The SI, especially thesis 91-94 of Debord's <em>Society of the Spectacle</em> http://bopsecrets.org/SI/debord/4.htm
, formulated the clearest <strong>anarchist</strong> critique of anarchism in the 1960s. This critique represents for many anarchists, specifically anarchists who have since declared anarchism to be distinct from the leftist heritage of Communism, Social Democracy, and State Socialism, the beginning of a new era for anarchist thinking and practice.
The inspiration for this thinking can be seen in the critique of work & the left (Black & AJODA), an ongoing dialogue with anarchists and so-called post-situationists since the 1970s, and the cultural influence that the SI had vis-a-vis punk rock and bohemian counter-culture ever since.
Here is a summary of the critique of anarchists in Debord's SoS.
1) Bakunin critiqued Marx for declaring that a stateless society must pass through a "dictatorship of the proletariat" while in practice participating in a conspiratorial group that acted outside, and above, the First International.
This is addressed in modern anarchist practice by a demand for transparency in all aspects of organizational issues and an attempt to have anarchist practice be indistinguishable from anarchist goals.
2) The ideology of pure freedom (Debord's term for anarchist political philosophy), flattens the difficulties of political struggles *in reality* while demanding the all-encompassing goal of the total negation of the current order. Both mystical and doctrinaire, anarchists have remained the soul of struggle and its impossibility.
This critique is ignored or addressed by different anarchist tendencies in different ways. The most clear engagement of this critique can be seen through the lens of Italian anarchist analysis from the 1970s that has resulted in the simple practice of Insurrectionary Anarchism.
3) Consensus and unanimity in anarchist practice (especially in the Spain Revolution) has been a strategic failure. This critique has been contested by anarchist practice and success in non-revolutionary moments like the anti-globalization movement, alcoholics anonymous, and the Occupy movement. The critique of anarchists as "specialists of freedom" still rings true.
4) Anarchists believe that revolution is immanent. It is possible at any time and does not require a particular historical process to unfold. This faith means that there is not anarchist clarity around how to extend partial victories. This critique still holds true and can be seen as recently as the Occupy Movement.
edited to fix link