K. H. Z. SOLNEMAN (Kurt H. Zube, 1905-1991)
This book won the First Alternative Peace Prize at the Alternative
Book Fair in Frankfurt/M., West Germany, in 1977. This work begins
with a clarification of much used — and mis-used — concepts such as:
Above all, THE MANIFESTO offers an alternative way of thinking,
which is necessary if we are to avoid catastrophe. Laying the basis for
new social relationships upon general agreement instead of ideology,
it presents the reader with an inevitable choice:
Either the law of the sword and aggressive force or non-domination and equal freedom!
. . .
"If we want to discuss any important and interesting topic for an hour,
then we ought first to spend four hours reaching agreement on the terms to be used.
Otherwise we will talk past each other."
(Prof. Carl Ludwig Schleich)
This is not a subjective, but an objective and quite exactly definable concept when we are dealing with freedom in a social context. Either my freedom is greater than that of another person, by occurring at his or their expense (in which case they are not free) or it is less than that of another person or group, at my expense (in which case I am not free). In either case there is no state of freedom. Freedom can, therefore, mean nothing other than equal freedom (not equality!) for all — which is essentially identical with non-domination.
is a state of unequal freedom. Here the freedom of some is greater than the freedom of others and occurs at their expense and against their will. Thus a condition of unequal freedom which exists with the consent of the disadvantaged is not domination.
is the physical or mental coercion exercised in an aggressive way, e.g. by injuring the equal freedom sphere of others. Defence against such aggression, including physical means, should thus not be considered as force.
This comprises all concepts and doctrines which go beyond the realm of sensibly and logically graspable experienced reality and which, therefore, cannot be proven either true or false. Here one may leave open the question as to whether these concepts and doctrines expressing a subjective reality of experience and transcendent reality also represent an actual reality, perhaps even the true reality, or whether they are merely vacuous games of thought. When something cannot be proven with the standards of experienced reality then one can just as easily assert its opposite.
are statements which — like metaphysical statements — are, in essence or subject, beyond empirical proof or refutation because they contain at least some elements which go beyond experienced reality.
is an ideology which submits the interests of individuals to the pretended interest of a majority, or of the abstractions "people" or "state." It is a system of domination which, to be sure, lets the representatives of the new gods "people," "state," and "humanity" be elected by individuals, but expressly exempts them from any contractual obligation towards their voters. Democracy pre-supposes and aims at a state of unequal freedom.
is a state of non-domination. Since there has never been such a state in a consistent form, the assertion that it would be identical with disorder, or even with chaos, does not express an experienced fact but amounts only to polemics and demagogy on the part of those who proclaim domination a necessity.
is a concept distorted by arbitrary mis-interpretations. Real anarchism sees in freedom not the daughter but the mother of order. It is not an ideology but begins with provable facts which lead to an unavoidable conclusion. (Kant: "Anarchism is freedom without violence.")