Autonomous social center

Autonomous social centers are self-organized community centers in which anti-authoritarians put on voluntary activities. These self-managed spaces, often in multi-purpose venues affiliated with anarchism, can include bicycle workshops, infoshops, libraries, free schools, free shops, meeting spaces and concert venues. They often become political actors in their own right.

The centers are found worldwide, for example in Italy, the United States and the United Kingdom. They are inspired by various left-wing movements including anarchism and intentional communities. They are squatted, rented, or owned cooperatively.

Uses[edit]

Autonomous social centers vary in size and function depending on local context.[1] Uses might include an infoshop, a radical bookshop, a resource centre offering advice, a hacklab, a café, a bar, an affordable gig space, independent cinema or a housing co-operative.[2] As well as providing a space for activities, these social centers can become protest actors in local issues such as gentrification or megaprojects.[3][4] Alongside protest camps, social centers are projects in which the commons are created and practiced.[5]

History[edit]

Western anarchists have long created enclaves in which they could live their societal principles of non-authoritarianism, mutual aid, gifting, and conviviality in microcosm.[6] Some of these community sites include Wobbly union halls (1910s, 1920s), Barcelonan community centers during the Spanish Revolution, and squatted community centers since the 1960s. They share a lineage with the radical intentional communities that have periodically surfaced throughout history[7] and are sometimes termed Temporary Autonomous Zones[6] or "free spaces", in which a counter-hegemonic resistance can form arguments and tactics.[8] Anarchists outside the class-struggle and workplace activism tradition instead organize through autonomous spaces including social centers, squats, camps, and mobilizations.[9] While these alternative, autonomous institutions tend to exist in transience, their proponents argue that their ideas are consistent between incarnations and that temporary institutions prevents government forces from easily clamping down on their activities.[10]

A free, or autonomous, space is defined as a place independent from dominant institutions and ideologies, formed outside standard economic relations, and fostering self-directing freedom through self-reliance. These nonhierarchical rules encourage experimental approaches to organization, power-sharing, social interaction, personal development, and finance.[11] Social centers can be squatted, rented, or owned cooperatively. They are largely self-maintained by volunteers and often close for reasons of burnout and reduced participation, especially if participant free time wanes as their economic circumstances change.[12]

Italy[edit]

Askatasuna social centre in Turin, 2016

Since the 1980s,[13] young Italians maintained self-managed social centers (centri sociali) where they gathered to work on cultural projects, listen to music, discuss politics, and share basic living information.[14] By 2001, there were about 150 social centers, set up in abandoned, squatted buildings, such as former schools and factories.[15] These centers operate outside state and free market control,[15] and have an oppositional relationship with the police, often portrayed by conservative media as magnets for crime and illicit behavior. The Italian cultural centers were sometimes funded by city cultural programming.[14]

United States[edit]

In the United States, autonomous social spaces primarily take the form of infoshops and radical bookstores, such as Bluestockings in New York City and Red Emma's in Baltimore.[12] Since the 1990s, North American anarchists have created community centers, infoshops, and free spaces to foster alternative cultures, economies, media, and schools as a counterculture with a do-it-yourself ethic. These social spaces, as distinguished from regional intentional communities of the midcentury, often seek to integrate their community with the existing urban neighborhood instead of wholly "dropping out" of society to rural communes.[7]

United Kingdom[edit]

The rise of social centres in the United Kingdom as cultural activity and political organizing hubs has been a major feature of the region's radical and anarchist politics.[16] For example, the 1 in 12 Club in Bradford provides a café, a children's play area, a bar, an infoshop, large meeting areas and concert spaces.[17]

Infoshops[edit]

Street view of an infoshop in Barcelona

Infoshops are multi-functional spaces that disseminate alternative media and provide a forum for alternative cultural, economic, political, and social activities.[18] Individual infoshops vary in features but can include a small library or reading room and serve as a distribution center for both free and priced/retail alternative media,[19] particularly media with revolutionary anarchist politics.[20] While infoshops can serve as a kind of community library, they are designed to meet the information needs of its users rather than to compete with the public library or per-existing information centers.[21] For alternative publishers and activist groups, infoshops can offer low-cost reprographic services for do-it-yourself publications, and provide a postal mail delivery address for those who cannot afford a post office box or receive mail at a squatted address. In the 1990s, available tools ranged from no-frills photocopiers to desktop publishing software. Besides these print publication functions, infoshops can also host meetings, discussions, concerts, or exhibitions.[19] For instance, as activist video grew in the 1990s, infoshops screened films and hosted discussion groups that, in turn, encouraged debate and collective action.[18] The infoshop attempts to offer a space where individuals can publish without the restrictions of the mainstream press[8] and discuss alternative ideas unimpeded by homophobia, racism, and sexism.[22]

