Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What are the historical examples of successful anarchist movements or communities?
Executive Summary
The historical record shows several influential anarchist movements and communities that achieved measurable self‑management, from large‑scale wartime collectivizations in Spain (1936–39) to long‑running autonomous enclaves such as Freetown Christiania (since 1971), and shorter lived insurgent experiments like the Makhnovshchina (1918–21) and the Paris Commune [1]. These cases differ sharply in scale, longevity, objectives and outcomes, and historians disagree about whether to judge them by immediate effectiveness, long‑term survival, or influence on later movements [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].
1. How a near‑society was built in wartime Spain and why scholars call it the clearest large‑scale example
The Spanish Revolution across Catalonia, Aragon and other zones during 1936–39 stands as the most extensive empirical case of coordinated anarchist self‑management in modern history: industrial factories, farms, transport, utilities and services were collectivized and run by workers’ assemblies and federated delegates, with experiments in wage abolition and family rations. Contemporary and recent analyses document participation by millions, the creation of federated councils and a central labor bank, and significant production and service continuity despite the civil war; proponents argue this disproves the claim that decentralization cannot handle complex economies. Critics point to wartime conditions, repression, and eventual military defeat as limiting generalizability, and some historians stress the wartime emergency as both enabling rapid collectivization and rendering it fragile [2] [3].
2. Enduring autonomous enclaves: Christiania’s longevity and everyday governance dilemmas
Freetown Christiania in Copenhagen, established in 1971, provides the best‑documented example of a long‑lasting autonomous community within a modern state: it has maintained distinct local governance, communal resources and a negotiated relationship with Danish authorities for decades. Recent reporting chronicles both its persistence and the practical compromises it has made, such as policing illicit markets and negotiating legal status with the municipality; these adaptations underscore how long‑term autonomy often requires pragmatic engagement with surrounding institutions. Scholars and local accounts highlight Christiania’s cultural and social resilience while noting internal tensions and legal pressures that complicate any simplistic claim of perpetual anarchist self‑rule [4] [7] [8].
3. Insurgent, stateless experiments: Makhnovshchina and Zapatista autonomy as tactical models
The Makhnovshchina in Ukraine (1918–21) and the Zapatista movement in Mexico (1994–present) illustrate anarchist or anarchist‑influenced projects rooted in armed defense and rural/community governance rather than institutionalized peacetime economies. The Makhnovist movement organized peasant and worker councils and voluntary taxation defended by Makhno’s Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army, but it operated under violent conditions and was ultimately crushed by larger forces; modern commentators warn that its legacy has been selectively appropriated by diverse political actors. The Zapatistas emphasize participatory democracy, autonomy and international solidarity, sustaining long‑term autonomous municipalities while also engaging media and electoral avoidance as tactical choices; both examples show anarchist practices embedded in broader insurgent strategies, with varied success metrics [5] [9] [10] [11] [12].
4. Earlier precedents that shaped anarchist theory: the Paris Commune and the Diggers
The 1871 Paris Commune and the 17th‑century English Diggers are frequently invoked as formative precedents for anarchist and communalist thought. The Commune enacted direct democracy, workers’ control of services, free education and housing redistribution during its brief rule, becoming a symbolic reference for later movements even as historians debate whether it was predominantly anarchist, socialist, or plural in composition. The Diggers pursued agrarian commoning and egalitarian rural settlement and were forcibly repressed; their ideas circulated in radical pamphlets and influenced later generations. Both cases highlight symbolic power: short duration and violent suppression contrasted with outsized influence on revolutionary theory and practice [6] [13] [14] [15] [16].
5. What “success” actually means — practical gains, survivability, and contested legacies
Comparative assessment shows that success in anarchist experiments must be qualified: some achieved substantial short‑term socialization of production and services (Spain), others achieved long survival and cultural autonomy (Christiania, Zapatista municipalities), while many were crushed or co‑opted (Paris Commune, Makhnovshchina, Diggers). Historians and participants disagree about metrics: operational efficiency, democratic depth, resilience under repression, and legacy influence all matter and yield different verdicts. Additionally, narratives are often shaped by political agendas—scholars sympathetic to anarchism emphasize participatory achievements, while opponents stress instability and external dependency—so situating each case in its political and temporal context is essential to any balanced conclusion [2] [10] [13] [7].