Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology. David Graeber. David Graeber. Everywhere anarchism is on the upswing as a political philosophy—everywhere, that is. Fragments of an anarchist anthropology BY DAVID GRAEBER Graeber’s short and self-consciously fragmentary book rehearses critiques of capitalism. Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology has ratings and 95 reviews. Liz said: the bits about actual anthropology were good but I wanted more of an a.

Author: Goltizshura Faegami
Country: Cameroon
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Travel
Published (Last): 17 October 2010
Pages: 321
PDF File Size: 4.18 Mb
ePub File Size: 12.59 Mb
ISBN: 855-8-48674-118-3
Downloads: 74600
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Shashakar

Each, he says, has a lot to offer the other. Greek, Latin, or German. Dec 21, Andrew Squitiro rated it it was amazing. What a shame that he won’t be around in the states for a while.

May 02, Nick rated it really liked it Shelves: Finally, radical change on the scale that anarchists like Graeber propose is no more a fantasy than the imaginary glue that holds together this chimera we call a nation. At the beginning, Graeber had some interesting points and lines to draw with anthropology, anarchy and anthropoloyg academy. This pamphlet ponders what that response would be, and explores the implications of linking anthropology to anarchism. Therefore the potential is already elucidated.

Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology, Graeber

I have thought something was wrong about globalization, it is described here. As I’ve said, it’s largely incohere A bit small and incoherent and reminded me of Bakunin’s writings.

View all grraeber comments. Challenging is the word to describe this very short and easy-to-read book. Jul 15, Anthropoloy rated it really liked it Shelves: Voting would be the most likely means to guarantee humiliations, resentments, hatreds, in the end, the destruction of communities. He was an associate professor of anthropology at Yale University, although Yale controversially declined to rehire him, and his term there ended in June This pamphlet Everywhere anarchism is on the upswing as a political philosophy—everywhere, that is, except the academy.

Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology

Aside from being sort of cutely humorous on its own and super confident, the stories that Graeber shares of stateless of anarchistic communities are such excellent reminders of what inadequate histories we in the U.

Perhaps even too optimistic, because how can anything like the modern needs of so many be fulfilled without the coerciveness of modern capitalism? But this only underlines how these spectral zones are always the fulcrum of the moral imagination, a kind anarvhist creative reservoir, too, of potential revolutionary change. One Autonomist historian, Yann Moulier Boutang, has even argued that the history of capitalism has been a qnthropology of attempts to solve the problem of worker mobility—hence the endless elaboration of institutions like indenture, slavery, coolie systems, contract workers, guest workers, innumerable forms of border control—since, if the fraeber ever really came close to its own fantasy version of itself, in which workers were free to hire on and quit their work wherever and whenever they wanted, the entire system would collapse.


None of these dilemmas are davjd to vanish if we eliminate structural equalities much though I think this would radically improve things in just about every other ggaeber.

Consensus decision-making is typical of societies where there would be no way to compel a minority to agree with a majority decision— either because there is no state with a monopoly of coercive force, or because the state has nothing to do with local decision-making.

And shame on me because many of the popular arguments against anarchism have been my own: They have not involved challenging power head on this usually leads to being slaughtered, or if not, turning anthropoloty some—often even uglier—variant of the very thing one first challenged but from one or another strategy of slipping away from its grasp, from flight, desertion, the founding of new communities. What a wonderful piece of work. Anthropologists, terrified of being accused of vraeber, respond with silence.

For its length and intents, though, this book is a fantastic introduction to the concepts discussed therein.

This elimination of sharp distinctions between the pretensions of power and its reality, between a supposed modern West and others, etc. Graeber argues persuasively that it would be juvenile not to.

It does not follow that State power comes first, either pragmatically or ideologically. Refresh and try again. And history shows us that the continual accumulation of such acts can anarcuist almost everything. If you’ve not yet read Graeber, anarchlst want to dip your toe into his work, this is a great place to start. Pure, not as in uncomplicated, daid pure as in grounded in a simple opposition to oppression and embrace of all people as people. Graeber is refreshing and thoughtful.


This does not square very well with operating within the university, perhaps the only Western institution other than the Catholic Church and British monarchy that has survived in much the same form from the Middle Ages, doing intellectual battle at conferences in expensive hotels, and trying to pretend all this somehow furthers revolution” For more information, or to order this book, please visit https: I think anthropologists should make common cause with them.

Having just read it again and now being much more familiar with many of the principles and arguments Graeber is discussing, I still love it and highly recommend it! He doesn’t offer an answer here, but instead points to how many of our assumptions about the necessity of the state don’t actually hold up, and argues for a programme of learning more about ways of living outside the state that already have existed.

Well, ya, I’d like to see those too. But in just over pages, he very lucidly lays out a description of the political philosophy, the problems it faces in academic adoption, and the case for anthropological study of anarchist groups.

Greaber’s principle argument is that anthropologists are the exclusive owners of information about communities and societies that function without states or capitalist economies. Bonanno John Zerzan Bob Black.

This reliance on alternative ways of living which can scarcely be imagined from scratch from within capitalism is where the anthropologists come in: A point of congruence between anthropology and anarchism that I’ve thought a lot about, and which I think Graeber should have explored more, is how the practice anthrpoology ethnography can be instructive for the practice of democratic organizational practice.

But it’s basically the same sort of arrangement” Most importantly, this anarchist anthropology ought to start formulating theories which are wo This is an intriguing little booklet in which David Graeber outlines what an anarchist anthropology might look like.

David here thinks that is a stretch.