What do you think?
Rate this book
Fields, Factories, and Workshops
Armed with a mass of figures, Kropotkin puts forward the evidence for communities and countries being self-sufficient in food and manufacturing, rather than the richer people and countries paying the poorer people and countries to do their work for them. Rather than forcing many of us to live our lives working meaningless jobs, this combination of evenly-distributed manual work with brain work would allow us all to live fuller, richer lives.
284 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1899
56 people are currently reading
1296 people want to read
About the author
Pyotr Kropotkin
299 books938 followersPyotr Alexeyevich Kropotkin (Пётр Алексеевич Кропоткин, other spelling: Pëtr Kropotkin, Pierre Kropotkine), who described him as "a man with a soul of that beautiful white Christ which seems coming out of Russia." He wrote many books, pamphlets and articles, the most prominent being The Conquest of Bread and Fields, Factories and Workshops, and his principal scientific offering, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. He was also a contributor to the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
Read
November 12, 2011(Notes on the edition available online at: http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_... )
It is extraordinary how prescient Kropotkin is on modern post-industrial issues. Perhaps I am reading into his work too much, but it seems that he has was 100 years ahead of the general population both in diagnosing the failures and the possible "fixes" for our current economic and societal discontents.
Chapter 2 predicts the flight of manufacturing to where workers are least expensive. "Industries of all kinds decentralise and are scattered all over the globe; and everywhere a variety, an integrated variety, of trades grows, instead of specialisation. " "The Chinese slumber still; but I am firmly persuaded from what I saw of China that the moment they will begin to manufacture with the aid of European machinery--and the first steps have already been made--they will do it with more success, and necessarily on a far greater scale, than even the Japanese."
Later chapters discuss a sort of prototype permaculture and urban-market gardening, and even discuss innoculating the soil with beneficial bacteria and microrhize.
He then goes on in the line more recently expounded in Matthew Crawford's"Shop Class as Soulcraft" and the "Maker"-movement:
"None but he who knows the machine-not in its drawings and models only, but in its breathing and throbbings-who unconsciously thinks of it while standing by it, can really improve it. "
"We maintain that in the interests of both science and industry, as well as of society as a whole, every human being, without distinction of birth, ought to receive such an education as would enable him, or her, to combine a thorough knowledge of science with a thorough knowledge of handicraft. We fully recognise the necessity of specialisation of knowledge, but we maintain that specialisation must follow general education, and that general education must be given in science and handicraft alike. To the division of society into brain workers and manual workers we oppose the combination of both kinds of activities; and instead of "technical education," which means the maintenance of the present division between brain work and manual work, we advocate the education integrale, or complete education, which means the disappearance of that pernicious distinction."
Even the idea of crowd sourcing scientific discovery (discussed in the recent book by Michael Nielsen, "Reinventing Discovery") is within his scope: "Darwin spent almost thirty years in gathering and analysing facts for the elaboration of the theory of the origin of species. Had he lived in such a society as we suppose he simply would have made an appeal to volunteers for facts and partial exploration, and thousands of explorers would have answered his appeal. Scores of societies would have come to life to debate and to solve each of the partial problems involved in the theory, and in ten years the theory would have been verified; all those factors of evolution which only now begin to receive due attention would have appeared in their full light. The rate of scientific progress would have been tenfold; and if the individual would not have the same claims on posterity's gratitude as he has now, the unknown mass would have done the work with more speed and with more prospect for ulterior advance than the individual could do in his lifetime. "
In the end, Kropotkin's solution looks a lot like:
* Local manufacturing (for more, read http://www.mutualist.org/id116.html)
* Unplugging from capitalism (http://howtolivewiki.com/en/The_Unplu... )
* Intensive local agriculture done intelligently and cleverly by all (with elements of community gardening and community-supported agriculture)
* Post-growth/steady-state/"plenitude" economics (http://www.newdream.org/)
It is extraordinary how prescient Kropotkin is on modern post-industrial issues. Perhaps I am reading into his work too much, but it seems that he has was 100 years ahead of the general population both in diagnosing the failures and the possible "fixes" for our current economic and societal discontents.