Organized by political activists, infoshops are often independent, precariously self-funded, and unaffiliated with any organization or council. They too are often staffed by their own self-selected users as volunteers[21] and like the anarchist media they distribute, operate on inexpensive, borrowed, or donated resources, such as secondhand computers and furniture.[23] As a result, infoshops and other marginal institutions are often short-lived, with minimal income to pay their short-term leases on rented storefronts.[24] Infoshops sometimes combine the function of other alternative venues: vegetarian cafés, independent record stores, head shops, and alternative bookstores.[19] But foremost, infoshops disseminate information, serving as library, archive, distributor, retailer,[20] and hub of an informal and ephemeral network of alternative organizations and activists.[25]

A panoramic view of the interior of the Lucy Parsons Center in Boston, United States.

Free schools[edit]

Anarchists, in pursuit of freedom from dogma, believe that individuals must not be socialized into acceptance of authority or dogma as part of their education.[26] In contrast to traditional schools, anarchist free schools are autonomous, nonhierarchical spaces intended for educational exchange and skillsharing.[27] They do not have admittance criteria or subordinate relations between teacher and student. Free schools follow a loosely structured program that seeks to defy dominant institutions and ideologies under a nonhierarchical division of power and prefigure a more equitable world. Classes are run by volunteers and held in autonomous social centers, community centers, parks, and other public places.[28]

Free schools follow in the anarchist education lineage from Spanish anarchist Francisco Ferrer's Escuela Moderna and resulting modern school movement in the early 1900s, through the predominantly American free school movement of the 1960s.[29] The American anarchist Paul Goodman, who was prominent in this latter movement, advocated for small schools for children to be held in storefronts and to use the city as its classroom.[30]

In one example, a free school in Toronto grew from the closure of a countercultural community café with the opening of an anarchist free space. It sought to share ideas about how to create anti-authoritarian social relations through a series of classes. All were invited to propose and attend classes, whose topics included: 1920s love songs, alternative economics, street art, and violence against women, though the longest running classes introduced anarchism and related politics of syndicalism and libertarian socialism. The course instructors served as facilitators, providing texts and encouraging participation, rather than as top-down lecturers. The free space also hosted art events, parties, and conversational forums. Other initiatives were short-lived or nonstarters, such as an anemic lending library and free used goods table.[31] Another free school in Nottingham found skillshare-oriented classes with more traditional pedagogy more popular than sessions on radical education.[32]

Similar to free schools, free university projects are run from college campuses most prominently in Europe. Organized by volunteer student collectives, participants in these initiatives experiment with the process of learning and are not designed to replace the traditional university.[33]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Lacey 2005, p. 292.
  2. ^ Trapese Collective 2007, p. 218.
  3. ^ Piazza 2016, p. 499.
  4. ^ Casaglia 2016, p. 489.
  5. ^ Pusey 2010, p. 184.
  6. ^ a b Shantz 2012, p. 124.
  7. ^ a b Shantz 2012, p. 125.
  8. ^ a b Atton 2003, p. 57.
  9. ^ Franks & Kinna 2014, ¶14.
  10. ^ Atton 2010, p. 49.
  11. ^ Atton 2003, p. 59.
  12. ^ a b Noterman & Pusey 2012, p. 194.
  13. ^ Atton 2010, p. 53.
  14. ^ a b Downing 2000, pp. 293–294.
  15. ^ a b Klein 2001.
  16. ^ Franks & Kinna 2014, ¶34.
  17. ^ Lacey 2005, p. 297.
  18. ^ a b Atton 2010, pp. 47–48.
  19. ^ a b c Atton 2010, p. 47.
  20. ^ a b Atton 2003, p. 58, 63.
  21. ^ a b Atton 1999, p. 24.
  22. ^ Atton 2003, p. 63.
  23. ^ Atton 2003, p. 62.
  24. ^ Atton 2010, pp. 48–49.
  25. ^ Atton 2010, p. 48.
  26. ^ Shantz 2012, p. 126.
  27. ^ Noterman & Pusey 2012, p. 182.
  28. ^ Noterman & Pusey 2012, pp. 182–183.
  29. ^ Shantz 2012, p. 127.
  30. ^ Shantz 2012, pp. 127–128.
  31. ^ Shantz 2012, pp. 128–130.
  32. ^ Noterman & Pusey 2012, p. 184.
  33. ^ Noterman & Pusey 2012, pp. 184–185.

Bibliography[edit]

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]