux-ci, semble-t-il, visaient a faire la "revolution bourgeoise" et ceux-la, a faire la "revolution paysanne". On peut donc affirmer que l'analyse de "l'affaire Carion" met en evidence les nombreuses contradictions nees de deux conceptions opposees de la Revolution.

抄録全体を表示