Chapter 2 predicts the flight of manufacturing to where workers are least expensive. "Industries of all kinds decentralise and are scattered all over the globe; and everywhere a variety, an integrated variety, of trades grows, instead of specialisation. " "The Chinese slumber still; but I am firmly persuaded from what I saw of China that the moment they will begin to manufacture with the aid of European machinery--and the first steps have already been made--they will do it with more success, and necessarily on a far greater scale, than even the Japanese."
Later chapters discuss a sort of prototype permaculture and urban-market gardening, and even discuss innoculating the soil with beneficial bacteria and microrhize.
He then goes on in the line more recently expounded in Matthew Crawford's"Shop Class as Soulcraft" and the "Maker"-movement:
"None but he who knows the machine-not in its drawings and models only, but in its breathing and throbbings-who unconsciously thinks of it while standing by it, can really improve it. "
"We maintain that in the interests of both science and industry, as well as of society as a whole, every human being, without distinction of birth, ought to receive such an education as would enable him, or her, to combine a thorough knowledge of science with a thorough knowledge of handicraft. We fully recognise the necessity of specialisation of knowledge, but we maintain that specialisation must follow general education, and that general education must be given in science and handicraft alike. To the division of society into brain workers and manual workers we oppose the combination of both kinds of activities; and instead of "technical education," which means the maintenance of the present division between brain work and manual work, we advocate the education integrale, or complete education, which means the disappearance of that pernicious distinction."
Even the idea of crowd sourcing scientific discovery (discussed in the recent book by Michael Nielsen, "Reinventing Discovery") is within his scope: "Darwin spent almost thirty years in gathering and analysing facts for the elaboration of the theory of the origin of species. Had he lived in such a society as we suppose he simply would have made an appeal to volunteers for facts and partial exploration, and thousands of explorers would have answered his appeal. Scores of societies would have come to life to debate and to solve each of the partial problems involved in the theory, and in ten years the theory would have been verified; all those factors of evolution which only now begin to receive due attention would have appeared in their full light. The rate of scientific progress would have been tenfold; and if the individual would not have the same claims on posterity's gratitude as he has now, the unknown mass would have done the work with more speed and with more prospect for ulterior advance than the individual could do in his lifetime. "
In the end, Kropotkin's solution looks a lot like:
* Local manufacturing (for more, read http://www.mutualist.org/id116.html)
* Unplugging from capitalism (http://howtolivewiki.com/en/The_Unplu... )
* Intensive local agriculture done intelligently and cleverly by all (with elements of community gardening and community-supported agriculture)
* Post-growth/steady-state/"plenitude" economics (http://www.newdream.org/)
July 17, 2012
Have a prized copy of this from 1913!
February 12, 2021
The front end is loaded with now outdated statistics and observance about agriculture and production, but lays ground for the arguments made in the later chapters. Kropotkin diligently explains the irrationality of capitalist production, and how it could be much better utilised if it was instead focused around meeting community and human needs instead of producing profit for property owners.
The chapter on brain work and manual work is still *very* relevant today, as it makes a compelling case for breaking down the divisions of labour and giving children more practical and well rounded education (whilst still allowing people to pursue their own particular interests). The parts highlighting children viewing abstract geometry as a torture imposed on children by teachers, most of whom forget it two years after having to learn it through repetition rings true still.
While there are gaps and outdated statistics and areas where understanding can be expanded from today's point of view, it is still an important work in Kropotkin's contribution to anarchist theory as a way of imagining societies that are not based on class divisions and which can be fulfilling to our needs as human beings.
The chapter on brain work and manual work is still *very* relevant today, as it makes a compelling case for breaking down the divisions of labour and giving children more practical and well rounded education (whilst still allowing people to pursue their own particular interests). The parts highlighting children viewing abstract geometry as a torture imposed on children by teachers, most of whom forget it two years after having to learn it through repetition rings true still.
While there are gaps and outdated statistics and areas where understanding can be expanded from today's point of view, it is still an important work in Kropotkin's contribution to anarchist theory as a way of imagining societies that are not based on class divisions and which can be fulfilling to our needs as human beings.
April 14, 2021
Cette lecture est la suite logique de la conquête du pain, qui apportais la prémisse et la vision de la méthodologie à suivre , et qui est mit en œuvre dans le présent ouvrage. À travers une analyse contextuelle exhaustive de la production industrielle et agricole de l’Europe du 19ieme siècle, kropotkine met en œuvre cette méthodologie. Mécanisation , technologie et collectivisation de la production pour le secteur agricole. Multiplications des petites et moyennes industries et atelier autogéré par les ouvriers pour produire les besoins matériels de base de chaque commune. Totale plaidoirie pour une souveraineté alimentaire et matérielle des peuples , par le peuple pour le peuple. Mais le plus important , une proposition de refonte complète du système d’éducation , qui ne divise plus la population en une classe ouvrière déconnecté du travail et de la connaissance intellectuel mais bien une union complète des 2 , à travers l’art et l’émancipation de l’individu humain complet. Seul bémol : la sacralisations de l’industrialisation et de la technologie à travers le paradigme de la domination de la nature , qui n’a plus sa place en 2021 par rapport à son empreinte écologique , sa destruction de l’environnement et sa vision anthropocentrique. J’ai adorer.
May 21, 2023
Unless you are researching Kropotkin do not read this book. Read the Conquest of Bread or Mutual Aid instead. Otherwise you’re just wasting your time. If you still want to read it, read the last chapter.
The book is dated, the view of the world is dated, but provides for an interesting history of agriculture and industry at the turn of 19th and 20th century in Europe.
Apart from that, nothing much… the thesis of combining “brain work and manual work” is lost and overshadowed by chapters upon chapters of statistics.
Also the ideas Kropotkin is advocating, well, ever heard of climate change? He obviously didn’t.
The book is dated, the view of the world is dated, but provides for an interesting history of agriculture and industry at the turn of 19th and 20th century in Europe.
Apart from that, nothing much… the thesis of combining “brain work and manual work” is lost and overshadowed by chapters upon chapters of statistics.
Also the ideas Kropotkin is advocating, well, ever heard of climate change? He obviously didn’t.
September 29, 2010
Peter Kropotkin was of royal blood in 19th century Russia. Oddly enough, despite that, he was, ideologically, an anarchist. He wrote scientific works, such as Mutual Aid. He also wrote works trying to demonstrate how anarchism could work in practice. This is one such work. As an example, he shows how agriculture might be made more productive in England, Scotland, and elsewhere by adopting anarchist organizational principles. Will readers accept his perspective? Most probably will not, but his arguments are provocative. Similar arguments are raised with respect to manufacturing and so on.
If one wants to get a sense of Kropotkin's effort to be "relevant" in the late 19th and early 20th century, this would be a useful work to explore. . . .
If one wants to get a sense of Kropotkin's effort to be "relevant" in the late 19th and early 20th century, this would be a useful work to explore. . . .
February 12, 2025
Honestly, this is terrifyingly brilliant and terrifyingly apt well over a century since it was for written (and nearly a century since it was substantially revised).
You will need to have an interest in the minutiae of agricultural and industrial production in the 1910s across the globe, though focused in Western Europe and the US, to enjoy the early chapters of the book. Luckily for me, I’m a social historian so I found it genuinely fascinating, but I can imagine the more average reader potentially being a bit bored to tears by them.
The good news is that all of that can be meaningfully skipped over by the modern reader, should you not be interested in it - it largely exists to prove the author’s credentials as an economist and that his theories for a rational anarchist society are based on hard and detailed economic knowledge rather than vague idealism, as that is always the charge thrown at those who dare to propose visionary ideas for societal and economic reform.
Krotopkin speaks of a society where production and consumption are highly decentralised, though knowledge exchange, education, luxury goods and technical expertise remain international, and become freer than they were then and are now. His analysis of the destructive effects across all human endeavour of capitalism and the worship of capital is sharp, incisive, rational and unequivocal, though his small foray in the conclusion into picturing the spiritual effect of a world where one could be free of the choice between exploitation and exploiting is genuinely gut-punching to read. He did not picture the climate crisis; he hoped we would destroy capital long before the dominion of oil, but his concentration on the importance of preserving soil fertility and scientific sustainability feels terrifyingly prescient.
Where he falls down is his unexamined colonialist bias; his frequent references to “civilised nations” and several reference to Africans as “savages” are painfully grating. Bizarrely, he also makes approving references to education within the Black community in the US and actively refers at several points to economic colonialism being intensely oppressive. He was writing in an *intensely* colonialist period and to me this reads as clumsy attempts to *begin* to reach towards anti-colonialism while utterly failing to examine the bias his life and education was steeped in. He is better on misogyny; despite writing about people as a whole with a somewhat patriarchal bent, he is scrupulous in noting the presence and capacities of women and girls in work and education.
You will need to have an interest in the minutiae of agricultural and industrial production in the 1910s across the globe, though focused in Western Europe and the US, to enjoy the early chapters of the book. Luckily for me, I’m a social historian so I found it genuinely fascinating, but I can imagine the more average reader potentially being a bit bored to tears by them.
The good news is that all of that can be meaningfully skipped over by the modern reader, should you not be interested in it - it largely exists to prove the author’s credentials as an economist and that his theories for a rational anarchist society are based on hard and detailed economic knowledge rather than vague idealism, as that is always the charge thrown at those who dare to propose visionary ideas for societal and economic reform.
Krotopkin speaks of a society where production and consumption are highly decentralised, though knowledge exchange, education, luxury goods and technical expertise remain international, and become freer than they were then and are now. His analysis of the destructive effects across all human endeavour of capitalism and the worship of capital is sharp, incisive, rational and unequivocal, though his small foray in the conclusion into picturing the spiritual effect of a world where one could be free of the choice between exploitation and exploiting is genuinely gut-punching to read. He did not picture the climate crisis; he hoped we would destroy capital long before the dominion of oil, but his concentration on the importance of preserving soil fertility and scientific sustainability feels terrifyingly prescient.
Where he falls down is his unexamined colonialist bias; his frequent references to “civilised nations” and several reference to Africans as “savages” are painfully grating. Bizarrely, he also makes approving references to education within the Black community in the US and actively refers at several points to economic colonialism being intensely oppressive. He was writing in an *intensely* colonialist period and to me this reads as clumsy attempts to *begin* to reach towards anti-colonialism while utterly failing to examine the bias his life and education was steeped in. He is better on misogyny; despite writing about people as a whole with a somewhat patriarchal bent, he is scrupulous in noting the presence and capacities of women and girls in work and education.
January 25, 2021
Equal parts inspiration and plea, Kropotkin offers a vision of a decentralised and distributive means of production, and shows (through many pages which are ultimately skippable, as they're inevitably now outdated) how this can be achieved, particularly in the matter of providing food and meals from local, home, and small-scale but intensive gardening and farming - well over a century ago.
That post-scarcity was achievable then is an idea which will have many people frowning and scratching their heads - how is that possible, when there were so many famines throughout the 20th Century, and even now, we're told that their simply "isn't enough to go around"?
The answers, touched on in this book are simple - artificially *created* scarcity, and centralised "gigantism" in areas such as (but not limited to) agriculture, which hold resources out of reach of people who can make them productive (the basis upon which capitalism is built).
This book, written from an anarchist perspective, offers a glimmer of hope, and a vision of a way out of this state of affairs.
Moving on from food production, the book also talks about neighbourhood workshops, enabled by electricity, and how this development could (and should have, alas) re-shape towns into their own productive centres, leaving factories only for the huge projects that genuinely need that scale of building and machinery (ships, for example). He envisioned a world where "division of labour" would be much less prominent, with the average "worker" splitting their time between manual-work and mind-work; not only would this be greatly more efficient, but greatly more satisfying to the individual; further, that worker would own much more of their own work, since the means to produce would be much more readily available to them.
This world, this vision, is still within reach. In fact - it is even more within reach than it was when Kropotkin wrote this, due to the advance of technologies in the 20th and 21st Century.
It merely needs enough people to let go of their old ways of thinking, and embrace some new ones.
It's a big challenge, but the reward is that everyone has enough - that we finally realise the vision of "enough to go around". I'm not sure what goal could be worthier.
That post-scarcity was achievable then is an idea which will have many people frowning and scratching their heads - how is that possible, when there were so many famines throughout the 20th Century, and even now, we're told that their simply "isn't enough to go around"?
The answers, touched on in this book are simple - artificially *created* scarcity, and centralised "gigantism" in areas such as (but not limited to) agriculture, which hold resources out of reach of people who can make them productive (the basis upon which capitalism is built).
This book, written from an anarchist perspective, offers a glimmer of hope, and a vision of a way out of this state of affairs.
Moving on from food production, the book also talks about neighbourhood workshops, enabled by electricity, and how this development could (and should have, alas) re-shape towns into their own productive centres, leaving factories only for the huge projects that genuinely need that scale of building and machinery (ships, for example). He envisioned a world where "division of labour" would be much less prominent, with the average "worker" splitting their time between manual-work and mind-work; not only would this be greatly more efficient, but greatly more satisfying to the individual; further, that worker would own much more of their own work, since the means to produce would be much more readily available to them.
This world, this vision, is still within reach. In fact - it is even more within reach than it was when Kropotkin wrote this, due to the advance of technologies in the 20th and 21st Century.
It merely needs enough people to let go of their old ways of thinking, and embrace some new ones.
It's a big challenge, but the reward is that everyone has enough - that we finally realise the vision of "enough to go around". I'm not sure what goal could be worthier.
May 26, 2025
This book was quoted quite a lot in Bertrand Russell’s “Roads to Freedom” so I had to pick it up. It is amazing to read the perspective of someone during the transition from agrarian society to industrial society and the perceived effects that transition would have on labor and eduction. Nowadays we would call Kropotkin’s ideas “decentralization” or “democratization” of agriculture or industry, and they still ring true today.
July 9, 2025
Another retroactive review of one of Kropotkins texts. If you're into learning about anarchism - specifically anarcho-communism - I will once again recommend that you read Kropotkin. If not, this book is a miss. Kropotkin has some incredibly idealistic ideas about the world and how we *could* reach his ideal state of anarcho-communism. He effectively discards the need for currency, arguing that a barter-economy is more effective in his ideal state, where each citizen provides for one another.
August 7, 2025
WOW that is a lot of stats. Still, this was an interesting look into agriculture right before artificial fertilizer and mechanization took off. A good companion to Farmers of Forty Centuries. Definitely some interesting threads to pull in the latter third if you're a fan of Maria Montessori - hard to believe she wasn't reading some of the same stuff as Kropotkin (and maybe also reading Kropotkin).
January 27, 2018
Lots of rather outdated figures throughout (though especially chapter 2), but chapters 4 and 5 finish the book well.
Read
August 26, 2019Some good stuff, but not enough time to finish it all.
October 18, 2020
the stuff about farming went a bit over my head, along with some stretches in some other chapters. don't skip over the editor's notes if your version has them.
December 13, 2022
The world needs more scientific socialism book like this one.
March 12, 2023
kitap eski olduğu için bazı yerler güncelliğini kaybedebiliyor, neyseki içinde editörün notu bölümleri güncel bilgilerle harmanlanıp bize sunuluyor.
December 15, 2023
Love Kropotkin, and while the message of the book is well explained and convincing, he really bashes you over the head with 18th-century economic statistics, which I personally found very boring.
February 17, 2025
I wish his utopia didn't rely quite so much on agricultural practices that we now know destroy the soil, but damn he's a good writer.
April 3, 2019
What is the purpose of economy? In short, this is the fundamental question posed by the grandfather of anarcho-communism, Russian prince and occasional Santa Claus impersonator, Pyotr Kropotkin. The answer, in Kropotkin and many others socialists view, is the satisfaction of human needs, to secure a comfortable and secure life for all in accordance with the principle of ''from each according to his ability, to each according to his need''.
Written at the start of the 20th century, at the peak of industrialization of the Western world, of expansion of capitalism and its profit motive to all reaches of the globe, of a world divided and subdivided in economic functions of producers and consumers (divided even more in the daily labors of most people), of gross inequalities in terms of distribution of wealth and, despite the wealth accumulated by European states, a world still rife with poverty, suffering and destitution. A far cry from the common sense conclusion reached by Kropotkin and others. This book sets out to offer alternatives and fresh perspectives on approaches to agriculture, industry, science and education to reshape the economy into a an extension of social life, rather than a superimposed system under which resources trickle down a social pyramid.
A common theme in the book is the denunciation of a division of production and labor, weather it be states or regions specialized in the production of specific goods and mostly nothing else, or the separation of the main branches of economy, independent of each other to the methods of educating future workers both for mental and manual jobs. Throughout the book, Kropotkin echoes the need to integrate, rather to divide, and calls for autonomy and self-sufficiency, instead of a hyper-specialization that leaves nations open to the mercy of international politics and trade, with its specific speculators and fluctuations in fortunes.
The book makes use of large numbers of statistical data and observations, journals and sources from many fields and is followed by in depth and meticulous descriptions. They offer an insight into the amount of work put in to the writing of this book, not to mention, the amount of research dedicated to it, as well as Kropotkin's keen observational eye and enthusiasm and faith in a different, better world. However, some information relayed seems anecdotal or passed on from unreliable sources (at least by modern scientific standards) and for today's times the statistical data, unless one is an expert in early 20th century economic data, is antiquated, difficult to asses and cumbersome, often making for a very difficult read for a 21st century reader. For most of the book this is the case, making it a tough read that makes up for it in the concluding parts and with Kropotkin's dedication and enthusiasm.
Kropotkin offers a vision of a sustainable and self-sufficient humanity, who by the wits and hard work and progress of technology is unstoppable and relentless, in its ingenuity and desire to innovate and improve despite adverse situations. May it be the farmers of Guernsey or the textile craftsmen of France or the watchmakers of Jura in Swtizerland. Here, we find a side of humanity often forgotten, one of an autonomous and capable force that does not need a profit-motive, nor a hierarchical guiding hand, one were artistry and ingenuity do not require a prestigious education or appreciation of a select class, but rather, one that springs forth vibrantly and freely, given the chance and opportunity and unencumbered by oppressing forces. Its this free spirit, playful and spontaneous and boundless in its potentiality, that Kropotkin wishes to remind us of, and that economy is not a matter devoid of us, outside of to which we are subordinate, but rather, that WE are the economy, much as we are society and that it is only for our own common interest, that we should strive for.
Written at the start of the 20th century, at the peak of industrialization of the Western world, of expansion of capitalism and its profit motive to all reaches of the globe, of a world divided and subdivided in economic functions of producers and consumers (divided even more in the daily labors of most people), of gross inequalities in terms of distribution of wealth and, despite the wealth accumulated by European states, a world still rife with poverty, suffering and destitution. A far cry from the common sense conclusion reached by Kropotkin and others. This book sets out to offer alternatives and fresh perspectives on approaches to agriculture, industry, science and education to reshape the economy into a an extension of social life, rather than a superimposed system under which resources trickle down a social pyramid.
A common theme in the book is the denunciation of a division of production and labor, weather it be states or regions specialized in the production of specific goods and mostly nothing else, or the separation of the main branches of economy, independent of each other to the methods of educating future workers both for mental and manual jobs. Throughout the book, Kropotkin echoes the need to integrate, rather to divide, and calls for autonomy and self-sufficiency, instead of a hyper-specialization that leaves nations open to the mercy of international politics and trade, with its specific speculators and fluctuations in fortunes.
The book makes use of large numbers of statistical data and observations, journals and sources from many fields and is followed by in depth and meticulous descriptions. They offer an insight into the amount of work put in to the writing of this book, not to mention, the amount of research dedicated to it, as well as Kropotkin's keen observational eye and enthusiasm and faith in a different, better world. However, some information relayed seems anecdotal or passed on from unreliable sources (at least by modern scientific standards) and for today's times the statistical data, unless one is an expert in early 20th century economic data, is antiquated, difficult to asses and cumbersome, often making for a very difficult read for a 21st century reader. For most of the book this is the case, making it a tough read that makes up for it in the concluding parts and with Kropotkin's dedication and enthusiasm.
Kropotkin offers a vision of a sustainable and self-sufficient humanity, who by the wits and hard work and progress of technology is unstoppable and relentless, in its ingenuity and desire to innovate and improve despite adverse situations. May it be the farmers of Guernsey or the textile craftsmen of France or the watchmakers of Jura in Swtizerland. Here, we find a side of humanity often forgotten, one of an autonomous and capable force that does not need a profit-motive, nor a hierarchical guiding hand, one were artistry and ingenuity do not require a prestigious education or appreciation of a select class, but rather, one that springs forth vibrantly and freely, given the chance and opportunity and unencumbered by oppressing forces. Its this free spirit, playful and spontaneous and boundless in its potentiality, that Kropotkin wishes to remind us of, and that economy is not a matter devoid of us, outside of to which we are subordinate, but rather, that WE are the economy, much as we are society and that it is only for our own common interest, that we should strive for.
February 21, 2013
Britain had its Angry Brigade and its Class War Federation, but for the most part English anarchism seems to be of the more moderate, pragmatic variety, symbolized by people like Colin Ward. Could Kropotkin's long stay in England and later books like this one be partly responsible? Seems possible. Kropotkin's calm, quiet, almost boring optimism shines on every page. The central underlying idea seems to be that a radically better future is practically visible already and right around the corner. "And what prevents us from turning our backs to this present and from marching towards that future, or at least, making the first steps towards the future, is not the 'failure of science,' but first of all our crass cupidity - the cupidity of the man who killed the hen that was laying golden eggs - and then our laziness of mind - that mental cowardice so carefully nurtured in the past," he remarks in the Conclusion. If only that were all that prevented us! Such an attitude can be hard to swallow for anarchists today. But there's a lot to be gleaned from this book despite its simple faith.
The first priority of the revolution will be feeding itself. Kropotkin gives a lot of food for thought here - if you can stomach all the statistical detail and his detailed description of such things as the ins and outs of horticultural methods in Belgium in 1903 (You will learn a lot about the importance of loam and greenhouses). Today in the US, food politics are usually the province of liberals with no connection to struggles for social transformation. Nowadays lots of people are "locavores," fans of "slow food" and all things "artisanal" and "organic," heirloom products and sustainable agriculture, urban gardening - but often motivated by a kind of snobbish aesthetic appeal and backed up by deep pockets. If Kropotkin were alive today it seems he might encourage revolutionaries to reclaim these things as our own. His advocacy of small-scale, intensive, decentralized agriculture, more like a garden than a farm, near and inside cities as well, with great variety in each region sustaining itself by growing its own food, and participation by everyone, fits right in with today's reaction against the nightmare of agribusiness, factory farms, pollution, genetic manipulation, chemical fertilizers etc. When you connect the urge to take land and grow food for ourselves to an attack on capital, things get interesting. And Kropotkin's data and examples might be tiresome, but he demonstrates that even around 1900 such things were easily achievable.
Kropotkin essentially takes the themes of decentralization, appropriate scaling, and integration (of city and country, manual and intellectual labor, tasks and skills, crops and industries, etc.) and puts them at the center of his "political economy." His confidence in science and technology would surely be shaken if he lived now. His optimistic observations on the rapid global circulation of knowledge and technologies practically make him sound like a post-operaista Negri of the nineteenth century. But he is surely still in the right in his argument with Malthus - it is possible to sustain the whole world's population comfortably. And his musings on the possibilities of a new education, activity that isn't drudgery, and the difficulties of sustaining inequalities when alternative methods already exist, in germ, can still provide some inspiration.
The first priority of the revolution will be feeding itself. Kropotkin gives a lot of food for thought here - if you can stomach all the statistical detail and his detailed description of such things as the ins and outs of horticultural methods in Belgium in 1903 (You will learn a lot about the importance of loam and greenhouses). Today in the US, food politics are usually the province of liberals with no connection to struggles for social transformation. Nowadays lots of people are "locavores," fans of "slow food" and all things "artisanal" and "organic," heirloom products and sustainable agriculture, urban gardening - but often motivated by a kind of snobbish aesthetic appeal and backed up by deep pockets. If Kropotkin were alive today it seems he might encourage revolutionaries to reclaim these things as our own. His advocacy of small-scale, intensive, decentralized agriculture, more like a garden than a farm, near and inside cities as well, with great variety in each region sustaining itself by growing its own food, and participation by everyone, fits right in with today's reaction against the nightmare of agribusiness, factory farms, pollution, genetic manipulation, chemical fertilizers etc. When you connect the urge to take land and grow food for ourselves to an attack on capital, things get interesting. And Kropotkin's data and examples might be tiresome, but he demonstrates that even around 1900 such things were easily achievable.
Kropotkin essentially takes the themes of decentralization, appropriate scaling, and integration (of city and country, manual and intellectual labor, tasks and skills, crops and industries, etc.) and puts them at the center of his "political economy." His confidence in science and technology would surely be shaken if he lived now. His optimistic observations on the rapid global circulation of knowledge and technologies practically make him sound like a post-operaista Negri of the nineteenth century. But he is surely still in the right in his argument with Malthus - it is possible to sustain the whole world's population comfortably. And his musings on the possibilities of a new education, activity that isn't drudgery, and the difficulties of sustaining inequalities when alternative methods already exist, in germ, can still provide some inspiration.
February 22, 2017
Not a very good book, not particularly fascinating, I think it was written far too optimistically for such a book on capitalism, if you are discussing capitalism, then you should be sort of nihilistic with your approach towards capitalism, his optimism is very tedious, the way that it was written is not in the way that you would expect coming from a philosophy + politics-related book, I got to about pge 184 and said ''I can't read anymore of this book, this is far too boring'' luckily I was just about finished with the book, only one more chapter to go with this book and I would be finished, the only good thing about this book is that compared to The Conquest of Bread, there isn't 17 chapters, there's only 5 chapters, this book drags on for ages, the chapters are fairly long, and you keep wondering to yourself "when will the book be finished?'' You know one of those books where you can't seem to put the book down, it's too fascinating to stop reading, this book isn't one of them, it's dull and lifeless, not a very great book
Read
September 27, 2007This is another classic by Kropotkin and outlines in more detail certain aspects of anarchist-communism such as the decentralization of industries and decreasing the work day to a 3 or 4 hour period of physical labor doing the work that is necessary for the collective and opening up time for intellectual labor. The book is still as relevant today as it was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries with one exception- the second chapter of the book dealing with agriculture is outdated and at the time was amount of time needed to spend on agriculture and distribution of produce in the UK. Well, needless to say, times have changed in the past 100 years, so that is why the ideas simply will not work in western industrialist nations of the 21st century. As a whole, the book is definitely a must have if learning about anarchist-communism and applying theory to everyday worker's self management of industries and land cultivation.
July 24, 2017
If you're fascinated by industrial/agricultural history & love statistics, then this is a fascinating read. If you're not, you might struggle with aspects of this otherwise insightful & astute political analysis.
Read
September 23, 2010"Fields, Factories and Workshops Tomorrow by Petr Alekseevich Kropotkin, KnIAZ, (1975)"
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews